Beauty and Hurt in the Balkans

One of the joys of doing a PhD on a European-related theme is that I can justify trips to less known corners of my continent as "research". It's a long shot but makes me feel better about taking time off. That said, in the case of Bosnia and Croatia, the focus of my current trip, it's not that far from the truth. These countries have been the focus of EU Higher Education policies to help their recovery from the 1992-5 war and some of the students involves in my case study come from this part of the world. If Universities can be used as a "soft power" tool to bring about social change, peace and growth - as the EU desires - then this is a prime example of where it can be used. 

I was 9 when the war in Bosnia started in 1992 and remember my Mother trying to explain that this was important not simply due to the deaths but it's proximity to us. A shooting in this part of the world had lead 80years earlier to war across Europe. This is not some far flung land but part of our continent. 

And that has been one of the striking things since we landed in Dubrovnik 36 hours ago. The Dalmatian coast is a little bit Italian, the Herzegovinan river valleys seeming a little like inland France and the rocky mountains like Provence. Of course, this country is unique and its beauty stunning but, in places, this is a land that is familiar.  So to imagine a war raging through this part of the edge of Europe is challenging. 

As we drove deeper into Bosnia some of the divisions became clearer. Road signs in cyrillic were crossed out or had graffiti on them to correct into what one minority consider the "correct" language. The number of minarets was a little unexpected but with some 48% of the 3.8m population being Muslim, they shouldn't have been. There have been Muslims in this part of the world for 5 centuries. Christians in the UK have left their mark on the architecture of the country with church towers over that time, the same will be true here. At the same time as witnessing the familiar in Bosnia & Croatia, we were seeing new things, too. 

Mostar is one of the places where the divisions in this society were clearest 20 years ago in 1993 when the bridge between the 2 elements of this society was destroyed and crimes committed against the city's populations. The bridge has been rebuilt and is impressive. In the bright autumnal sunshine it is beautiful yet, all around buildings remain bombed out, bullet marks can be seen on buildings and the community remains separated into groups as can be seen by the separate schools, governance and cultural institutions. 17 years may have passed since the peace was agreed and millions invested but there is still much that divides this nation. 

As tourists, we are amongst the minority who come here though numbers are increasing. We strayed from the main tourist sites to small villages or back roads where the divisions become more evident. Schools for one group of children or another. Cemeteries, spray painted slogans, war memorials and, I suspect, local cafes dedicated to one group or another. The infrastructure here is not suited to tourists (the lack of accommodation, food or even signage indicates that) but this is, I feel, what really needs to be seen and talked about. The reality of this country rather than the glossy brochure they want to present. 

And this is where the EU and, in a strange way, my research links back in. This place needs unifying infrastructure and knowledge. The EU has experience of this following the divisions through war, the iron curtain and socio-political shifts. Through the power of schemes like the one I am researching, people learn and engage with new peoples and cultures. The "other" becomes familiar. If this is allowed to continue here, perhaps HE can have a role beyond educating. 

Today I am stunned by the concurrent beauty and still-visible ravages of war in Mostar & Bosnia generally. Tomorrow, perhaps, I can be impressed by the beauty and a country that has continued to move on from its difficult past. 

Universities: The Future – Some Predictions

I research European Higher Education Policy and work in a field of Higher Education which necessitates engagement with policy in the sector.  So I thought I might do some speculations on the future of HE and what we can see happening over the next few years. 

-       Students – application numbers to go down but actual acceptance will not go down massively following the introduction of the new funding regime.  Arts/Humanities will be particularly hit but those subjects with clear professional destinations like law/medicine will not suffer. 

-       2 year degrees or short, intensive programmes are going to become more common as people cannot afford to study in traditional forms. 

-       International – physical student mobility to decrease but off-sure provision to increase with a particular innovation in e-learning provision.  The EU may lead some of the funding to encourage this. 

-       University mission – not all universities will do everything.  Some universities will focus on research, others will become teaching-only.  There will be inconsistencies across universities with some departments being research active, others teaching only. 

-       Universities will increasingly be focussed on a more limited number of subjects where they can specialise. 

