Peder Saether Symposium (March 9-10, 2000)

Dr. Marijk van der Wende Presentation

Home | About | Background | Program & Proceedings | Participants | Readings

CSHE > Events > Peder Saether Symposium > Program & Proceedings > Dr. Marijk van der Wende Presentation

Dr. Marijk van der Wende, Senior Research Associate, The Center for Higher Education Policy Studies, University of Twente, The Netherlands

Research usually leads not only to answers, but also to new questions. Therefore, I will first present some of the main conclusions of a study that we undertook last year, then see to what further questions it led, and how these have been further inspired by our discussions during this symposium.

The study focused on the state-of-the-art in the use of ICT in higher education in Australia, Finland, Belgium, the EU, the UK, and the USA. Research questions were related to governmental policies and institutional strategies, educational implications, and costs and benefits.

In the area of policies and strategies, the main conclusions were:

• Rich experimentation but weak dissemination. Mainly due to the lack of institutional strategies, it proves difficult to move from the enthusiast pioneer to system-wide use.
• Managerial difficulties. A lack of knowledge, financial problems and uncertainties related to the speed of change, and the complexity of broad implementation cause many problems for university management, which is in general unfamiliar with risk-taking.
• A lack of incentives for staff. The main criteria for promotion and tenure are still in the area of research, much less in teaching, and even less in innovation and the application of new technologies.
• Successful initiatives feature strong collaboration. Inter-institutional, inter-sectoral (private-public) and international collaboration are often observed. In Europe, this seems to be more subsidy-driven than in other parts of the world.
• Strong international competition. Traditional and new providers compete globally for the post-graduate and training market in particular. In some regions (e.g. Asia), undergraduates may also be an important target group.
• Market forces push substantial use of ICT. Large scale and systematic use is especially observed in the new markets of fee-based systems: life-long learning (extension, continuing education) and international education.
• Governments limit their role to facilitation and deregulation. In most countries, government facilitates national infrastructure and initiates activities and collaboration. Deregulation of provision, access, and markets is introduced or enhanced with the aim of making institutions more responsive to the demand for ICT-supported education.
• Incentive systems are not adapted to ICT-use. In various countries, incentives for institutions to introduce ICT are lacking, e.g. partial or no funding of distance education students.
• The is a need for quality assurance of virtual higher education.

Many new research questions have come from this study. They correspond, to a large extent ,to the issues raised during the seminar. They could be divided into various categories: pedagogical, technical, economic issues, etc. I will concentrate on the questions that CHEPS would like to focus on in future research in this area.

Questions related to the institutional level

What are effective strategies for change? This was the last of the questions presented by Tony Bates, and indeed marks an area in which little research has been done as yet. The leading question is related to "upscaling": how do we move from pioneers and projects to system-wide use?

There will, of course, be no single answer to this question. Sarah Rosenblit has made it very clear that there are various parameters that have to be taken into account and that will be decisive for the adoption and use of ICT. These parameters are related to the various functions and roles of the university. Martin Trow also pointed in his articles to the fact that choices will be quite different for elite/research universities and for mass institutions. Differences are related to the extent to which the institution is a knowledge provider or a knowledge producer, and consequently to the degree to which faculty has or feels ownership of the curriculum. The functions and role of the institution are often expressed in its mission. As the VP of Phoenix said: "ICT choices need to be consistent with mission and quality". And as was also said by Rector Flodgren from Lund: "The various initiatives need to be pulled together and linked to the mission of the institution". In trying to address the question of effective strategies, I think it will be very important to think along the line of the different functions, roles, and missions, and to address the diversity between universities that we can expect to find in this respect.

A related question concerns the choices for ICT that will be made with respect to undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate education, life-long learning, etc. Choices will also be motivated by the particularities of the disciplines, the more so because the pressures and opportunities for ICT coming from various professional fields (e.g. business) and research fields (e.g. science) can be very different. As a consequence, ICT choices may not only lead to more diversity between, but also to more diversity within higher education institutions -- with all its implications for management, funding, access, etc.

Questions beyond the institutional level

What forms of collaboration are emerging; how can these various types of inter-institutional, inter-sectoral, and international consortia be characterized; what are their rationales and aims; how do they actually work; and to what extent are they effective? What are success factors and what is their added value for the individual institutions which are members of such consortia?  A Ph.D. project was recently started on this problem at CHEPS.

Questions related to governmental policies could focus on how such policies can stimulate institutions to become more responsive to the challenges of ICT, related to widening access, new markets, increasing competition and internationalisation, costs, efficiency, effectiveness, etc. What are the critical factors and the right incentives and conditions that need to be created? To what extent should such policies be prescriptive or supportive?

For example, there is an important socio-economic demand for life-long learning in the Netherlands. Should initiatives be left to the universities, who usually do not consider this to be part of their function and mission? Or should initiatives be created as in the UK (Universities for industry, the e-university) and in Norway (the Norwegian Network of Lifelong Learning)? In this example, the ministry of economic affairs, rather than the ministry of education, decided to establish a Network Academy (a broker-type virtual university).

Some specific topics

ICT and internationalisation. ICT enhances the opportunities for collaboration across borders, e.g. with the virtual mobility of students through collaborative group ware, or the virtual mobility of faculty through video conferencing. At the same time, ICT increases competition, especially through forms of transnational education (educational services provided by foreign providers). Questions could focus on the benefits of, and the relationship between, collaboration and competition in the international arena.

ICT and quality assurance and accreditation. Only limited experience has been gained hitherto in assessing the quality of ICT supported education. Questions would be related to quality criteria (or benchmarks), suitable and effective methods and practices, and how these could be integrated into existing systems. Questions are however not only related to the providers’ side. Especially in the case of transnational education, the perspective of consumer protection and information seems to be important.

Economic models and ICT supported education. Which economic principles are emerging and will define this market -- those of the "old" or the "new" economy?

Research approach and methods

On the basis of its tradition and with a view to the particular theme, CHEPS would promote international comparative research in this area. Frameworks of national (state or federal) governmental policy define to a large extent the environment and the autonomy of the institutions. Besides, differences between countries in terms of technological infrastructure and the related degrees of Internet access and use, cultural and linguistic factors, the climate for public-private partnerships, etc. may represent crucial dimensions for ICT use in higher education. International comparative studies will provide more insight into these dimensions and factors.

Obviously, CHEPS will not be able to take up all of the above mentioned questions. Therefore, we are looking forward to opportunities for cooperation and I hope that this seminar will be the start of that.