|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
Higher Education Review ProcessVarieties of Excellence: Diversity, Specialisation and Regional Engagement7. diverse and specialised partnerships
249 Excellence in the creation and sustenance of partnerships should be the goal of every higher education institution. Varieties of excellence will result from the development of diverse and specialised partnerships. Recognition by higher education institutions of their role in social, economic and cultural development should lead to a focus on enhanced community engagement. 250 Collaboration is essential between institutions and a range of other stakeholders with interests in linking with a national network of higher education, including other educational institutions, industry and business, professional associations, government funded research agencies, and communities. 251 This paper will not canvass all the possible partners for higher education institutions, but focus on five, as examples of the potential benefits for the nation, students and higher education institutions in forging productive partnerships. a. regional partnerships
252 In 2001, the Federal Government released its framework for developing Australia’s regions over the next decade:
This framework articulates a shift in policy from the imposition of ‘one-size fits all’ to a community partnership philosophy and places the responsibility for future development on communities themselves. 253 Higher education institutions are uniquely placed to assist their communities in future economic, social and cultural development. Garlick argued that:
defining a ‘regional higher education institution’
254 There is no accepted definition of a ‘regional university’, nor a set of defined regions for regional development purposes (Garlick, 2000, p.29). The Commonwealth approach to regional development is to allow communities to define their own region. 255 There has been a view that ‘a regional university’ is located outside the metropolitan areas of major capital cities. This perspective influenced the compilation of the list of thirteen universities considered ‘regional’ in order to qualify for Regional Protection under the Knowledge and Innovation reforms (1999, p.23). There was, however, some dispute about the validity of the criteria and the ultimate list. One particular complication is that a significant number of metropolitan universities now have regional campuses. 256 A rigid identification of universities into a category called ‘regional’ institution found little favour in submissions. Victoria University argued that “establishing categories for universities would create an artificial rigidity in the system” (Submission 215, p.11). Garlick argued that it is more appropriate “to ensure there is a focus on excellence among all universities in working with their respective communities” (1998, p.64). He adopted the view that:
257 A policy framework for regional engagement that incorporates all higher education institutions, wherever they may be located within Australia, is supported by submissions, as indicated in the following:
258 The Western Australian universities and the Western Australian Department of Education Services (Submission 176) put a case for the distinctiveness of their State on the basis of its low population density and lack of major regional centres. They argued that any policy framework would need to acknowledge that all of the WA universities have responsibilities for ‘regional’ engagement as reflected in the UWA submission:
259 The global context for higher education has been raised by a number of universities in relation to notions of regional positioning. The University of Western Sydney argued that in an international context “regions and regionalism…encompass more than proximate communities, whether urban or rural”:
260 The University of Newcastle argued that a number of universities saw themselves “in the context of their relationship to a regional community, as well as their national and international activities and contributions” (Submission 183, p.2). Curtin University of Technology emphasised that its ‘region’ extended into South-East Asia (Submission 270, p.6). 261 There is strong support for a policy framework for regional engagement that does not define some institutions as regional to the exclusion of others, but makes incentives and support for regional engagement potentially available to all institutions, in accordance with their mission and purpose. Robson et al argued that “fitness-for-purpose is a better guide to local and regional collaboration than is a pre-determined set of standard ‘regions’” (1997, 5.2). potential contribution to regions262 Higher education institutions have the capacity to engage in partnerships with their regional communities to achieve significant economic, social and cultural benefits. ‘Learning regions’ will only develop out of productive partnerships between communities and education providers. As suggested by the University of Ballarat, these partnerships need to focus on regional sustainability:
263 Economic contributions can and should extend far beyond the multiplier effects of being an employer and purchaser of goods in a local community, but this is dependent upon the institution “being more assertive in the way they involve themselves with the economies of the region they are located in” (Garlick, 1998,p.vii). The economic impact of the university sector on Australia, according to Cabalu et al, can be measured in three major ways:
264 Phillips Curran used the method developed by Cabalu et al in their assessment of the total direct and indirect economic impact of the South Australian universities, which in 1999, they estimated to be $1 738 million (2001). The University of Newcastle reported on a recent study it commissioned that indicated that the “multiplier effect on income generated to the regional economy area for each dollar of the University’s income is six to eight dollars” (Submission 183, p.2). A university clearly makes a significant economic contribution to the region in which it is located. The contribution of a university campus will vary according to its size and range of activities. 265 Central Queensland University outlined the broader benefits that accrue to a community from the presence of a university campus:
266 As will be discussed in a later section, a higher education institution can also make a significant contribution to the community in terms of service in social and cultural development. 267 A higher education campus may be a conduit and broker for community access to the global community, as suggested by Central Queensland University:
effective partnerships in/with regions
268 Increasingly, there is recognition that there is much more to effective regional engagement by higher education institutions than economic contributions as employers and purchasers. Sutherland suggested “the wider knowledge community is increasingly rating the universities by their connectivity to the community, and by their ability to augment their human capital with others” (2002, p.53). 269 The W.K.Kellogg Foundation identified eight characteristics of effective engagement between higher education institutions and communities:
270 Garlick reported on the outcomes of his study, which has found that there is a continuum of engagement practices for universities, ranging from fully engaged to non-engaged. The fully engaged university:
Lower levels of engagement are characterised by being project specific, staff member specific or enterprise specific (Garlick, 2000, p.xiii; Submission 193, p.2). partnerships in regional australia271 Whilst acknowledging that all universities have responsibilities and expectations for partnerships in their regional communities, campuses that are located in rural or non-capital city areas or ‘regional Australia’ have distinctive relationships with their communities, particular calls on their services and may be likely to suffer disadvantages that are not shared by all capital city campuses. 272 Central Queensland University noted that “often a regional university is the only institution within the community to drive the educational, economic, social and cultural development of the community” (Submission 280, p.17). BHERT saw great potential for institutions in forming partnerships to build competitive regional economies:
273 Universities are now a significant presence in many communities in regional Australia. This presence varies from a major campus, to a study centre, to a shared educational precinct in collaboration with a TAFE college, a school or a community library. It is clear, as Garlick observed that:
274 The growth in numbers of non-metropolitan campuses can be interpreted from a variety of perspectives. Garlick questioned the motivation of some institutions:
275 He further argued that:
276 The comment by the University of New England, that “an institution that has its headquarters and its heart in a region can make a contribution that no branch office can possibly make”, suggests that there is a perception that some of the moves by capital city institutions into regional Australia may not be wholeheartedly welcomed (Submission 26, p.11). 277 Improvement of access to and participation in higher education by regional Australians has been a driver for the establishment of new campuses. James argued that “the costs of higher education are particularly serious inhibitors or barriers, especially the expenses associated with leaving home for rural school students” (Submission 60, p.2). He cited research that has shown that:
278 Deakin University called for “Government and communities…to address the serious issue of defining the level of educational provision expected in regional areas” (Submission 95, p.10). It argued that the emergence of campuses in many regional centres with a wide spectrum of course offerings is difficult to sustain. Questioning the presumption that a local campus presence is the only way to provide a community with higher education services, Open Universities Australia (OLA) called on industry and regional communities to ask “how to gain local access to the programs of leading educational institutions and specialist practitioners” (Submission 18, p.8). OLA suggested that:
279 There have been some outstanding examples of partnerships in learning between campuses and institutions in regional Australia and their local communities. Some have been acknowledged in the Australian Awards for University Teaching. For example, in 1999, the University of Newcastle won an award for its programme to retrain BHP staff who had been made redundant as the result of the closure of BHP Rod Bar and Wire Division, as teachers of Technological and Applied Studies in NSW secondary schools. This was a successful partnership between the Faculty of Education, BHP and the NSW Department of Education. 280 Some successful research partnerships have also been formed in regional Australia. However, Garlick observed that:
281 Many of the more effective partnerships have been through industry and technology precincts, project-based relationships or participation in Cooperative Research Centres. A number of purpose-built research centres for regional studies have been established over the past decade, for example, the University of New England’s Institute for Rural Futures, La Trobe University’s Faculty for Regional Development at Bendigo, and The University of Queensland’s Community Service and Research Centre at Ipswich. 282 The University of Ballarat argued that the research priorities of institutions in regional Australia must address the needs of their communities:
283 The University of Tasmania has adopted such an approach in developing four areas of concentration that have direct connection to its regional community - Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, National and State Development, Natural Environment and Wilderness and Population and Community Studies. The creation of critical mass to effectively address community needs will inevitably require partnerships with other higher education institutions and publicly funded research agencies to bring in additional expertise from outside the local community. Strategic alliances in research, as part of the greater national network, are essential. 284 Some concernes have been expressed about research in regional Australian campuses becoming overly parochial, as reflected in the comment by the University of Southern Queensland’s Faculty of Sciences, that “it is necessary that some research undertaken within regional universities have a global perspective” (Submission 24, p.3). In the UK context, the Higher Education Funding Council of England (HEFCE) observed that:
285 This was a view echoed by James Cook University, which proposed:
286 Integral to the building of partnerships between higher education institutions and their communities in regional Australia, is the development of a mutual understanding of expectations, roles and preferred outcomes. The local member for the State seat of Bendigo East, Jacinta Allen, argued “it is a relationship that must always be of mutual understanding in order to maximise the benefits for both parties to the relationship” (Submission 147, p.2). 287 Developing a mutual understanding takes an investment of time and a strategic approach by all parties. However, high community expectations of a higher education campus have the potential to create tensions in community partnerships. Goddard noted that:
288 The Area Consultative Committees (ACCs) provide higher education institutions with one point of contact with their regions, and a number of institutions have formalised a relationship with their local ACC. In Victoria, the Victorian Learning and Employment Skills Commission and Local Learning and Employment Networks (LLENs) provide a further point of access for Victorian institutions. In Queensland, Learning Network Queensland links more than 50 learning support centres, which provide access to higher education and training in small regional communities. 289 The University of Tasmania’s partnership with the Tasmanian State Government for the provision of a range of research and consulting services provides a model for other institutions in regional Australia. The Partnership Agreement is managed by a Working Party consisting of the senior executive of the University and the Heads of the major government agencies. In 1999, Swinburne University of Technology’s Lilydale Division signed a Growth and Development Partnership Agreement with the Shire of Yarra Ranges to pursue a range of activities in the shire. 290 A number of submissions referred to the disadvantages that campuses in regional Australia face. James Cook University provided a list that included:
291 Strong arguments were made in submissions that the provision of higher education in regional Australia was more costly than provision in capital cities. Edith Cowan University estimated that the “cost of delivery to learning centres in regional WA is at least three times more expensive than the cost of delivering similar programs in the Perth metropolitan area” (Submission 225, p.3). The current funding model makes no allowance for differences in costs for course provision, maintenance of infrastructure, staffing or the limited economies of scale that can be achieved in smaller campuses. 292 Bandwidth issues have also been raised by a number of non-capital city institutions. Most universities enjoy access to bandwidth at 34 megabits per second (Mbs) and some metropolitan universities have up to 155 Mbs. Until recently, some regional universities have had access to as little as 2 Mbs. Arguments have been made that the lack of adequate bandwidth acts as a barrier to a university’s participation in many fields of research and restricts its provision of online education and training. In 2000, the Commonwealth provided funding of $3.2 million for a number of universities in north-eastern Australia to improve bandwidth. Longer term solutions are being considered. 293 There are significant opportunities for technology to improve access to higher education for Australians in regional Australia as noted earlier by OLA and by Murdoch University:
294 It was argued in a number of submissions that institutions with their major presence in regional Australia do not have the same potential for diversification of revenue as older, better endowed institutions situated in cities with growth industries and growing populations. An academic from the University of Tasmania argued that:
295 Whilst acknowledging this, there are new opportunities emerging because global capital is mobile and many international companies are establishing bases wherever they find the appropriate skills and favourable political, economic and social environment. As yet, there are few examples of institutions in regional Australia attracting major multi-internationals to their campuses. However, the decision of IBM Global Services to locate within University of Ballarat’s Technology Park presages the possibilities. 296 Within a national, diverse higher education network, there would be scope for some institutions to specialise in serving the needs of their regional community. Over the past decade, many universities with a non-metropolitan base have established campuses in metropolitan areas, which Garlick argued has been “to capture part of the growing overseas student market for their institution” (1998, p.12). In its submission, Queensland University of Technology argued that by investing in city campuses, these institutions “are denying their local community the full benefit of this rich source of potential community benefit” (Submission 96, p.13). The balance between appropriate revenue diversification and serving the needs of particular communities is clearly a delicate one. facilitating regional partnerships297 There are currently few incentives in terms of funding or support for the creation and sustenance of partnerships between higher education institutions and their regions. Swinburne University of Technology claimed community development was a problematic part of a university’s mission because of the lack of specific funding:
298 Garlick endorsed this view in stating “there are currently no higher education or regional development policies and funding programs that directly seek to strengthen the behavioural connection between the university and its regional community” (Submission 193, p.4). A number of possibilities have been raised in submissions to facilitate regional development partnerships. 299 One option could be for funding to facilitate regional engagement to be incorporated as a separate criterion for receipt of all operating grants. Performance could be reported through an annual profiles process. However, a number of submissions argued that any funding for regional partnerships or development should be specific, rather than part of the present operating grants. Swinburne University of Technology argued that “generic, untied additions to the operating grants of individual universities or classes of universities would be unlikely to result in substantive regional development outcomes” (Submission 194, p.13). The joint Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Australian Industry Group and Business Council of Australia submission proposed that any solution should not “skew the fundamental logic of any funding model”:
300 Another option put forward in submissions is the establishment of a regional incentives programme that would fund specific regional partnerships and initiatives. The Group of Eight supported such a proposal on the condition that it did not define ‘regional universities’ as non-metropolitan institutions:
301 The La Trobe University, Bendigo, Regional Advisory Board supported project specific funding, including for course provision of direct service to communities. It suggested that the “Commonwealth enter into contracts with universities for teaching, research and community service activities of benefit to regional communities” (Submission 110, p.1). 302 The University of the Sunshine Coast put forward a proposal for a “Collaborative Infrastructure policy initiative”. It supported relocations of government funded research facilities to university campuses; co-location of industry-research resources with universities; shared field station facilities; multi-sector educational precincts; shared sporting and cultural facilities; and collocation of local, State and Commonwealth Government services with a university (Submission 242, p.7). 303 Other submissions argued for additional funding to support institutions in regional Australia, in part based on the added costs of provision of higher education outside capital cities:
304 There was also support for the payment of a premium to institutions and campuses in regional Australia. The University of Ballarat supported a “regional and rural loading to operating grant income, based on student load [which would]… be an important catalyst for meeting the needs of regional students and communities” (Submission 139, p.2). BHERT referred to the Commonwealth Grants Commission, which quantified and funded differential costs based on “scale, remoteness and community service obligations” (2001b, p.5). Northern Territory University stated that:
305 Edith Cowan University supported the suggestion that “special Community Service Obligation funding should be provided to enable improved services in regional areas” (Submission 225, p.7). In contrast, the University of Ballarat rejected a model in which institutions in regional Australia would be funded differently for a special community service obligation (Submission 139, p.4). 306 Another way of acknowledging the distinctive context for campuses in regional Australia would be to maintain existing operating grants at a lower level of student enrolment. Some submissions opposed this. Swinburne University of Technology argued that this “would not result in a net benefit to regional communities, as education and training is the primary contribution that universities can make to regional development” (Submission 194, p.13). The University of Ballarat argued that “reducing current enrolment levels would reduce access and make entry more competitive, particularly in a rural and regional environment” (Submission 139, p.4). 307 Support for regional engagement and community development is not a matter for the Commonwealth alone. A number of submissions argued that State and Territory governments also have an important role to play. There is however, no intention to shift funding responsibility for higher education from the Commonwealth to the States and Territories. The AVCC supported “specific funding tied to a verifiable level of regional engagement with productive outcomes” and foreshadowed that such funding could come from “areas other than the higher education budget, such as regional and state development programs, including those of State governments” (Submission 22, p.7). The University of Western Australia stated that “there should be a greater role for State Governments to support specific local and regional development needs” (Submission 175, p.3). 308 The University of New England saw a role for State governments in contributing to “the rural research and engagement ‘agenda’ of rural based universities” (Submission 26, p.14). It suggested that the Commonwealth could offer funds conditional on matching grants from State governments (Submission 26, p.15). Watts argued that the States and Territories have a special responsibility for regional policies and they should “establish scholarships and institutional investment that will stabilise regional universities and colleges and make it possible for them to compete in chosen areas of professional education and scholarship” (Submission 94, p.15). 309 A suggestion put forward in Higher Education at the Crossroads was that regional community bodies could be funded directly to purchase the higher education services they needed, whether they be courses, research or community service. This proposal found limited support in submissions, although the La Trobe University, Bendigo, Regional Advisory Board accepted that “some funding for educational and broader services could be channeled through regional bodies such as this Regional Advisory Board or local public and private institution” (Submission 110, p.1). 310 Several institutions rejected this idea because they feared it would add a new layer of compliance and bureaucracy. Curtin University of Technology did not support:
311 The University of Ballarat did not support:
312 A joint funding approach to building of regional partnerships between the Department of Education, Science and Training and the Department of Transport and Regional Services was suggested by the University of New England (Submission 26, p.15). Garlick also proposed “a general framework that would sit outside the current funding arrangements for universities and regions” which could be jointly managed by DEST and DOTARS (Submission 193, p.5). His general framework approach was supported by DOTARS (Submission 309, p.7). Funding support within this proposal would be directed to partnerships rather than either the university or the regional partner. 313 Tax incentives to encourage industry and business to form partnerships with higher education institutions in regional areas have been proposed by a number of submissions. The President of the AVCC, Professor Deryck Schreuder has argued that “university community engagement would also be supported through more effective taxation arrangements to support donations and regional investment” (2002). The University of New England, for example, foreshadowed in relation to support for endowments, scholarships, research and consultancies, that “a clear message would be sent to regional Australia if such investments were able to be claimed by the donor as a tax deduction” (Submission 26, p.14). b. partnerships in community service