-       Funding – Commercial sponsorship is not a reliable way forward.  UK Business sees University’s as being state-supported so why should they?  Funding will increase in these areas but the use of the third sector (NGOs, charities) and public sector can grow in research as they cannot always have their own research functions. 

-       University – Mergers are to be likely.  As always during periods of growth, there has been a growth in the number of providers.  Now things are economically tighter, mergers will happen so that universities become an economically viable model and there are some obvious mergers out there.  And mergers with Further Education colleges are going to happen and closer relations with private colleges could be anticipated.  Indeed, we could see cross-European mergers starting.  I am aware of some German-Dutch companies which are providers in each country but with local quality adherence, language and delivery.  Why couldn’t we woke more closely with some of our EU partners?

-       University – Cross-European collaboration will continue to be important to bring in new skills and make use of more favourable funding regimes.  Ascension of some countries will be particularly encouraged and included if funding applications are to be successful.   The same is true of mobility/joint academic student programmes. 

The nature and role of the University is changing in our society and in many senses all of this is guesswork but it will be interesting to see what if this is true 1, 2, 5 or even 10 years out.  My career path and sector is changing, like everyone else’s, but the need for Higher Education remains consistent. 

Adding Morals to Markets: Why markets and neo-liberalism are evolving and not dying

There seems to be a whole body of discussion on whether we are post neo-liberal now or in a revised form of it. But what on earth is neo-liberalism? It may be seen as the dominant political context but few people seem to define it.
Neo-liberalism – for me – is about a market-lead approach, freeing the markets to lead economic growth and service provision. It is also about rendering the individual citizen a contributor and beneficiary of a market system.

Now many against neo-liberalism argue that all values thus become economic, driven by targets and other social and philosophical values are lost.

Those in favour, see it as method for financial gains individually and nationally, smaller, more efficient government which leaves the citizen in control.

During the economic crisis it was deemed that neo-liberalism had failed; leaving banks and markets to decide the worth of anything lead to a melt-down. But it has to be questioned what form of neo-liberalism failed as it has gradually evolved.

Thatcher and Reagan are seen as the original creators of neo-liberalism though they themselves would not use the term nor particularly see themselves as liberals. They lead the large-scale opening up of markets, encouraging home ownership (and thus individual participation in a market) and changed our relationship with public services.

This model was then revised by Clinton and Blair with the so-called ‘third way’: put simply, market liberalism with a social conscience which meant more state investment in services. And yet for some this lacked the economic rigour for some and thus was doomed to failure.

The thing is that we are yet to see a huge divergence away from the models identified above. Despite the cycles of market growth and constriction, it appears to have worked as a model for increasing wealth. Indeed it is still ensuring huge growth in China, India and Brazil.

What 2008 did was make excessive money (and particularly bankers) look wrong and cause people to ask that a wider set of values be attributed to our markets, governance and, indeed, our lives. I can see neo-liberalism evolving to take on these values; causing a third stage of the concept’s development.

As someone researching European Higher Education, many of the key questions tied to it are attributed to neo-liberalism: the current form of the EU, globalisation, the market approach to HE, the understanding of education/learning etc. My tutor (rightly) argues that I need to challenge these ideas and look for alternative models. My problem is this: I have this feeling that, from my perspective, neo-liberalism works and – with the above evolution – should work better.

Due to neo-liberalism (though some would say despite it), universities have grown and been successful, people are more mobile and aware of the world and the individual’s capacity to bring about change have become clear.

There are faults and the current coalition government are aware of them. But what’s required is a revision to the neo-liberal model - rather than a whole scale scrapping of it as it remains an important model for our universities, country and world.

