Search results

The outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 has had a profound impact on education institutions at all levels. Open universities, with their privileged delivery method, have been in an advantageous position. In the earlier stages of the pandemic, they made remarkable contributions to assuring learning continuity. However, with more and more conventional universities migrating online, great changes have taken place in the field of higher education, and it is imperative for open universities to adjust their strategies in order to maintain their leading role in a technology-enabled education context. This paper aims to examine what challenges have been faced by open universities during the pandemic and how they will transform in the future.

Six open universities in Asia, Africa and Europe were selected as cases in this research to make a comparative study based on the papers in the volume beyond distance education [1]. Similarities and differences among the cases were analyzed in order to identify the developing trend for open universities in the international context.

The results showed that (1) open universities in these regions demonstrated their resilience in the pandemic; examples were that new technologies have been leveraged to implement totally online delivery with short notice and huge amount of learning resources were offered to the society. (2) However, they encountered challenges of delivering fully online examination due to the lockdown and quarantine policies, and open universities in African and the sole private institution suffered financial pressure due to improving information and communication technology infrastructure and staff training. Another challenge was the fierce competition from conventional universities that open universities in Asia and Europe came across. (3) Four main areas were identified for future development in order to respond to the challenges: No.1 is that programs such as health care, psychology, epidemiology, virology, immunology, data analytics, biology and bio-informatics have stimulated interest for African open universities to develop in the future; No. 2 is that open universities were seeking to innovate their teaching formats; short courses, such as micro credentials, might be developed as agile and flexible offerings which are expected to be suitable to learners in the pandemic context; No 3 is that programs and courses for upskilling in the context of digitalization will be implemented; and No. 4 is that lifelong learning is given a higher priority in order for open universities to stand securely in the higher education sector.

The study may give open university leaders a quick insight into their future development.

The purpose of this paper is to report on research on the views of Presidents and Vice Chancellors of Open Universities of current threats and opportunities for their institutions as the author marks the 50th anniversary of the first Open University in the UK established in 1969. The paper offers a historical account of the development of the Open University model, and assesses the extent to which it remains in the key position as owner of innovation in the higher education sector.

Interviews were conducted with leaders of Open Universities or distance teaching universities. They covered a total of 14 universities.

The replies from institutional leaders reveal the current developments, opportunities and strategic challenges of the universities. It is suggested that the digital revolution along with a wider range of environmental changes for higher education have substantially eroded the first-mover advantage that Open Universities had undoubtedly enjoyed in the first 25 years.

The paper concludes that there are significant concerns that innovation in Open Universities is not sufficiently embedded to ensure that their contribution to the UN Sustainable Development Goals will be maximised, or even in some cases their survival, and that a key but undervalued element is leadership development for innovation and change.

This research attempts to reveal ways of addressing challenges in open universities related to empowering lifelong learning; establishing policies and strategies in dropouts, student portfolio and support services for students with special needs; and implementing online instructional design and strategies. Two institutions were investigated, namely National Open University (NOU) Taiwan and Universitas Terbuka (UT) Indonesia, both founded in the 1980s to serve lifelong learners with diverse backgrounds and needs. This study was aimed at understanding good practices and challenges for improvement for the two open universities in those areas being investigated.

This research was qualitative using document analysis along with focus group discussions and interviews with administrators, academic staff, students and alumni to collect data for analysis.

Lifelong learning is the necessity of individual in societies for continuing professional development through enabling access to quality university education. Open universities have been tasked to cater for lifelong learners using non-traditional approaches, new technology and adapting to online learning and teaching in digital age. This research was exploratory, and the findings were expected to improve understanding of lifelong learning in open universities, particularly in NOU and UT.

Findings of this research are relevant to open universities to enhance its missions and define its possible new roles to serve lifelong learners.

This research reveals the roles of open universities in lifelong learning and enhances understanding of open universities that have a wide range of responsibilities in offering programs and courses to accommodate lifelong learners.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a better understanding of what Open Innovation means within university context. Focus is also put on the role universities believe they should play in Open Innovation, as well as the changes that might have arisen as a consequence of universities’ greater awareness of this concept.