314 Distinctive partnerships in community service present powerful opportunities for higher education institutions to contribute to a broader national and regional, social and cultural agenda. There is a sense in which partnerships in community service were covered in the preceding section on partnerships in the regions, but a particular dimension of community service will be stressed in this section. 315 The area of the traditional academic triumvirate that has arguably received the least attention in the Australian higher education context is community service. According to Lander, “service weighs in a distant third to teaching and research in the traditional assessment of the work of academics” (2000, p.137). McKinnon et al (2000) claimed that “until recently few universities had developed a formal strategy of community service as a means of enhancing their external impact” and those that had, focused on commitment to a specific objective such as a science park, rather than an institutional community service policy or strategy (2000, p.35). 316 There is, however, a strong tradition that academic scholarship should embrace service to the community, both through one’s discipline, field of study or professional practice and in a broader sense of ‘academic citizenship’. An academic’s service and contribution to the university and broader community in a broad range of areas, including those outside of his/her specific discipline, can be embraced by the notion of ‘academic citizenship’. 317 Boyer’s (1990) scholarship of application embraces a narrow interpretation of academic community service. Kemmis et al (1999) argued that the scholarship of application:
318 For community service to satisfy Boyer’s notion of scholarship, it is necessary that the service be tied to one’s discipline or field of study, not merely the doing of good works. Glassick et al (1997) argued that “such service is serious demanding work, requiring the rigor – and the accountability – traditionally associated with research work” (1997, p.12). RMIT described their efforts to develop a fifth scholarship – the scholarship of partnership and engagement (Submission 273, p.9). 319 Moses recognised that society fairly has an expectation that there will be a “transfer of expertise beyond the classroom” but notes the tension in the current context for community service:
320 The Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science argued that:
321 A number of submissions identified the importance of community service in the role of the higher education institution:
322 The understanding of community service in Australian universities has tended to be limited to the contributions of staff. There is, however, a broader context for community service involving students. Some students make a valuable contribution to both their institutional community and the broader community. A submission by the University of Canberra Students’ Association gave an example of valuable work in a peer education project called the University of Canberra Suicide Intervention Project. It argued that such a project is “recognition that universities are not degree factories, and that there is a contribution students make to the community that is not purely economic or academic” (Submission 50, p.11). At present, most student community service tends to be project-based and the result of individual or small group initiatives rather than part of a broader institutional commitment to community service or integrated use of community service in the curriculum. 323 There is considerable scope for expanding productive partnerships with the community through student involvement in what is termed ‘service learning’. As a pedagogical approach, service learning is a part of the tradition of experiential and active learning. Originally articulated and developed in schools in the United States in the 1960s, service learning directly links community service with the curriculum. It is a “teaching and learning approach that integrates community service with academic study to enrich learning, teach civic responsibility, and strengthen communities” (National Commission on Service-Learning, 2002). Students are assisted to determine real, defined community needs and then respond to them, so that there are reciprocal benefits for both students and the community. 324 In the higher education context, the goal of service learning is to prepare graduates to become active participants in civil society and lifelong learners. There is potential for service learning to be integrated into the curriculum of subjects and courses or as part of a whole-of-institution initiative. The Association of Commonwealth Universities acknowledged the place of service learning in universities, particularly in developing nations:
325 Whilst there are many examples of community service by students in Australian higher education institutions, few could be described as service learning. 326 In the United States, in the interests of developing partnerships in service learning, almost 850 presidents of higher education institutions have joined
Campus Compact, a national coalition “committed to the civic purposes of higher education”
(Campus Compact website, 2002). The Compact “promotes community service that develops students’ citizenship skills and values, encourages partnerships between campuses and communities, and assists faculty who seek to integrate public and community engagement into their teaching and research” (Campus Compact, 2002). The American Association for Higher Education has an initiative to integrate service learning across the disciplines