Challenges in Global Education

A friend of mine has recently written a short piece for a course in reply to the question “Describe what you think are the main challenges for your institution in terms of competitiveness in and relevance to global education.” She focussed on the cuts to UK education and the need to correctly define & target a market. Though I agreed with the second point, the former I saw as a bit of a red herring as though the cut of 35% to universities’ funding will affect research budgets and slightly UK student numbers rather than international education.  This got me thinking: what would my reply be within the 500 world limit set. So here goes:

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have been engaging for years in ‘global education; this is here understood here as the involvement of those from outside the UK in a UK HEI’s education remit. This can take several forms including:
- Mobility of students INTO the UK
- Delivery of Education OUTSIDE the UK by a UK HEI
- Collaborative Education, delivered jointly by UK and international partners
Traditionally, UK universities have a single office mainly focussing on the first of these. Increasingly, ‘international’ is seen as forming part of curriculum, the mobility of students and the exchange of research by academics, all of which is delivered by multiple departments right across an institution. Perhaps, to be truly ‘global’ educators there is a need to focus on the processes behind this (and the process of globalisation) and therefore focus on the off-shore and collaborative education (points 2 and 3 above).

Institutions are challenged currently by their very understanding of ‘global education’; many have international policies which are often bureaucratic statements of utopic aspiration or false reviews of activity and do not really understand the situation. Part of the challenge facing a University is engaging and educating staff in this broader sense of ‘international’; at a time when staff are squeezed, there will be fewer staff to cover ‘core’ teaching and learning activity and not the broader set of activities needed to deliver a truly global education. Institutions need to be careful in defining a market which makes them stand out and the current practice of institutions delivering nearly all subjects should not continue: specialist and unique should become more important.

I see three medium-term threats to global education:
- Economic: With less funds available, will students have the money to travel or governments to support them (take the cancelling of Chevening Scholarships and various British Council streams).
- Security (terrorism will remain a risk and increased border security will make it harder for physical mobility to take place).
- Environmental (probably the longest issue but increases in air fares and fuel insecurities will threaten travel).
To combat this, HEIs need to plan that in the long term physical mobility may be limited or impossible and should invest in technology & remote provision in anticipation. What is key is that this will take imagination and creativity as well as an understanding that there will be failures. The main challenge for institutions with regard to global education may be learning to take a risk.

410 rather broad words but in a time when spending reviews are about to be announced, a new way needs to be found into Higher education.

Tutorial Day Revisited

OK, it has been a week but have been thrown somewhat into a spin after the tutorial and have sort of been running away from doing anything with it since.  The summary of the tutorial which I wrote for the supervision report was as follows: 

Main topics/issues discussed and action points agreed:

o Work was rushed, not what expected and failed to sit comfortably in any section of the final thesis. Work failed to reflect nuance or discussion and its style could be more in line with academic writing.
o A broader literature needs to take place, covering a number of areas including the Europe, Student Experience, Policy Formation and Coopeartion etc.
o Specific issues to do with issues raised and language used were discussed.

Basically,  they wanted a draft of the lit review chapter.  I did a paper on internationalisation.  They did not want me analysing the documents and stats I had found.  I analysed away.  They did not want me drawing conclusions about new models of international relations.  I came up with (I thought) an interesting new model.  They did not like my attempt to be informal and witty.  I did. 

So, as with all tutorials, I went into a spin and felt that I was not getting anywhere.  Each time I do this I feel like it is one step forward and two back and one just has to be positive. 

Therefore in the last week I have broken my own rule of doing an hour's research daily.  I need to produce a chapter for the autumn but first there is an article which needs re-editing and an essay to be written so I might distract myself with that for a few days so I can write them on holiday. 

Instead of research reading on the train, I have read two books which I will review else where but have felt a little better for that; both relate to the play 'Holding the Man' which I saw a couple of weeks ago but that can feature in another blog. 

I feel a little better for writing this, I have to say, and have got it all off my chest.  Still feel a little lost, as do many of my colleagues after a tutorial, but I will get there.

Tutorial Day

It hardly seems like 2 minutes since the last tutorial but today’s the most recent one. I think I will be told off for not getting work done soon enough. There are a variety of issues to discuss including the paper I submitted on Internationalisation, my questionnaires which have been submitted and planning for the year ahead. Quite an involved meeting. And there’s a problem with my registration at the moment that my paperwork for the fee waver has been lost and I may end up paying for the year.

From the International to the Homely

I am now on the train from Chester to Wrexham after a delayed journey due to a train being stuck in Rhyl earlier this afternoon.

