Search results

This chapter explores the circumstances in the global south that have been reshaping teaching and learning practices, with particular focus on the African context. Anchored on a literature review strategy, the chapter explores some of the key pressure points in the higher education context that have been the trigger of reforms in the core practice of teaching and learning in recent years. In particular, the chapter discusses the neoliberalism crisis associated with the coronavirus pandemic in higher education, drawing attention to the inequalities that it ignited: not all students were affected in the same way; not all universities or colleges were affected in the same way; and not all students had the learning technologies required to carry on their education in the same way. Alongside the COVID-19 concerns, the chapter reflects on other pressure points for change including developments in digital technologies and the internet and changing students and changing higher education markets in sub-Saharan Africa. It argues that these forces are among a wave of influences that higher education institutions across the African continent cannot ignore. They form a blend of neoliberal reforms that are pressurising academics to change pedagogical models and threatening certain core values of a university: academic freedom, autonomy, and truth. The chapter develops the argument that although multiple pressures – arising from the pervasive influences of technology and the COVID-19 pandemic – are mounting on the higher education sector to reform its pedagogical practices, it should not be at the expense of perpetuating injustices, particularly among students.

The purpose of this study initially was to explore how graduate teaching assistants’ (GTAs) peer-to-peer interactions in a teaching development seminar (TEAC 530, offered at Midwestern State University) shaped their experiences in the seminar. However, as this study unfolded, the author learned that the neoliberal social structure enveloping TEAC 530 informed how GTAs interacted with their peers. It became necessary to interrogate how the seminar, against a neoliberal backdrop, shaped GTAs’ interactions.

Using an ethnographic methodological approach, this inquiry drew from fieldnotes from 21 different TEAC 530 sessions, with collection occurring over the course of 15 months. This project also drew upon 18 semi-structured interviews and analysis of relevant documents.

Neoliberalism’s influence on TEAC 530’s structure and learning goals created conditions that did not forge strong GTA peer connections; the extent to which GTAs got to know each other and build relationships was questionable. Fruitful working peer relationships were inconsistent, making it challenging for GTAs to learn and contrast their experiences and understandings about teaching with peers.

Neoliberalism’s influence on TEAC 530 undermined the seminar’s community of practice design, limiting the scope and depth of GTAs’ peer interactions, which in turn limited the facilitation of GTAs’ teaching preparation.

The current book chapter seeks to respond to the existing literature on early career researchers, using an autoethnographic approach to further unravel the crossroads of identity formation, research politics, and successful promotion through the eyes of early career researchers. Combining autobiography and ethnography, we systematically analyze our own experiences to make sense of wider social and political practices. Ellis, Adams, and Bochner (2010) remind us that autoethnography is not to be dismissed as a form of self-therapy but is to be presented in a rigorous manner as other research forms by carefully justifying the data sources and techniques, analyzing the data and crafting the findings. Our sources were both found texts (e.g., university policies) and created texts (our journal entries and personal communications). Using analytic techniques such as highlighting critical incidents or epiphanies, we structured coherent narratives to illuminate the complexity and uncertainty of the lives of early career academics. This chapter’s focus on early career researcher experiences makes poignant commentary on neoliberalism’s impact on and within higher education. The chapter concludes with the authors’ reflections on the dilemmas of academic and research choices made within the limitations of institutional structures, processes, and systems that shape career trajectories.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a fast-moving pandemic that has brought about calamities and challenges to the human world. In the field of international higher education (IHE), it problematizes and challenges the operation of neo-liberal mentalities and rationales, while generating disruptions and impediments to the flows of globalization. Drawing upon extant research on IHE across spatial and cultural contexts, this essay aims to: (1) unravel the deficiencies of neo-liberal mentalities and rationales in coping with the challenges of COVID-19 to IHE; (2) assess the impacts of COVID-19 on the developments of globalization and internationalization of higher education with particular focus on the complications therein; and (3) explore the possible spill-over effects on and implications for the re-positioning of IHE in the post-COVID-19 era. Albeit the negative impacts of COVID-19 may not last, its spill-over effects are bound to cast a long shadow over IHE’s future development. This essay explores how IHE can persist in spite of deficiencies in neo-liberalism and fluidity in globalization.

This study examines the perspectives of adjunct (short-term contract) faculty teaching at offshore branch campuses in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The rise of the global adjunct labor class and the expansion of universities to overseas markets in the form of branch campuses are just two examples of the extension of neoliberal and consumerist ideology to higher education. While the problems of implementing corporate-style practice and policy in higher education is much critiqued in the literature, this research centers on the intersection of the two issues just mentioned. The primary motivations for undertaking this study were to explore a) branch campus adjuncts’ perceptions of being connected to their university community, and b) the possible impact of their labor conditions on pedagogical conditions. Five adjuncts from four separate branch campuses were interviewed, and the semi-structured interviews analyzed using a critical discourse analysis approach. The findings revealed that the adjuncts often felt isolated from their branch campus and considered themselves to be carrying out the educational mission of the home campus despite having no contractual relationship with the home campus. I argue that the working conditions of the adjuncts have a negative impact on teaching experience and, to a degree, on pedagogy. A more formalized employment relationship between branch campus adjuncts and the home campus is recommended, as well as the provision of professional development and research engagement opportunities for adjuncts.

