The Challenge of Massification, Globalisation and Diversification
The Australian and Irish Contexts
Personalised Access and Study Policy (PAS)
Concluding Comments: the Role of Universities in a Globalising World
As in other parts of the world, the Australian higher education system confronts the challenges of massification and globalisation. Australia faces the additional challenge of developing a tertiary sector responsive to the cultural diversity of its population – of making changes to structures, policies and curricula in response to local student diversity. For institutions like Victoria University, with more culturally and socially diverse student profiles than the Australian average, the demands are even more pressing – especially in the context of shrinking government resources for the Australian tertiary sector and the associated need to be internationally competitive. This paper argues that this fundamental contextual change is fast dissolving the discontinuity between the local and the global, and that the challenge for higher education is both to adapt to this change and to lead it. Through the examples of the initiatives taken by Victoria University, this paper suggests that local experiences of engagement with cultural diversity open up new opportunities for wider engagement by higher education at an international level.
The paper traces initiatives undertaken at Victoria University which address the need for curricula sensitive to the diverse needs of its students, their communities, and the broader communities the University serves. In particular, the paper discusses the applicability of the partnership structures and relationships developed under our policy of Personalised Access and Study (PAS) to the educational needs of culturally diverse groups, ranging from third generation Maltese–Australians to recently–arrived refugees from the Horn of Africa, Kosova and East Timor. The paper concludes that Victoria University’s partnership with culturally diverse community groups provides a model for the sector’s global engagement with educational and developmental issues.
As I articulated in Malta and elsewhere last year1, the twin forces of massification and globalisation have been key defining characteristics that have challenged and shaped the role and functions of higher education. In this paper I will introduce and discuss the third key characteristic of higher education as we enter the third millennium: diversification. Population movements, such as migration, which have seen millions of people resettled in other parts of the world, have been a key defining feature of the the modern era, challenging profoundly the notion of cultural and social homogeneity and the exclusivity of inherited definitions of community and nation state. Indeed, as Castles and Miller (1993) have pointed out, in light of the enormous population movements that have taken place, the modern era might rightly be characterised as ‘the age of migration’.
Since the beginning of European settlement, two centuries ago, Australia has always been in ‘the age of migration’. It has become home to people of diverse social and cultural backgrounds from all parts of the world. Ireland, too, has been part of this age of migration. Millions of people of Irish origin are now part of countries such as Australia, the United States and Canada, in which they have settled during the past two centuries. The Irish diaspora has made an immense contribution to the development of all aspects of life in the countries of settlement and in defining and elaborating the place that those countries occupy in the modern world.
Suffice it to say that the historically–produced global links already exist, which we need to recognise in all their complexity and diversity. The challenge for us, for higher education, is to embrace these close links, to engage with the diverse issues that are part of the modern social and cultural realities, and to build on them. As I shall argue, higher education is ideally placed to engage with the current issues and debates about diversity, and to lead them. These debates assume a heightened degree of importance at a time when we see the declining role of the nation state as we have known it, in light of globalisation processes and the emergence of transnational and international social, political and economic structures, such as the European Union. The complex social and cultural changes that have taken place both locally, within each nation state, and globally, inevitably impact on higher education and challenge it to grapple creatively and constructively with the changed circumstances. The social and cultural diversity of our world challenges us to respond to the complexity of issues, the complexity of needs and the complexity of rights in sensitive, appropriate and diverse ways within a
set of universal principles for which the term ‘university’ was coined. Higher education is ideally positioned to play a critical role in the multicultural or pluralist ‘nation–building' processes, both locally and globally, because:
I have previously made a number of observations touching on the emerging role of universities in the area of cultural diversity. In Lecce I questioned and problematised the notion of ‘preserving’ cultures at the diasporic margins of migration. In Paris I discussed the mediating role of universities in cross–cultural regional and global development. In Malta I explored the implications of massification and globalisation for higher education and the challenges they pose to universities to engage with the emerging issues in new and creative ways.