I am meant to have spent the journey working on the paper for the conference on Thursday. Instead I have written up a couple of quotations by the excellent Jane Knight who has written the most straight forward and engaging definition of internationalisation I have read in a while. I think it aims at a process driven definition and I think there is a relational and output definition that could be created to complement her work.

I then read the initial Research Excellence Framework submissions for my school at University of Westminster. I am not hugely impressed but there are another 2 or 3 years yet and I had better not say more on here but at least I am prepared for the meetings on Monday morning.

At the end of this journey, I am listening to Nigel Hess and watching the countryside go past. As I crossed the Chester walls and race course I heard the end of ‘Shelter Island’ (the first movement of his ‘East Coast Pictures’) which felt very much at home. As I cross the Cheshire plains and see the Welsh mountains as I drift towards Wrexham and home, the second movement has started: ‘The Catskills’ which depicts a journey through those mountains and ends with a majestic view of New York (the final movement). With the sun setting, it feels like the fanfare which ends the piece and the sunset are welcoming me back home.

How funny that evening – like my career – which is defined by the international has been marked by music and views of home. But I am glad for it. Have a good weekend at home or wherever you are.

PS
And as a little taster for you (though shame there is not a better recording on YouTube):

I Haven't Forgotten

I know I am meant to be blogging and keeping a diary regularly. 

But like most people in academia (indeed, most humans), I am somewhat target driven which means that after a very nice weekend, the paper still wasn't written.  Now some 2200 of 3600 words is written and most of the rest sketched.  And a section on defining internationalisation can be lifted from the essay I am to write (as well) this weekend for a tutorial.  I now an extention on submitting the slides until Monday and I think I almost have a clever conclusion and will be ready to deliver next Thursday.  Even almost come up with a conclusion along the lines of that in such an environment as Erasmus Mundus, students collaboration to improve Special Education Needs is not a question of inspiration but inevitability. 

And as I have been writing this just had a good quotation from the Academic Co-operation Association to end with:
"Everyone wants a world-class university. No country feels it can do without one. The problem is that no one knows what a world-class university is, and no one has figured out how to get one".
(Philip Altbach of Boston College at ACA Seminar)

Thoughts on “Studying in the European Union – chance and challenge for international students”

Just finished this work (edited by Katarzyna Hadas) and, as I’ve said before, I’m not hugely convinced by some of what it has to say. That said, it did make me think I might want to explore students’ previous experiences of Europe in my interviews.

The work used Phenomenology to analyse the findings which I want to find out more about to avoid the issues I had with it: namely, the lack of editing editing and explanation of how many replies make a phenomenon.

In Chapter I, Section 7, the report examines the students’ plans for after completing the programme and there is strong anecdotal evidence of students’ wanting to return home to implement changes learnt on their course. This applied to subjects from Energy Storage to Quaternary and Prehistory, from International Health to SEN. In Chapter 2, there’s an analysis (with some of the few statistics in the work), of reasons why students joined an Erasmus Mundus programme; 62.18% answered ‘very important’ to ‘career opportunities after completing the course’, 28.15% ‘important’, 7.14% ‘not very important’ and 2.52% ‘unimportant.’ This echoes my research’s findings that students are motivated for personal reasons ahead of altruism. Now there is no ‘changing my home context’ reply to this and the replies cover everything from local culture, weather (?!) and finding information on the internet. So, whilst I am not convinced by the question asked as a tool, I am sure I will quote the findings to back up my own.

This report comes closer than many in addressing my research questions but due to the lack of analysis, I am convinced I can take my work further than this. Unlike the official evaluations of Erasmus Mundus, it asks questions which are tied into the original aims of the programme and provides an interesting starting point.

Involvement in International Collaboration as a Reason for Studying

Just occurred to me in tutorial. In my pilot study students just starting masters course did not see international collaboration as one of their motivations for studying. Those questioned half way through did see collaboration as a motivating reason. That said they all saw inspiring collaboration as one of the EU's reasons for the programme. What changes? Or is the EU's plan of fostering relations working?

More on this (and the tutorial) to follow.