ﺗﺑﺣ ث ھذه اﻟ د ر ا ﺳ ﺔ ﻓ ﻲ وﺟ ﮭﺎ ت ﻧ ظ ر اﻟ ﻣد ر ﺳ ﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣ ﻘﯾ ن ﻓ ﻲ ﻓ ر وع اﻟ ﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺎ ت ﻓ ﻲ دﺑﻲ ، اﻹﻣﺎ را ت اﻟ ﻌرﺑﯾﺔ اﻟ ﻣﺗ ﺣدة. إ ن ﺻ ﻌود اﻟ طﺑﻘﺔ اﻟﻌﺎ ﻣﻠ ﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻟ ﻣﯾ ﺔ اﻟﻣﻠ ﺣ ﻘﺔ و ﺗ و ﺳ ﻊ اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺎ ت إﻟﻰ ا ﻷ ﺳ و ا ق اﻟﺧ ﺎ ر ﺟ ﯾ ﺔ ﻓ ﻲ ﺷ ﻛ ل ﻓ ر و ع ﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﯾ ﺔ ﻟﯾ ﺳ ت ﺳ و ى ﻣﺛﺎﻟﯾ ن ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ا ﻣﺗدا د ا ﻹ ﯾدﯾ و ﻟ و ﺟ ﯾ ﺔ اﻟ ﻧﯾ و ﻟﯾﺑ ر اﻟﯾ ﺔ و ا ﻻ ﺳ ﺗ ﮭ ﻼ ﻛﯾ ﺔ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﺗ ﻌﻠﯾم اﻟ ﻌﺎﻟ ﻲ. ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟ رﻏم ﻣ ن أ ن ﻣ ﺷﻛﻠ ﺔ ﺗ طﺑﯾ ق ﻣﻣﺎ رﺳﺎ ت وﺳﯾﺎ ﺳﺎ ت اﻟﻧ ﻣ ط اﻟﺗ ﺟﺎ ر ي ﻓ ﻲ اﻟﺗ ﻌﻠﯾم اﻟ ﻌﺎﻟ ﻲ ﻗد ﺗ ﻌر ﺿ ت ﻟﻧﻘد ﻛﺑﯾ ر ﻓ ﻲ اﻷدﺑﯾﺎ ت، ﻓﺈن ھذا اﻟﺑ ﺣ ث ﯾ رﻛز ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ﺗﻘﺎط ﻊ اﻟ ﻣﺛﺎﻟﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣو ﺻ وﻓﯾ ن . ﻛﺎﻧ ت اﻟ دواﻓ ﻊ اﻟ رﺋﯾ ﺳ ﯾ ﺔ ﻹ ﺟ را ء ھذه اﻟد ر ا ﺳ ﺔ ھ ﻲ ا ﺳ ﺗ ﻛ ﺷ ﺎ ف 1 ( ﻣﻔﺎ ھﯾم ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘ ﻲ ﻓ روع اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺎ ت ﻟ ﻛوﻧﮭم ﻣرﺗ ﺑ طﯾ ن ﺑ ﻣ ﺟﺗ ﻣﻊ اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺔ؛ 2 ( ﻣﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﯾ ر ظرو ف ﻋﻣﻠ ﮭم ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟظ ر و ف اﻟ ﺗ ر ﺑ و ﯾ ﺔ. ﻟ ﺟ ﻣﻊ اﻟ ﺑﯾﺎﻧﺎ ت ، أﺟرﯾ ت ﻣﻘﺎﺑ ﻼت ﻣﻊ ﺧﻣ ﺳﺔ ﻣدرﺳﯾ ن ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻣ ن أ رﺑ ﻌﺔ ﻓ روع ﺟﺎ ﻣﻌﯾ ﺔ ﻣﻧﻔ ﺻ ﻠ ﺔ. ﺗم ﺗ ﺣﻠﯾ ل اﻟ ﻣﻘﺎﺑ ﻼ ت ﺷﺑ ﮫ اﻟ ﻣﻧ ظﻣﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺗ ﺧدام ﻣﻧﮭ ﺞ ﺗ ﺣﻠﯾ ل اﻟ ﺧطﺎ ب اﻟﻧﻘد ي. وﻛ ﺷﻔ ت اﻟﻧﺗﺎﺋ ﺞ أ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻏﺎ ﻟ ﺑًﺎ ﻣ ﺎ ﺷ ﻌ ر و ا ﺑ ﺎ ﻟ ﻌ ز ﻟ ﺔ ﻋ ن ﺣ ر ﻣ ﮭ م ا ﻟ ﺟ ﺎ ﻣ ﻌ ﻲ وا ﻋﺗﺑ روا أﻧﻔ ﺳﮭم ﯾﻧﻔذون اﻟ ﻣﮭﻣﺔ اﻟﺗ ﻌﻠﯾ ﻣﯾ ﺔ ﻟﻠ ﺣرم اﻟ ﺟﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ اﻟ ﻣ ﺣﻠ ﻲ رﻏم ﻋدم وﺟود ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗ ﻌﺎﻗدﯾ ﺔ ﻟ ﮭم دا ﺧل اﻟ ﺣرم اﻟ ﺟﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ. أﻧﺎ أ زﻋم أن ظرو ف ﻋﻣ ل اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻟ ﮭﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﯾ ر ﺳﻠﺑ ﻲ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﻣﺎ رﺳﺔ اﻟﺗد رﯾ س . ﺗ و ﺻ ﻲ اﻟ د را ﺳﺔ ﺑ ﺧﻠ ق ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗ و ظﯾ ف أ ﻛﺛ ر رﺳﻣﯾﺔ ﺑﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻓ ﻲ اﻟﺣ ر م اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ اﻟﻔ ر ﻋ ﻲ و اﻟﺣ ر م اﻟ ﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ اﻟدا ﺧ ﻠ ﻲ ، ﺑﺎﻹ ﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ﺗ وﻓﯾ ر ﻓ ر ص اﻟﺗ ط وﯾ ر اﻟ ﻣﮭﻧ ﻲ واﻟﺑ ﺣ ث ﻟﻠ ﻣ ﺷ ﺎ ر ﻛﺔ ﻟﻠ ﻣد ر ﺳ ﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣ ﻘﯾ ن .