Massification of higher education has meant not only having to meet national policy priorities but also having to make appropriate provision for ever larger numbers of students seeking access to educational opportunities. Simultaneously, massification has also exposed the immense diversity in the population of students that higher education now serves. All higher education institutions are having to come to terms with the new reality, with concrete initiatives and measures which take account of the social make up of our societies and the kind of world in which our graduates will be living and working in the years ahead. I would suggest that higher education institutions have an obligation to respond appropriately to the legitimate claims to equal access to educational opportunities made by specific groups and sections of society, such as people of diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds, people with disabilities, people from disadvantaged social and economic backgrounds, and women.
This obligation is not new. On 11th March 1591 Lord Deputy Fitzwilliam appealed, from the very spot where we are meeting today, to the gentry of Ireland to fund the building of the College of the Holy and Undivided Trinity near Dublin for "the benefit of the whole country, whereby knowledge, learning and civilitie may be increased to the banishing of barbarisme, tumults, and disordered lyving …" Fitzwilliam singled out for special mention the benefit to Ireland’s children and children’s children, “especially those that be poor (as it were in an orphan’s hospital freely), may have their learning and education given them with much more ease and lesser charges, than in other Universities they can obtain it.”
Fitzwilliam’s vision of higher education serving all of the country’s "children and children’s children, especially those that be poor", is as relevant today as it was 400 years ago. I know that it has exercised the mind of the 42nd Provost of Trinity, Dr Thomas Mitchell, whose presence here today I am very pleased to acknowledge.
The difference as we enter the third millennium is that the obligations of higher education now go beyond the borders of individual states. In the context of globalisation and the interdependent relationships between peoples and nations, the obligations of higher education need to be repositioned to take account of the changes that have taken place and to ensure that universities continue to be at the forefront of human progress and development. Consistent with its ‘traditional’ obligations, higher education now needs to promote and participate in a cooperative international framework in order to facilitate exchanges and understandings that are indispensable for a world based on justice and fairness, in accord with the international principles of equality and human rights.
The key issue for higher education, therefore, is to accept the challenge of diversity and to respond flexibly and creatively to the legitimate claims of diverse groups and communities to educational opportunities. Engagement at the local level can not only provide direct and concrete benefits to students and the community at large, but can also serve as a foundation for promoting and nurturing developments at an international level. Such an approach provides higher education with opportunities to re–engage in a more vigorous manner with issues and practices that have been integral to its role as an agency that promotes fair, open and equitable sharing of knowledge, ideas and understanding across communities throughout the world. Because of their histories, countries such as Ireland, which is a member of the European Union, and Australia, which is a member of a number of regional associations in the Asia–Pacific region, are now increasingly involved with issues and peoples that transcend national boundaries. Higher education institutions in middle power countries like Ireland and Australia are ideally placed to play an important role in bringing to bear their experiences of grappling with diversity in the international domain.
Apart from its indigenous population, Australia is a nation of immigrants and their descendants (Jupp 1988). It is a nation whose key defining feature is its ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity. There are, for example, more than 150 non–indigenous languages spoken in Australia, to which we could add the 100 or so languages spoken by Aboriginal communities. The reality of such diversity for Australian politicians as well as institutions and the community at large has been to find ways of responding to the social, cultural and linguistic challenges that it poses (Martin 1978). In social policy terms, over the past three decades Australia has changed dramatically from a country that had pursued an institutionalised assimilationist policy vis–à–vis its indigenous and migrant communities, to a country that has embraced a policy of multiculturalism (OMA 1988; Collins, 1975; Jamrozik et al, 1995). Whereas barely one generation ago cultural, ethnic and linguistic difference was regarded as a ‘threat’ to national unity, this very diversity is now seen as an asset and a resource from which Australia can draw in meeting the challenges of the present and the future.
The Australian government, for example, has introduced specific policy initiatives, such as the ‘Productive Diversity’ policies and programs, which have sought to harness the wealth of languages, knowledge of cultures and world–wide experiences of its population for business and trade purposes (OMA 1992). In the mid 1980s, Australia was the first country in the world to develop a far reaching ‘national policy on languages’, which was specifically designed to maintain and promote the acquisition of diverse languages other than English (LOTE). These developments have, of course, been the subject of contest and passionate debate in academia and in the community at large. The fact remains, however, that major social and cultural advances of world importance have been made, which have demonstrated that it is possible to maintain social unity in diversity. Australia’s ‘multicultural experiment’, as some have referred to it, has demonstrated that diversity does not have to pose a threat to living and working together or to maintaining a common commitment to the wellbeing of the polity (Castles et al , 1990).