Europe 'Taking Over'

Been meaning to publish this for while: 

The European Institutions have been accused of 'taking over' various policies (I think this is an idea from a book edited  by Voldemar Tomusk but I need to check).  The example cited is Bologna - harmonisation of European degrees was taking place and the EU saw it useful policy to take over. 

I also think the same is true of cross-European Masters Degrees/Joint Degrees; these were already being developed (see Roehampton's collaborative Masters and Doctorate with Fontys as an example) but the EU saw them as a potential tool accross Europe and around the world and hence created Erasmus Mundus. 

I wonder if this can be taken one stage further; I have written about 'Soft Power' or 'Bottom-up Globalisation.'  Nothing new - global powers have always tried to win 'hearts and minds' to avoid physical battles (look at England in India, the Romans in England).   But are the EU taking over these 'bottom-up' methods to undertake traditional 'top-down' colonialism?

Where are you from?

At church we were asked by a visiting speaker whether we felt ourselves to be in Croydon (as in a distinct town/borough) or in London (of which Croydon is a part).  I feel myself to be part of London - as did two thirds of the congregation - for the simple fact that my work and social life are mostly centrally-focussed and Croydon is where I live and shop.  The remaining third found themselves to be in Croydon and these, mostly older people, probably see their lives as focussing on the town. 

This reminded me of a questionnaire I filled in about my perception of nationality and identity after my Erasmus year.  We were asked if we felt more or less British/European/Global Citizens at the start and end of our programme overseas.  In my case, I felt more European and still do.  In the same way, I am asking in my research how students' perceptions of their identity and nationality change.  There will be an increased sense of 'global citizen' I can tell you now. 

But should we be looking for a single answer?  Just because we are from one place (Britain) does not mean we can't have ties to another (Europe). Just because I see myself as being based in London doesn't mean I don't say home is in Croydon?  Identity - like so many things - isn't a clear black/white issue. 

Shirley Valentine Moment

Well, after seeing the play last week, I almost had my own Shirley Valentine moment. 

On the motorway heading north from Strasbourg, in the first sunshine in a week that had been exceptionally wet, I suddenly remembered why I loved France. 

Yes, it has its faults (bureaucracy, mixed record on investment in universities) and its 'more relaxed lifestyle' is over-hyped.  But the buildings on the edge of the motorway reminded me of where I was in Grenoble.  The sense of living in a world, a culture that is not quite your own.  I've done it, I've lived abroad so I know the reality is different.  At drinks the previous night, someone said I had enough French to work in France.  Possibly but it isn't accurate enough.  Whatever the practicalities, for that moment, I wanted to be there, to live there and not just for a holiday.  Time to start thinking about the next job move?

Docu Analysis: Erasmus Mundus as Foreign Policy?

Just found that an interesting quotation that seems to justify one of the real reasons behind Erasmus Mundus as I see it; the Erasmus World document (ref. 1128) refers to Europe needing “future decision-makers in third countries having a better understanding of, and closer ties with, Europe” for its lasting political and economic success. I have always said that until the Lisbon, Europe could not have a foreign policy but Erasmus Mundus allowed global influence; this seems to prove that this quotation at least formed part of the sub-agendas behind the programme.

Docu Analysis: One HE System?

The document on Erasmus World (ref 1128) talks about their being a lack of a ‘European Offer’ in Higher Education. Reminds me of a report by the Academic Cooperation Association which said that people identified with individual countries and not the EU. Would both this lack and this identification be because the EU was more of a group of states than a union when this was written 10 years ago?

Docu Analysis: United States of Europe?

Just starting on my documentary analysis and started with the first proposal by the European Commission for Erasmus Mundus (then called Erasmus World) dating back to 2001. They spend 10 lines explaining why the programme needs to be like Fulbright. Is that because it is the leading scholarship product in the market or is it because they want to be a ‘United States of Europe’ and thus emulating that United States on the other side of the Atlantic is one way of doing that?

European Travel

Sitting on dock at Dover waiting to board ferry. Reminds me of pictures of Erasmus Mundus SEN students traveling to the Netherlands in the videos in my last post. Would such international programmes be thought of - let alone possible - without easier border restrictions?