The research methodology used is an exploratory study based on in-depth semi-structured interviews of Pro-Vice-Chancellors (or equivalent level) of a variety of British universities. The study was designed around five main research themes: discourse, change, strategy, management, Open Innovation success.

In addition to the traditional teaching, research and knowledge transfer roles of university, this study has uncovered a new role of universities: trusted intermediary (or “Open Innovation Hub”). Another key finding of this study is that it highlights the diversity that prevails in the UK with regard to Open Innovation.

The number of the interviews conducted for this study is probably not large enough to allow a solid generalisation. Data saturation, however, was achieved in this study. The insight provided by this study is particularly significant as interviewees were amongst the highest-ranking executives in their respective universities. Hence the views reported in this study are what “drives” Open Innovation policies in the universities that participated in this study.

This new role of a trusted intermediary played by universities is very likely to change the existing Open Innovation landscape and re-shape policies.

The changing role of universities within Open Innovation context may potentially change the respective role of other stakeholders in the Open Innovation ecosystem.

This is the first study aimed at investigating how British universities understand Open Innovation and what opportunities and challenges they associate with this process.

In 2019, the goal of developing a world-class open university through different stages was put forward by the Open University of China (OUC), which indicated that internationalization for Chinese open universities came to the agenda. However, international activities of open universities are different from those in conventional universities, and how to fulfill the goal of internationalization is a main issue faced by educators in Chinese open and distance education arena. This research aimed to identify ways of internationalization for the OUC system.

A survey was employed as a tool to get feedback from target audience. A questionnaire was released to academics, management staff and researchers to the 44 provincial open universities. A total of 501 samples were collected. Among them, 332 were from academics, which accounted for 66.27%, 152 were from school-level directors and 17 were from university-level leaders.

By analyzing the data collected in the survey, the study proposes four recommendations to fulfill the goal of internationalization for Chinese open universities and these include strengthening top-level strategies, building up professional teams, sharing learning resources and delivering upper-level programs.

The targets of this research were all staff at different levels in the central and local institutions; no students were included in the research. Therefore, this did not reflect a picture from the student perspective, and this will be improved in future research.

Since the establishment of the OUC in 1979, there has been no clear and systematic pathways for the development of internationalization of Chinese open universities. This research proposes a theoretical framework of internationalization for open universities and suggests a direction for future development.

Given that repositories were proposed as one of the routes to open access (OA), this study sought to establish the achievements universities in East Africa had attained in initiating institutional repositories (IRs), the challenges in providing OA and strategies for the way forward.

Data were collected through literature searches, using the internet, journal databases and university websites in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda for information about OA and IRs in East Africa. Some of the findings were based on the author’s PhD “The management and accessibility of OA IRs in selected universities in East Africa”, which used face-to-face interviews with six librarians and self-administered questionnaires responded to by 183 researchers at Kenyatta University, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences and Makerere University.

Universities in East Africa were still in the intermediate stages of embracing OA, and only 40 libraries out of 145 universities had implemented IRs. However, most of the repositories had less than 1,000 items, with this challenge attributed to the absence of institutional and government/funder mandates that affected the collection/provision of OA, in addition to the lack of awareness of IRs among researchers.

The value in this research was establishing the extent of IR initiatives in universities in East Africa and their contribution to OA, which is regarded as more visible and accessible to scholars and government personnel who could leverage the information for further development in the region.

In 1974 the University of Newcastle, Australia, established a mature age access programme called the Open Foundation. Since that time, thousands of adults have entered university through the Open Foundation portal. This article explores the layers of context for the establishment of the Open Foundation in the early 1970s. It seeks to understand the reasons why the University of Newcastle, which already provided the means for direct entry for some adults, sought to widen participation for adults at that time by creating a year long pre‐tertiary programme. Pascoe’s explanation that matureage entry schemes in Australian universities were prompted by ‘pragmatic considerations’ such as the disruption to intakes due to the lengthening of secondary schooling in New South Wales in 1969 and the falling demand for university places in the late 1970s and 1980s, does not satisfactorily account for the establishment of the Open Foundation Programme. Rather this article argues that the Open Foundation was set up in response to a variety of international, national and local influences, and as a reflection of educational ideas that were flowing from overseas at the time, especially around the establishment of the Open University in the United Kingdom, and in which not only pragmatism, but also idealism figured.