For its part, Ireland in the modern era has also experienced major and profound change. Since the end of the Second World War, for example, Ireland has been faced with a mass of challenges and has made massive strides that have seen it transformed into a modern, confident, wealthy and open society. This breathtaking transformation, which has been achieved, historically speaking, within a relatively short period of time, has seen Ireland become a major player in world affairs, especially in the developments that have swept Europe, such as the establishment and emergence of the European Union as a major economic power and a moderating force in promoting fairness, equity and social justice in international affairs (Flynn, 1995).
Whereas Ireland was once a source of emigrants, its increasing prosperity has made it the destination for immigrants from other parts. This reversal has been brought about by the dramatic changes that have taken place in Ireland and by the globalisation processes that now affect every part of the world. These developments, in all their complexity, serve to emphasise the diversity of Irish society as well as its interconnectedness with the rest of the world. The challenges that confront Ireland, and especially the higher education sector, in this changed and evolving context, share common ground with other countries and their higher education institutions. This requires new and creative responses and ‘investments’ in education in order to meet the challenges that face us and the communities that we serve.
As in the case of Australia, Ireland has invested heavily in education as a means of developing a highly skilled and educated workforce, indispensable for meeting the challenges posed by globalisation and the need to engage with the rest of the world. The massification of higher education has been both a response to the aspirations for emancipation and social development on the part of its people, as well as a necessity for Ireland as a member of the international community. Although the social and cultural realities of Australia and Ireland differ in many respects, diversification -largely as a result of globalisation - and massification is a challenge that confronts higher education in both countries in at least two respects. Firstly, in terms of responding to the diverse needs of the populations that make up both Australia and Ireland. Secondly, in terms of meeting the challenges posed by the complex web of relationships across cultures, which are part of the current and future engagements with the rest of the world.
Returning to the case of Australia, the creation of an inclusive and culturally diverse higher education system has been both an economic and a social imperative. This, combined with the impact of the joint forces of massification of higher education and globalisation, has underpinned policy development at the level of both government and individual universities. The transformation of higher education has brought about changes to policy and approaches to curricula in line with the needs of increasingly diverse student populations, which at the same time is aimed at meeting broader social and economic policy objectives.
Massification of higher education has produced two post–school education sectors in Australia: the higher education sector, and the vocational education and training sector. While they have been historically divided into universities and Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institutes, in some parts of Australia the two sectors are becoming increasingly integrated within the one institutional framework2. Victoria University is a large dual sector university, with 50,000 students spanning higher education and TAFE divisions.
Massification, globalisation and diversification are among the most significant challenges confronting higher education providers. Meeting these challenges is a complex undertaking that requires balancing and paying careful attention to the issues involved and developing appropriate responses that meet the needs of students and promote equitable outcomes for the diverse groups and communities. This effort requires a broad range of skills and resources that no university, however well resourced or intentioned, can meet on its own. Partnerships with the broader community, such as employers, unions, community organisations and members of the different communities, is one way in which a higher education institution such as Victoria University can respond to this situation. Partnerships represent a key initiative through which the combined resources of the university and community can be brought to bear to maximise the benefits that accrue to our students, our communities and society at large.
Victoria University's dual sector composition has sought to accommodate the region's cultural and social diversity, building on its existing educational infrastructure to produce curricula truly reflective of and responsive to the needs of the student population and the region. While the University is relatively young by Australian standards, it has always focussed on developing multi–faceted policy approaches which meet the needs of its diverse student population. This multi–faceted policy approach has been directed at meeting the needs of discrete target groups, as well as the needs of individual students from diverse backgrounds. We believe that a policy approach to institutional arrangements and curriculum based on meeting the needs both of groups traditionally excluded from tertiary education and of individuals from a range of backgrounds benefits all students, including those from backgrounds which have a tradition of participation in tertiary education. This is because the policy focus is on improving the quality of student learning per se, as exemplified in our Personalised Access and Study Policy.