This paper aims to examine how Hong Kong universities have responded to a newly included assessment element of socio-economic impact in a government-implemented research evaluation system – Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) 2020 – within the context of tightening audits and forceful knowledge economy objectives.

This paper reports an institutional case study of the institutional-level response to the RAE 2020 impact requirement at a top-ranked comprehensive university in Hong Kong. A qualitative inquiry approach was adopted. The data sources mainly include university documents related to the RAE 2020 socio-economic impact policy, interview data with nine RAE-eligible academics at the case university, documents on the RAE exercises issued by the University Grants Committee (UGC) and field notes taken during the RAE information sessions.

The institutionalisation process of the RAE socio-economic impact agenda could be considered as establishing an indicator-oriented reward and recognition regime for knowledge transfer and knowledge exchange (KT/KE). Overall, two major institutional strategies were identified in operating the RAE 2020 impact agenda at the case university: (1) launching various policy initiatives: driven by the RAE-defined socio-economic impact; (2) incorporating socio-economic impact into faculty evaluation: premised upon the 16 KT performance indicators laid down by the UGC.

This article adds to the theoretical debate on the local reproduction of the global in studies of neoliberalism in higher education by describing a Hong Kong case study, supported by empirical data, of an actual university's responses to the newly included impact requirement in RAE 2020. More specifically, this study reveals that (1) the policy for socio-economic impact might be designed in a neutral or even benevolent manner, but has taken on a neoliberal and managerial dimension in its actual implementation; and (2) the neoliberal discourse underpinning the university's operation can be accounted for and explicated by the local factors embedded in the specific academic environment.

This study has two aims. It aims to analyse three essential pre-conditions of an authentic sustainability curriculum (ASC). The theoretical analysis involves the definition of authenticity through the learning outcomes (LOs) framework called authentic minimum (AM). This paper also aims to gauge students’ views on economic growth, sustainability and mindfulness.

The theoretical aim was accomplished by extensive study of and critical reflections on the relevant literature. The empirical research was qualitative using an online questionnaire as survey instrument consisting of predominantly open-ended questions involving students of two economic faculties. Directed content analysis and nonparametric quantitative methods were used to assess the answers.

Viable sustainability goals are in stark contrast with the promotion of sustainable economic growth in sustainable development goals 8 and the reigning neoliberal agenda. The empirical findings provide valuable insights into how undergraduate students view mindfulness, economic growth and aspects of sustainability.

The empirical research has some obvious limitations that warrant caution in generalizing the results. The authors used a sample of convenience and the base population of the survey consisted only in students of economics in two economic faculties of two Hungarian universities.

Practical implications of the present paper are many all sharing; however, the need for existential courage on the part of teachers, students and leaders of higher education institutions. Existential courage is required for profound personal transformation, for going against mainstream ideology and the possible confrontations with colleagues, leaders of institutions, students, friends or family members.

On the theoretical side, the concept of ASC was introduced with AM as its LOs framework. For the first time, an attempt was made to interpret authenticity in sustainability education as an integration of mindfulness, human and environmental ethics and a firm opposition to economic growth and neoliberal ideals. The analysis of qualitative data supported earlier research and also provided unique findings in the examined areas.