Overview
- Editors:
-
-
Rosalind M. O. Pritchard
-
Ulster University, UK
-
Attila Pausits
-
Danube University Krems, Austria
-
James Williams
-
Birmingham City University, UK
- The entire book is devoted to institutional positioning; the process through which higher education institutions locate themselves in specific niches within the higher education system.
- The book contains empirical research on institutional coordinates.
- The book elaborates on the philosophy of university missions and features strategic planning.
Access this book
Other ways to access
Table of contents (14 chapters)
-
-
Creating the Institutional Compass: Vision, Values, Mission and Strategies
-
-
-
- Bruno Broucker, Kurt De Wit, Liudvika Leisyte
Pages 19-40
-
- Pepka Boyadjieva, Petya Ilieva-Trichkova
Pages 41-62
-
- Maria J. Rosa, Cláudia S. Sarrico, Isabel Machado, Carolina Costa
Pages 63-83
-
-
-
- Tony Strike, Jacqueline Labbe
Pages 125-140
-
Reviewing Institutional Performance and Positioning
-
Front Matter
Pages 141-141
-
-
-
-
-
- Jussi Kivistö, Vuokko Kohtamäki
Pages 215-226
-
- Hans Vossensteyn, Don Westerheijden
Pages 227-245
-
- Per Olaf Aamodt, Rune Borgan Reiling, Stein Bjørnstad, Mirjam Snåre, Edvin Finnanger
Pages 247-263
-
Back Matter
Pages 265-269
About this book
Higher education is of growing public and political importance for society and the economy. Globalisation is transforming it from a local and national concern into one of international significance. In order to fulfil societal, governmental and business sector needs, many universities are aiming to (re-)position themselves. The book initially considers their “compass”. They aspire to transformational planning, mission and strategy in which social justice is important, people are not treated as mere means to an end, and traditional moral positions are respected. This transformational urge is sometimes vitiated by blunt demands of new public management that overlook universities’ potential for serving the public good. The volume then addresses universities’ success in meeting their targets. Often the challenge in evaluation is the need to reconcile tensions, for example between structure and pastoral care of students; institutional competition and collaboration; roles of academics and administrators; performance-based funding versus increased differentiation. Measurement is supposed to provide discipline, align institutional and state policy, and provide a vital impetus for change. Yet many of these measurement instruments are not fully fit for purpose. They do not take sufficient account of institutional missions, either of “old” or of specialist universities; and sophisticated measurement of the student experience requires massive resources. Change and positioning have become increasingly key elements of a complex but heterogeneous sector requiring new services and upgraded instruments.
Editors and Affiliations
-
Ulster University, UK
Rosalind M. O. Pritchard
-
Danube University Krems, Austria
Attila Pausits
-
Birmingham City University, UK
James Williams