The Personalised Access and Study Policy, in many respects, exemplifies Victoria University’s response to massification, globalisation and diversification. The University, and its predecessor institutions, consciously sought to support students who enter tertiary education from non–traditional backgrounds with two distinct but related strategies. The first strategy supports students as individuals, as they present in programs of study. The second strategy seeks to stimulate involvement by groups who have been traditionally excluded, by involving them in University programs on the basis of their group membership. Simply put, the University has sought to build partnerships with individuals and with groups. A range of initiatives undertaken before and immediately after the formation of the University in 1991 attempted either to meet the needs of students as they presented in learning programs, or to stimulate involvement by groups in the community in educational processes.
The Educational Development Department (EDD), formed in 1982 at our Footscray campus, gradually changed its program orientation from mature–age students to non–English speaking background (NESB) students. In parallel, learning support provision shifted from individual consultations to program–based provision, largely in response to increasing numbers of students in programs. During this period, EDD programs, although supported by Federally–funded grants aimed at increasing retention rates of targeted groups, were also increasingly funded through institution sources, as the need for assistance to students increased as the student profile became more diverse. At other campuses, learning support provision focused on the learning needs of students from a non–English speaking background, and from its beginning support provided concurrently with mainstream classes was a feature of its educational provision. The primary mechanism was individual consultations with additional on–demand parallel or group sessions. The Student Learning Unit (SLU), formed in 1995, has seen a further shift in learning support provision towards a curriculum–based model with greater emphasis on embedding learning support mechanisms in subject and course design and delivery systems.
In addition to programs or structural arrangements that were essentially reactive to student needs once enrolled, the University has a history of stimulating participation of discrete groups in the educational process. One such group has been Melbourne’s Maltese community, a group concentrated in the western suburbs who were largely excluded from higher education institutions for a variety of reasons. In 1989 a research team from the Faculty of Arts worked closely with the Maltese Community Council of Victoria on a government–funded project investigating why many Maltese–background students were not continuing on to higher education, and why there was an apparent lack of interest in the Maltese language among these students. The team’s report (Terry et al, 1993) published by the University signalled the kind of relationship which we were keen to establish with our various constituent communities. It is a relationship based on partnership and mutual support. In relation to the Maltese community, the partnership has been distinguished both by its strength and by its diversity, with public lectures, seminars and symposia drawing on visiting Maltese scholars and public figures, community use of University facilities for such events as the annual Manoel de Vilhena Awards, provision of scholarships, a close liaison with local schools and community organisations, encouragement of post–graduate study, and University publication of books, pamphlets and CDs relevant to the Maltese community. All of these initiatives have been complemented by an active staff and student Exchange Agreement with the University of Malta, built on and at the same time extending the firm foundation established with our local Maltese–background community.
The University’s partnership with the Maltese community brought important benefits to both, while laying the foundation for the development of a model the University would subsequently use to initiate partnerships with other communities. These partnerships have become fundamental to the way in which the University defines itself, with our emerging links with the various ethnic communities in our region forming the basis for our global exchange links. Agreements we have negotiated with universities in Italy, Ireland, Greece, Albania and Macedonia, for example, reflect the composition of the region in which we are located, and should be viewed as a natural extension of the University’s longstanding involvement in the transplanted ethnic communities from which we draw so many of our students and whose interests we are committed to serve. This international orientation creates a further sense of location for the diverse peoples of the western region, and at the same time helps to promote multiculturalism as the fundamental underpinning of local citizenship.
In essence, the Maltese project provided a model for working strategically with communities in the western region when the University’s Personalised Access and Study policy was adopted. Implementation of the policy has intensified the community development/education nexus by seeking to tailor curriculum as a result of a targeted pro–active strategy to involve more of the region's communities in the University.