With the illustration of a best practice example for an implementation of open access in a scientific institution, the paper will be useful in fostering future open access projects.

The paper starts with a brief overview of the existing situation of open access in Germany. The following report describes the results of a best practice example, added by the analysis of a survey on the position about open access by the scientists at the University of Konstanz.

The dissemination of the advantages of open access publishing is fundamental for the success of implementing open access in a scientific institution. For the University of Konstanz, it is shown that elementary factors of success are an intensive cooperation with the head of the university and a vigorous approach to inform scholars about open access. Also, some more conditions are essential to present a persuasive service: The Library of the University of Konstanz offers an institutional repository as an open access publication platform and hosts open journal systems for open access journals. High‐level support and consultation for open access publishing at all administrative levels is provided. The integration of the local activities into national and international initiatives and projects is pursued for example by the joint operation of the information platform open‐access.net.

The paper offers insights in one of the most innovative open access projects in Germany. The University of Konstanz belongs to the pioneers of the open access movement in Germany and is currently running a successful open access project.

The purpose of this paper is to consider how the open access policy environment has developed since the Rights Metadata for Open Archiving Project’s call in 2003 for universities and academics to assert joint copyright ownership of scholarly works and investigate whether UK universities are moving towards a joint copyright ownership.

The paper analyses 81 UK university copyright policies to understand what proportion make a claim over: IP ownership of all outputs; the copyright in scholarly works; re-using scholarly works in specific ways; and approaches to moral rights. Results are cross-tabulated by policy age and mission group.

Universities have not asserted their interest in scholarly works through joint ownership, leaving research funders and publishers to set open access policy. The paper finds an increased proportion of universities assert a generic claim to all IP (87 per cent) relative to earlier studies. In total, 74 per cent of policies relinquished rights in scholarly works in favour of academic staff; 20 per cent of policies share ownership of scholarly works through licensing; 28 per cent of policies assert the right to re-use scholarly works in some way; and 32 per cent of policies seek to protect moral rights. Policies that “share” ownership of scholarly works are more recent. The UK Scholarly Communication Licence (UK-SCL) should have an impact on this area. The reliance on individual academics to enforce a copyright policy or not to opt-out of the UK-SCL could be problematic. The paper concludes that open access may still be best served by joint ownership of scholarly works.

This the first large-scale analysis of UK university policy positions towards scholarly works. The paper discovers for the first time a move towards “shared” ownership of scholarly works in copyright policies.

This study describes and elucidates higher education internationalisation with an in-depth case study of China and its Tsinghua University using international entrepreneurship concepts. The study examines internationalisation as a dynamic reciprocal interplay between opening-up policy and higher education policy, especially world-class university policy.

This is a qualitative mixed-method single case study. In desktop research, the study reviewed China's national policy documents on educational opening-up, Tsinghua's institutional strategy papers and research literature concerning internationalisation, entrepreneurship, Chinese higher education and Tsinghua University. In fieldwork research, the present researcher engaged in action, participatory and collaborative research about university internationalisation in her capacity as both a faculty and an international office administrator at Tsinghua.

Entrepreneurial internationalisation in Chinese higher education has served multiple purposes simultaneously: (1) a pillar to support domestic confidence in educational opening-up for modernisation while also contributing to global development; (2) a cost-effective way to cultivate Chinese talent by accessing the international education market; (3) a quality imperative to stimulate domestic reform and innovation through Sino-foreign exchange and collaboration; (4) a public diplomacy measure building a global network of educational engagement; and (5) a differentiation strategy to stretch the capacity of the nation's top universities by benchmarking their global competitiveness.

Conceptualising opening-up as entrepreneurial internationalisation is key to understand China's higher education development. This study expounds this special term by connecting it with basic concepts in international entrepreneurship research. The analyses at system and institutional levels reinforce one another to forge a synthetic view by integrating policy and practice.