Erasmus Mundus - Why it's Important

Today's the deadline for Erasmus Mundus Applications to be a Masters Course for 2010.  In all the rush of completing forms, it could be easy to forget why this is important.  It is important not for the international or European agendas but because it provides an education.  Both a formal education as part of a Masters Course but also a social, cultural and personal education.  I came accross the below 2 videos from 'my' EM SEN Cohort 4 which reminded me that, despite the hard work, it is really worth it. 

Certifying Internationalisation?

Just read an article in this month's International Focus on 'Internationalisaing Europe'.  Tad pedestrian to start off with: the magazine's for professionals in the international wings of universities - we don't need a summary of where the EU's thrown money at Higher Education in the last 20 years.  That said, two interesting points. 

Firstly, it previews the fact that on 10-11 May that the HE Ministers will "adopt a set of conclusions about the internationalisation of HE and it's importance for Europe's Universities".  This will be very interesting as one of the things I am questioning at the moment is what the EU means by internationalisation in its Erasmus Mundus legislation.  I am pretty convinced that the EU's understanding of the concept has shifted over the last six years (though the documentary analysis I plan to work on next week will give firmer answers).  The term has changed in meaning since Erasmus Mundus appeared on the scene and there are a variety of cultural impacts on how the term is understood.  This document may give me some hints as to how some see the term.  But a single set of conclusions and reflections on the importance of internationalisation may be tricky with the variety of cultural, legislative and educational frameworks operating in the EU. 

Secondly, the article previews the plans of the Flemish Dutch Accreditation Agency (NVAO) to issue a certificate of internationalisation.  This will be based on "vision or policy on internationalisation; learning outcomes; curriculum, educational practice and assessment of students in line with international goals; staff with international experience; and sufficient inbound and outbound mobility of students." This intrigues me. As with the EU guidelines, how can you certify something that is constantly changing and that people struggle to find a single definition for and, also, does this not risk allowing one version of internationalisation?  It is very good to see the impacts on the teaching and learning aspects of a university's life but the importance of international research is important.  I am not sure that NVAO's topics allow for understanding or impact; as I am finding looking at Erasmus Mundus, the policy or theory may be good, the reality may be different.  Finally, I wonder how well UK universities would be rated when the number of outbound mobile students is low and it is one of the fastest growing provider's of off-shore teaching.  Does this definition of internationalisation really feature in NVAO's above five headings?

The article concludes that a certificate will either be a useful tool or fade into insignificance (not much in between, apparently).  For me, the thing with 'certifying' anything is that is makes me think of 'certifying' in the madness sense of the word.  Perhaps I won't go any further with that idea! 

First Conference Paper Accepted

Just had e-mail that my first conference paper has been accepted which is exciting, if a little terrifying.  What if no-one turns up?  What if, in the 10 minutes discussion after the 20 minute presentation, they ask me questions I cannot answer ?  Now I need to write the paper (3500 words or so), prepare slides and think through questions. 

The abstract which has been accepted was as follows:

The European Commission envisaged its Erasmus Mundus (EM) programme as having 2 purposes, offering both “a framework for valuable exchange and dialogue between cultures […and] a distinctly ‘European’ offer in higher education to those beyond EU borders.” (European Commission: 2008) To this end, Masters Courses created by European collaborations and inspiring international collaborations were formed. Amongst the masters courses was EM SEN from which 110 students from 39 countries have graduated following studies in the UK, Netherlands and Czech Republic.


This is an example of what some have called ‘soft power’ (Nye 2005, Trilokekar 2009) and what others have seen as “globalisation from below” (Malhroum 2008): using networks of students to facilitate change in collaboration with European organisations. However, a pilot study into the student experience has found that although 66.7% of EM SEN’s students were interested in changing inclusive education in their home context and 32.0% recognised the European Union’s drive for collaboration through the EM programme, only 18.5% of students actually wanted to work in collaboration with other countries after graduation.

This paper will discuss some of the academic, policy and legislative discourses around the EM programme and specifically the EM SEN course before examining the students feelings towards collaboration to work on inclusion. Perhaps, following time as part of a global cohort, EM SEN’s students find ‘being with others’ is the greatest inspiration for collaboration in inclusive education.