Concentration and Diversification in the Higher Education Landscape<br />Prof. Dr. Dirk Van Damme<br />Head of the Centre ...
Outline<br />Contexts<br />Four main competing rationales affecting the structure of the landscape<br />Main thesis: we ne...
Contexts<br />Main trends:<br />Continued expansion of higher education systems in access and participation<br />More hete...
Contexts<br />Main policy directions:<br />Policy frameworks (theoretically) exchanging more institutional autonomy for ac...
Contexts<br />Future trends and policies to be expected:<br />Continued increasing participation; growth will come from mo...
Problem<br />No lack of good ideas and policy objectives<br />But lack of system capacity to implement and to innovate<br ...
Rationales affecting landscape<br />Public policy rationale: concentration and specialisation<br />Strong drive in many co...
Rationales affecting landscape<br />Institutional rationale: autonomy, expansion, coherence and competition<br />Confronte...
Rationales affecting landscape<br />Market rationale: reputation race and competition<br />Significance of market forces h...
Rationales affecting landscape<br />Research rationale: flexible networks organised around primacy of research needs and i...
11<br />
Critical success factors<br />Sufficient resources: how to guarantee expenditure objectives in times of public spending de...
Questions for discussion<br />What will be the impact of the crisis on the global competition for talent and excellence?<b...
The structure of the top 200THEWUR 2010 – Regions <br />N=81<br />N=82<br />N=27<br />14<br />
Thank you !<br />dirk.vandamme@oecd.org<br />www.oecd.org/edu/ceri<br />15<br />
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Concentration and diversification in the higher education landscape

562 views

Published on

Presentation for the

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
562
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Concentration and diversification in the higher education landscape

  1. 1. Concentration and Diversification in the Higher Education Landscape<br />Prof. Dr. Dirk Van Damme<br />Head of the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation – OECD/EDU<br />
  2. 2. Outline<br />Contexts<br />Four main competing rationales affecting the structure of the landscape<br />Main thesis: we need to tune better the different rationales in order to enhance the capacity of the system to deliver excellence<br />A few critical success factors<br />Some questions<br />2<br />
  3. 3. Contexts<br />Main trends:<br />Continued expansion of higher education systems in access and participation<br />More heterogeneous student population<br />Institutional diversification<br />More challenging and insecure funding<br />Increased competition for resources and output, including for academics on a competitive market<br />In an increasingly global context of networking, mobility and collaboration<br />3<br />
  4. 4. Contexts<br />Main policy directions:<br />Policy frameworks (theoretically) exchanging more institutional autonomy for accountability<br />Continued (or even increased) steering to integrate institutional objectives with national priorities<br />Integration (or subordination) of research in national and European innovation systems<br />From ensuring quality to promoting excellence<br />European convergence: EHEA and ERA<br />Positioning national systems in global arena<br />4<br />
  5. 5. Contexts<br />Future trends and policies to be expected:<br />Continued increasing participation; growth will come from more diverse and more demanding students<br />Changing skill demands, including innovative skills and interdisciplinary skills for new professions<br />More challenging situation at input side: resources, staff<br />Increased social and political demand for effectiveness, productivity in research and teaching, innovation<br />More competition, not only between institutions and countries, but also with new types of institutions outside the HE sector<br />5<br />
  6. 6. Problem<br />No lack of good ideas and policy objectives<br />But lack of system capacity to implement and to innovate<br />What explains this resistance to change?<br />Possible: lack of tuning the different rationales, system dynamics and motivations present in the higher education and research system<br />Main obstacle: complacency with status quo<br />6<br />
  7. 7. Rationales affecting landscape<br />Public policy rationale: concentration and specialisation<br />Strong drive in many countries and EC to rationalise provision and research capacity in order to avoid fragmentation and overlap<br />Often opposed by institutions being interested in expansion and competition<br />Main policy benefit: efficiency and excellence<br />Main policy deficit: narrow fascination with excellence, life-cycle of top research and top researchers difficult to predict<br />7<br />
  8. 8. Rationales affecting landscape<br />Institutional rationale: autonomy, expansion, coherence and competition<br />Confronted with increasingly international competition, institutions tend to maximise their sphere of activity<br />Even in less market oriented systems, institutional autonomy has increased mission drift<br />Main policy benefit: entrepreneurial universities<br />Main policy deficit: proliferation of profitable but not necessarily most innovative activities, risk-avoidance<br />8<br />
  9. 9. Rationales affecting landscape<br />Market rationale: reputation race and competition<br />Significance of market forces has increased, even in public systems, because of institutional autonomy, the reputation race provoked by international rankings and excellence initiatives<br />Main policy benefit: competition may perhaps increase system capacity to deliver excellence<br />Main policy deficit: self-regulatory capacity of the system is limited; reputation leads to ‘the winner takes all’; competition at odds with cooperation; competition needs transparency and regulation<br />9<br />
  10. 10. Rationales affecting landscape<br />Research rationale: flexible networks organised around primacy of research needs and ideas<br />Research networks escaping institutional boundaries and national policy frameworks<br />Public policy, institutional and even market rationales do not fit well with what drives researchers and research communities<br />Main policy benefit: sufficient space for researchers drives excellence and innovation<br />Main policy deficit: limited overall efficiency, lot of waste, limits of peer review modes of quality<br />10<br />
  11. 11. 11<br />
  12. 12. Critical success factors<br />Sufficient resources: how to guarantee expenditure objectives in times of public spending deficit<br />Modernising university governance, leadership and management: how to move away from parochialism, how to improve institutional capacity for strategic management<br />Inter- and trans-disciplinarity: how to transcend or even break the conservative powers of disciplines<br />Improved system transparency: a well-tuned system needs far better transparency mechanisms<br />12<br />
  13. 13. Questions for discussion<br />What will be the impact of the crisis on the global competition for talent and excellence?<br />Is the European ‘plateau’-model in university performance more sustainable than the US stratified model?<br />Is the main challenge for Europe to increase quality at the top or to improve the sub-top?<br />How to lower tolerance for mediocrity protecting forces in higher education and research?<br />13<br />
  14. 14. The structure of the top 200THEWUR 2010 – Regions <br />N=81<br />N=82<br />N=27<br />14<br />
  15. 15. Thank you !<br />dirk.vandamme@oecd.org<br />www.oecd.org/edu/ceri<br />15<br />

×