Challenges of blogging

In this post, I would like to tell about the challenges I experienced in writing for the blog in comparison with academic writing and I will compare my experience with the results of the survey about blogging experience conducted among my groupmates. Overall, my earlier attitude towards blogging can be described as rather negative – mostly unfriendly and cautious. Although some of my friends are successful bloggers, well read and supported in their writing exercises by readers as well as their families and friends, it was hard for me to understand how any blogger can freely reveal his or her thoughts in public. According to the survey, conducted in our class, about one third of my groupmates would support me in that sharing your thoughts via blogging is not as easy as it seems. Therefore, when blogging was announced as our major writing activity to do this semester, I was happy, because I knew, this would be a challenge for me.

Blogging really turned out to be challenging. The first challenge for me was choosing a topic. In my opinion, for a standard academic writing it is easier, because your instructor or supervisor is your main targeted audience and in this case, the most important point is to choose a topic you know well to be able to demonstrate the full knowledge in the field. However, choosing a topic for a blog post, the most important point is writing about an interesting or highly relevant issue, because main peculiarity of blogging is freedom of readers to choose what they read. In addition, the main purpose of writing for the blog is to attract as many readers as possible. According to the survey, over 50% of my groupmates find it difficult to choose topics for blog posts. It is not a surprising number for me, because there are especial requirements to the topic for the blog post: blogger writes for audience which chooses whether to read the post or not, so the topic must be worth reading.

Another challenge for me was a writing style. By trying to blog, I learnt that good writing  can be very different in style. What is appropriate for academic writing may seem clumsy in a blog post and vice versa. In addition, our exercise was to do blogging on education-related topics, so we could not be too informal. In my opinion, blogging is a good writing practice, because you develop sense of words and phrases, suitable for various range of topics.

And the last challenge for any blogger is comments. After I published my post about women in education, I got comment from one of the coursemates I know, which showed that she did not fully understand some phrase in the blog, and after her comment, I edited this phrase to be clearer. However, the main thing I learnt was that when you engage in blogging, you must be ready for negative comments, because there must be people whose life positions are different from yours. However, I am eager to receive feedback, and so are just below 50% of my groupmates. The secret motivation of the blogger here is the willingness to get his or her work appreciated. Of course, the blogger must be ready for criticism, and that is why the other half of my group did not find getting feedback from peers as attractive.

Despite these challenges, blogging was a good exercise and a good development tool. With the help of this exercise, I learnt that it is possible write interesting things without necessarily revealing your intimate feelings. In this activity, we wrote about education, and that was really interesting and useful. Now, since I have overcome these challenges writing for a blog as a classroom activity, I will definitely practice some blogging outside classroom.

References:

Montgomery, D. P. (2015a). [Blogging and Academic Writing]. Unpublished raw data. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/PX8wv7

Entrepreneurial universities - drivers of innovation or threats to academic ideology?

Image source: http://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/cooperations.htm

Globalization is a driving force which has dramatically changed the ideology of higher education in recent years (Altbach & Knight, 2007). Many universities were pushed to transform their practices and adapt to new realities due to the need to shift to the global knowledge-based economy (Gibb, Haskins & Robertson, 2013). They are demanded by the governments to take leading roles in contributing to the regional economy by using their research capacity. Therefore, there has been a shift towards a “third mission” of commercializing the research in addition to their main missions of teaching and research (Etzkowitz et. al., 2000, p. 313). It has all resulted in the emergence of the contemporary phenomenon of “entrepreneurial university” (Etzkowitz et al., 2000).

The term “entrepreneurial university” was first introduced by Etzkowitz (1983) in his studies about transformation of American universities. Webster and Etzkowitz (1991) further explained that the emergence of entrepreneurial universities was as an inevitable process or “second academic revolution”, which was posed to universities by external and internal forces. Clark (2001) also points out that the shift towards the entrepreneurial model of university is now the only way universities can successfully operate in the ambiguous and competitive environment of the 21^st century. In other words, entrepreneurial universities develop students’ critical thinking and entrepreneurial mindsets. Therefore, students from non-business specialties who have great ideas, but no entrepreneurial skills, can produce innovative products either within the university or after graduation (European Comission, 2008).

There are different opinions regarding the appropriateness of shifting towards an entrepreneurial approach in managing the university. First, the opponents of the entrepreneurial model of university stated that commercialization of knowledge can be detrimental to the mission and values of academic university and can lead to the creation of “academic capitalism” (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997, p. 135). Conversely, the proponents of entrepreneurial universities (Etzkowitz, 2003) declared that entrepreneurial universities are the same academic universities which strive to make outcomes of research profitable for the economy of the country and universities themselves. Nevertheless, many academics and society still tend to misinterpret the ideology and characteristics of an entrepreneurial university (Etzkowitz, 2003).

To conclude, the emergence of an entrepreneurial university is the reality which academic society and administrators around the world have to embrace. Nevertheless, many people are still not aware of this type of university and tend to think critically about its values. I believe that entrepreneurial universities should not be regarded as business enterprises, but as social contributors to the economy and prosperity of the country. Contemporary reality shows that universities can no longer prepare workforce who will eventually become white-collar workers. They have to produce entrepreneurial-minded and risk-taking individuals who will be able to invent new innovative technology and products.