(http://www.aahe.org/service/) 327 In the United Kingdom, Community Service Volunteers (CSV) has been established to promote and facilitate education for citizenship and service learning in higher education, through learning experiences that meet community needs but are also accredited or certified in higher education. The Higher Education Active Community Fund (HEACF) managed through the Higher Education Funding Council of England (HEFCE) is intended to encourage greater involvement of students and staff in voluntary and community activities. 328 In Australia, there is currently no specific incentive in the funding arrangements for higher education institutions to engage with and contribute to the community. Higher Education at the Crossroads asked whether universities should be funded for community service activities and who should pay. 329 A number of submissions argued that the Commonwealth should fund institutions for community service:
330 Most of those supporting Commonwealth funding for community service focused on the annual profiles process as the way to achieve accountability:
331 In contrast, several institutions argued that the inclusion of community service as part of the operating grant would result in new compliance requirements and that this should be avoided:
c. partnerships with industry and business
332 Productive partnerships between higher education institutions and industry and business bring benefits to all partners and are vital to the effectiveness of the national innovation system. Global innovation networks are forming and for Australian higher education institutions, industry and business to be effective players, we need to establish:
333 The conventional model of interaction between universities and industry/business has been based on one-way service, often initiated and sustained by personal links. Consideration needs to be given to new forms of partnership, characterised by “the creation of knowledge systems based on organisational collaboration” (Turpin and Ngui, 2000, p.22). 334 Universities have become more actively engaged with industry over the past decade and funding from these sources has grown sharply. Between 1992 and 2000, universities’ research income from industry and other sources, (such as research income from contracts, donations, bequests and international sources) grew from $109 million to $330 million (Higher Education Research Data Collection). The majority of universities demonstrated strong growth over this period, and most smaller universities improved their overall performance from very modest bases. Successive Commonwealth governments have supported the development of industry-higher education partnerships, with funding for university-industry research growing from nothing in 1991 to around $58 million last year (Higher Education Data Collection, unpublished data). 335 The Commonwealth has a portfolio of programmes designed to encourage research collaborations, including those between universities, industry and business. The Cooperative Research Centres Scheme supports collaboration between research providers, governments and industry partners, both domestic and international. The Australian Research Council’s (ARC) Linkage Programme includes objectives to encourage excellent collaborative research within universities and across the innovation system and to encourage industry oriented research training. The ARC has documented the range of programmes available to support linkages between industry and public sector research agencies, including universities:
(http://www.arc.gov.au/industry/good_idea.pdf).
336 All universities can cite examples of successful partnerships with industry and business. In its submission, the Australian Council of Engineering Deans provided some notable examples from the science, engineering and technology area:
337 In a briefing to the Australian Industry Group, the Managing Director of Advance Metal Products, Ian Stone, described his firm’s relationship with the University of Western Sydney as “strong and supportive”:
338 A very successful model of engagement has been established by member companies of the Minerals Tertiary Education Council (MTEC) and selected universities, to facilitate collaboration in the disciplines of earth science, mining engineering and metallurgy. The MTEC Secretariat guides the process of university collaboration, facilitates the implementation of agreed programmes, acts as a communication hub for all participants, collects and distributes the resources and is the vehicle by which programmes are regularly reviewed. Centres of excellence in each of the participating universities are collaborating to develop and share new undergraduate learning materials, a postgraduate coursework programme for practising professionals and a national programme of work experience for undergraduate students studying for careers in the minerals industry. 339 Science, engineering and technology are not the only fields of study with the potential for partnerships with industry and business. Stannage and Gare (2002) recognised that the humanities and social sciences also present opportunities:
340 A significant challenge for academics in these areas is to communicate the relevance of their disciplines to industry and business so that the process of engagement can begin. The submission from the Australian Academy of the Humanities proposed the establishment of a CRC type programme that would cater for the humanities, arts and social sciences:
341 Traditionally, most partnerships have had a research focus, but there is an increasing number of examples of successful learning partnerships between higher education institutions and business and industry. Co-operative education programmes have been developed by many institutions, coupling studies with work in integrated degree programmes. Industry and business representatives have an advisory role in the curriculum design and evaluation processes of many programmes. 342 For over a decade, the Commonwealth Bank has had a partnership with the Macquarie Graduate School of Management, which offers Commonwealth Bank managers a Postgraduate Diploma in Financial Services Management. In 2000, Deakin University announced that it had formed a partnership with Microsoft Australia and Com Tech Education Services, a division of Com Tech Communications, to develop and deliver a new degree - Bachelor of Computing (Networking Technologies). The programme will provide graduates with the degree, industry certification in the Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer and a guaranteed job in the information technology industry after twelve months of commencing the programme. Flinders University offers a Graduate Certificate in Public Sector Management and the University of Western Sydney, a Graduate Certificate in Management, to Commonwealth public servants, through an arrangement with the Australian Public Service Commission. 