The Personalised Access and Study Policy attempts to build on existing institutional practices and processes, as outlined above, whilst simultaneously extending and developing them in response to national (education) policy and regional (population and economic) trends. PAS comprises a complex set of processes focused around the inter–related issues of access (creating alternative mechanisms for students to enter the institution) and study (assisting them to stay in the institution once they arrive).
The ‘access’ component, in its initial stage in 1998, concentrated on establishing alternative entrance arrangements to the Tertiary Entrance Ranking (TER), an exit–secondary schooling score traditionally used by Australian universities for student selection. As with all aggregated score models, students from higher socio–economic status backgrounds are known to be over–represented in the higher scoring bands (Pascoe et al, 1997; Andrich & Mercer 1997). Student interviews are a primary means of assessment of individual student point–of–entry learning needs, and a personal Student Compact sets out how the institution will attempt to meet those needs. Simultaneously, the 'study' elements of the policy have been addressed through a re–working and enhancement of institutional policies relating to the design and delivery of the curriculum: student progress procedures, study pathways between the TAFE and Higher Education components, and student learning support at course and subject levels. In addition to working with individual students at point of entry, institution initiatives in 1998 and 1999 also focused on tailoring alternative–entry processes and curricula in targeted subjects and courses to meet the needs of specific communities in the region.
For example, extensive consultation with the region's recently–arrived communities from the Horn of Africa resulted in the design and delivery of culturally–sensitive curricula in courses provided specifically for these communities. Components of courses have been taught in one of the mother tongues (Amharic), English language support has been integrated at all levels, and content has been re–contextualised to take account of African cultural mores, beliefs and practices. Parts of the course have also been taught, where possible, by leaders from the communities. At the TAFE level, the University has collaborated with African community groups to provide a pre–apprenticeship program for African young people, upon completion of which they have been guaranteed apprenticeships. Within the Higher Education Division, Horn of Africa refugees have taken advantage of the University’s Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) provisions to access a range of courses in several disciplines. Targeted bridging programs have helped articulate such students into programs such as the Community Development degree course, where students from refugee backgrounds are able to use their experience of working in refugee camps in the course.
In relation to Kosovar refugees in Australia, the University was able to build on its existing partnership with the local Albanian community to provide policy as well as program assistance. One of the University’s Community Liaison Officers in particular played a critical role in planning and implementing Australia’s ‘safe haven’ response. Given that there are large Serbian and Albanian communities, both in our university and in the broader community, the potential for inter–communal conflict in such difficult circumstances was considerable. Our constructive engagement with both (and other) communities was critical in these circumstances, and I can happily report that there was not a single incident of inter–ethnic conflict that I am aware of in our University. On the contrary, as an institution we were able to concentrate on restoring a sense of educational continuity within the refugee community. Soon after the settlement of refugees in Victoria, a meeting was held between senior University staff and a delegation of fifteen Kosovar academics from the safe haven of Puckapunyal, just to the north of Melbourne, to devise a strategic plan for those Kosovars whose education and training had been disrupted by the war. One concrete outcome of this was the enrolment of some 29 Kosovar students in various University courses, 26 of whom have now returned to Kosova to resume their studies.
At the local level, these initiatives were supported by the local Albanian community, with whom the University had been working closely for the previous year through our Centre for Commencing Students. At the international level, we are now in the process of organising an international conference, planned to be held in September, which will bring together academics from Italy, Greece, Albania, Macedonia, Kosova and, we hope, Serbia to explore the issues and developmental challenges that confront the region. Our Exchange Agreements with the Universities of Tirana, Skopje, Ioannina, Thessaly and Lecce, and the links we have with the Universities of Prishtina and Belgrade, have made such a conference possible. The purposes of the conference are to stimulate debate about the social and economic realities confronting the region, to share knowledge by drawing on the experience of those countries as well as countries like Australia which have become home to peoples from the region, and to promote collective and cooperative relations in response to the shared challenges facing the region.