343 There are many examples of productive partnerships between universities and industry and business, but there is scope for improvement in the nature, number and effectiveness of these relationships. Universities are at different stages of development with regard to commercial relationships with business and industry and this is reflected in their varied success in gaining entrepreneurial advantage from partnerships. 344 There are still concerns from both higher education institutions and industry/business about the dynamics of collaboration. Turpin and Ngui observed that most links in the past “have tended to be intermittent and generally unsupported by wider institutional structures” (2000, p.8). Phillips Curran noted that:
345 A submission by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Australian Industry Group and Business Council of Australia summarised the challenges of partnerships, from the perspective of industry partners:
346 Delays in university decision-making processes have also been identified as a significant problem for venture capitalists in investing in university enterprises (The Melbourne Consulting Group, 1999). There have been concerns expressed that the reward and promotion systems in universities do not adequately acknowledge and facilitate the development of commercialisation and entrepreneurial skills in staff. 347 The issue of university management of intellectual property received considerable attention through the National Innovation Summit and the Backing Australia’s Ability initiatives. The introduction of the National Principles of Intellectual Property Management for Publicly Funded Research in September 2001, provided researchers, research managers and their institutions, with guidelines for best practice for the identification, protection and management of intellectual property. As part of the annual profiles process, the Research and Research Training Management Reports now require universities to demonstrate improvements in their management of intellectual property and commercialisation. 348 It is important to realise that alignment with industry needs will require the establishment of institutional policies and practices in relation to commercialisation that take into consideration industry expectations and standards. 349 The BHERT submission identified cultural differences as obstacles to effective collaboration:
350 Industry/business collaborations need to be characterised by clear communication and a better understanding by all parties of the cultures of the other sector. The Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology recognised that there is “a need for industry and the university sector to understand their respective cultures and functional operation” (Submission 208, p.6). PriceWaterhouseCoopers acknowledged that “business must take a more active role to voice its concerns and interests as a key stakeholder in the HE sector – to not do so would reinforce the image of ambivalence” (Submission 279, p.19). 351 Turpin and Ngui argued that most existing partnerships have:
352 Phillips Curran pointed to communication and cultural gaps as inhibiting the partnership process:
353 Some would argue that there is a strong case for industry and business partnerships to be more closely integrated into state and regional development plans. In their strategic review of higher education in South Australia, Phillips Curran (2001) recommended the creation of a higher education industry development framework that identified a set of priority industry sectors as the focus for South Australian higher education institutions over the next five years. Natural areas of specialisation for South Australian institutions were suggested - wine, biotechnology, water, aquaculture, defence industries, signal processing and nanotechnology. They concluded that:
354 The Review of higher education is occurring at the same time as the National Research Priorities process, which is identifying areas of strength, opportunity and need for Australia. Science, engineering and technology priorities will be set in 2002 and social sciences and humanities will be set in 2003-04. The identification of national priorities reflects the need to strengthen Australia’s innovation networks through “the development of innovative networks in concentrated areas of excellence” (CCST, 1999, p.vii). This exercise has significant implications for future partnerships between higher education institutions and industry/business and a strong incentive for partnerships to reflect national needs and priorities. 355 Linkage with national, State and regional needs requires close liaison with government authorities, as proposed by BHERT:
356 At the Commonwealth level, there are a number of government portfolios with an interest in the contributions of universities to industry policy objectives, as indicated by the whole-of-government approach adopted in the Backing Australia’s Ability initiatives. Successful partnerships will ensure that government has some part to play:
357 As acknowledged in a Coordination Committee on Science and Technology (CCST) report on interactions between universities and industry, there is also an “onus on government to ensure that programs within and across different agencies are responsive to emerging needs” (1999, p.xi). 358 Partnerships with business and industry need not be limited to ‘big business’. An area of yet untapped potential for higher education partnerships in Australia is the small and medium enterprise (SME). The most recent available data (1998-99) indicate that approximately 95 per cent of Australian businesses are categorised as ‘small’ (ABS, 1999). As noted in an earlier section, these enterprises are of particular significance in rural and regional communities. 359 The barriers to successful partnerships with SMEs are considerable, according to the Association of Commonwealth Universities:
360 The needs of SMEs may be difficult for higher education institutions to access and understand because they may not be connected to representative networks and are often solo operations.
361 The SME sector is likely to have different needs and expectations from larger businesses. The Dearing Committee acknowledged this:
362 It may be, for example, that SME employers are more interested in employees having access to short skill-based courses than longer-term degree programmes. For institutions that may choose to specialise in partnerships with SMEs, a model such as that proposed by the Association of Commonwealth Universities may be appropriate:
363 A study of the interface between universities and small firms in the United Kingdom identified four components of a best practice model for any institution seeking to develop partnerships with SMEs:
364 European countries have established a number of initiatives to foster partnerships between higher education institutions and SMEs. With the assistance of the European Regional Development Fund, in 1995 the Universities of the North East and the Open University in the UK formed a collaborative venture to improve small firm competitiveness called The Knowledge House
(http://www.knowledgehouse.ac.uk
d. partnerships with professional associations365 Partnerships between higher education institutions and professional associations share some of the same tensions as those with industry and business. Professional associations are, however, distinctive organisations, and it is argued that it is incumbent upon both professional associations and higher education institutions to cultivate these partnerships. As acknowledged by the Australian Council of Professions, “it can be said that the majority of teaching in universities is directly for the professions” (Submission 285, p.5). 366 A number of universities make specific reference in their mission statements to a focus on course provision and research that enhances professional practice or is directed at particular professions. For example, Edith Cowan University aims to provide a university education “especially for those people employed in, or seeking employment in the service professions”. The University of Technology, Sydney “provides higher education to enhance professional practice”. 367 As with all partnerships, the benefits can and should be mutual. Morris argued that:
Morris cited an example of The University of Queensland’s relationship with the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) in which the AICD offers a Company Directors Course as part of the University’s MBA programme. 368 The increasing focus on experiential and work-place learning has involved professional associations and their members into higher education in unprecedented ways. The Australian Council of Professions noted the variation in teaching methods between professions and the increasing emphasis on “practical experience in courses, that is, learning through doing or ‘situated learning’ as opposed to the traditional discipline knowledge based approach or ‘propositional knowledge’” (Submission 285, p.5). e. partnerships with other higher education institutions369 As noted earlier in this paper, submissions have proposed a reconceptualisation of the relationships between Australian higher education institutions as strategic national and regional networks. To facilitate such networks, it is argued that there is a need for closer collaboration between institutions. There is considerable collaboration already but there is great opportunity for new forms of cooperation between institutions, which are more actively facilitated by the policy and funding framework. 370 In a sector characterised by greater systemic diversity through specialisation, there would be a more critical need for collaboration between teachers, researchers and institutions. No one institution would provide undergraduate programmes in all disciplines or fields of study. No one institution would have researchers working in all disciplines or fields of study. The advantages of critical mass in research would need to be achieved through collaboration and creation of distributed networks of researchers in particular areas. The creation of world-class networks of researchers and teachers would be the ultimate goal. 371 Stronger collaborative arrangements may lead in some cases to formalised relationships and new institutions, such as a unified Australian Technology Network (ATN) institution. The Vice Chancellor of Edith Cowan University, Professor Millicent Poole, sees the potential for stronger regional alliances:
372 In their submissions, a number of members of the ATN also envisaged some further development of their network, but not necessarily a federated institution:
373 Australian universities have been leaders in establishing strategic international and national alliances with other higher education institutions. At a national level, the Group of Eight, the Australian Technology Network and the most recently formed New Generation Universities represent formalised links between institutions in a range of areas. International alliances have been created through organisations such as Universitas 21, the Australian-European Network, the International Network of Universities and the Global University Alliance. 374 Some argue that there is an inherent tension between cooperation and competition and that this is exacerbated in the Australian higher education sector by the current funding framework. The University of New England argued that:
some possible responses375 A wide range of possible options have been raised in relation to the issues in this section. Some of the key questions include:
|
|||
|
Any comments or
queries should be sent to:
highered@dest.gov.au
Department of Education, Science and Training
|
and has joined with Campus Compact to form the Service-Learning Consulting Corps, to assist colleges and universities. The W.K.Kellogg Foundation, particularly its
Youth and Education Programs, is also active in promoting the engagement of communities and institutions. 