As well as academics, participants will also include members of the business community and the media. By the nature of their activities, business people are committed to breaking down artificial boundaries blocking the open exchange of goods and services, just as media representatives are committed to the open dissemination of information. Academics, both in terms of their intellectual role and in terms of their professional networks, are committed to breaking down barriers to the open and free exchange of ideas. Within the framework of this shared commitment, the aim is to have critical and wide–ranging discussion of the issues that impact directly on the understandings and perceptions of, as well as the relationships between, the various peoples of the region. This initiative represents one concrete outcome of the evolving international role, in this case as an outcome of local engagement, that a university such as Victoria University can play in promoting mutual understanding, debate and the promotion of social and economic development in another part of the world. It also points to an expanding role that universities and academics can play in providing a safe and neutral space in which issues can be honestly explored and options for dealing with emotionally–charged challenges can begin to be expressed.
East Timor provides another example of how the University’s involvement with local communities mediates between the local and the global. University staff have had a long–standing interest in and engagement with the issues affecting the people of that country. Academics in the University’s Centre for Asia–Pacific Studies and the Department of Social Inquiry and Community Studies, for example, have been engaged with the issues affecting East Timor and the East Timorese people for many years. The University has provided educational opportunities for many East Timorese refugees during their long residence in Australia, in spite of their contested status, such as the denial of refugee status and permanent residence to them by successive Australian governments. Over the years, East Timorese refugees, for example, were able to study in our Asia–Pacific focused Community Development courses and were able to acquire the indispensable skills that assisted them to develop a sense of community and to form appropriate social structures in Australia from which to articulate their needs and aspirations. This represents a direct contribution by the University to the future of the East Timorese and the future development of East Timor as an independent country.
In addition to this, Victoria University academics and students, including East Timorese graduates and current students, also played a key role in assisting the approximately 900 East Timorese who were evacuated to Victoria, in October 1999, following the tragic events in their country in the aftermath of the United Nations supervised referendum in East Timor. Academics and students from our University provided direct assistance to the East Timorese evacuees by collecting and providing material aid and by taking part in concrete educational activities, such as assisting the East Timorese evacuees with English. At an institutional level, Victoria University has provided space for the CNRT (National Council of Timorese Resistance) within the Centre for Asia–Pacific Studies at our central city Flinders Campus, as a focal point for debates of the issues confronting East Timor as a new and emerging nation. One outcome of this association was the visit earlier this month of CNRT Chair Xanana Gusmao, a possible future President of East Timor, to Victoria University, where he will participate in a major forum on East Timor. These local engagements by the University extend to East Timor, for example through our involvement in the current international efforts to develop the University of East Timor, in Dili, and with assisting with the acquisition of teaching and learning materials.
In all of these initiatives, the University’s approach spans a range of levels of engagement that inextricably bind the local with the global. As I have argued, universities need to revisit their ‘traditional’ role as a key mediator in providing educational opportunities for members of our communities in order to meet the challenges, as well as the opportunities, that massification, globalisation and diversification present. In broad terms, this engagement encompasses three overlapping and mutually reinforcing sets of activities:
Our experience clearly illustrates the importance of universities engaging with issues which, I would argue, have always been part of the domain of scholars, as Lord Deputy Fitzwilliam’s appeal of 1591 attests.
In the present context, I would suggest that universities occupy a unique position in our societies and more generally in the international arena, and are ideally positioned to promote the values of human understanding, cooperation, exchange and the promotion of equitable social and cultural development. It is my view that as the position of the nation-state is weakened by the processes of globalisation such as through the transfer of economic decision-making power to multinational corporations with all the implications for social policies and programs which such a transfer implies – educational institutions are ideally placed to articulate and define egalitarian values and to lead the debates that now confront us. I believe that Victoria University’s experiences at the local level point to some approaches that can be taken in response to the challenges that massification, globalisation and diversification present. As our experience demonstrates, changes in structure, policies and programs to facilitate partnership engagement with local communities can also result in new forms of engagement with colleagues internationally and with issues in other parts of the world. Such engagements, I believe, are central to the articulation of values that place people and communities, their rights and their legitimate aspirations for advancement, at the core of activities in the modern world. Academics who as a group already operate across borders and boundaries, who share a commitment to an open society, and who have a professional responsibility to question the taken-for-granted have a key mediating role to play in these developments.