References

Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of studies in international education, 11(3-4), 290-305.

Gibb, A., Haskins, G., & Robertson, I. (2013). Leading the entrepreneurial university: Meeting the entrepreneurial development needs of higher education institutions. In Universities in Change (pp. 9-45). Springer New York.

Etzkowitz, H. (1983). Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science. Minerva, 21(2), 198-233.

Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330.

Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Social Science Information, 42 (3), 293-337.

European Comission. (2008). Entrepreneurship in higher education, especially within non-business studies. Final Report of the Expert Group. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/files/support_measures/training_education/entr_highed_en.pdf

Webster, A., Etzkowitz, H., & Science Policy Support Group, London (United Kingdom);. (1991). Academic-industry relations: the second academic revolution? A framework paper for the proposed workshop on academic-industry relations. Science Policy Support Group.

Research at National University of Singapore

National University of Singapore is the largest comprehensive university in Singapore that is the 22nd in the 2014 QS World University Rankings (NUS, 2015). NUS hosts 12 faculties and 21 university-level research institutes including three Research Centers of Excellence (RCEs) and a number of faculty-based research centers (Halliwell, 2010). In addition to teaching and conducting research, NUS also serves to the country. In 1985, NUS has built a National University Hospital (NUH) that allows young researchers and scientists conduct research in biomedicine and life sciences with the direct implication of research outcomes (Halliwell, 2010). Today, the expenditure for R&D at NUS constitutes over one-third of the whole expenditure for research and development (R&D) in Singapore (Wong et al., 2011). Importantly, NUS is interested in cross-disciplinary innovative research that can “break new ground and establish new paradigms” in all fields of study (Halliwell, 2010, p. FA15). Moreover, research aims to investigate the state of religion, global attitude towards Singapore, the value of culture, history, family, migration and other aspects of life that are relevant to modern Singapore (Halliwell, 2010).  NUS has a significant support from foreign universities and organizations. For instance, NUS has a joint recruitment scheme with Cambridge University (Halliwell, 2010). Currently, NUS establishes joint research programs with leading universities around the world. Interestingly, NUS is a member of group alliances such as International Alliance for Research Universities (IARU), which appears as “an alliance of 10 of the world’s leading research universities” that include Yale University, University of California, Berkeley etc. and the Universitas 21 (U21) that is “an international network of research-intensive universities” (Xavier & Alsagoff, 2013, p. 231). Xavier and Alsagoff (2013) argue that the main goal of NUS is to be the first and best in conducting certain types of research, therefore “positioning itself proudly as an innovative institution” (p. 232). NUS represents itself as an enterprise with a clear strategic plan. The “NUS Enterprise” is a ground-breaking project that integrates education and research with the purpose of providing “an entrepreneurial and innovative dimension to the University’s core research and educational activities” (Xavier & Alsagoff, 2013, p. 230).  References Halliwell, B. (2010). The National University of Singapore and what it does. Biointerphases, 5(3), FA15-FA18. National University of Singapore (2015). University Rankings. Retrieved from National University of Singapore website http://www.nus.edu.sg/oam/whynus/university-rankings Wong, P. K., Ho, Y. P., & Singh, A. (2007). Towards an “entrepreneurial university” model to support knowledge-based economic development: The case of the National University of Singapore. World Development, 35(6), 941-958.  Xavier, C.A., & Alsagoff, L. (2013). Constructing “world-class” as “global”: a case study of the National University of Singapore. Educational Research for Policy and Practice,12(225), 225-238.

Research at Nanyang Technological University

            Nanyang Technological University (NTU) is a young autonomous university in Singapore that is the first in the world among young universities according to the 2014 QS Top 50. Main focus of the university is in engineering field. Andersson and Mayer (2010) claim that NTU is probably “the world’s largest engineering-based institution on a single campus” (p. FA9). NTU has bilateral relations with leading universities of Asia, Europe, and North America in terms of scientific research and joint degree programs (Andersson & Mayer, 2010). 

What is important, NTU conducts a strategic cross-disciplinary research in a variety of fields such as medicine and healthcare, research in interactive digital media, and China and Asian studies that are significant to Singapore (Andersson & Mayer, 2010). In 2010, for instance, NTU established a medical school offering a joint degree with Imperial College that is the largest medical school focusing on innovative approaches in a healthcare in the United Kingdom (Gopinathan & Lee, 2011).

            Under NTU, there are several research centers. One of them is a business incubator Gintic Institute of Manufacturing Technology (GINTIC) that closely works with NTU faculty staff and performs joint research projects with the participation of graduate students (Lee & Win, 2004). In 1989, NTU with the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) set a Center for Advanced Construction Studies (CACS) with the aim of training young scientists, conducting research, and transferring technology into industry (Lee & Win, 2004). Starting from 1991, the Thermal Spray Group in NTU has been productively involved in a variety of projects with foreign thermal spray research centers (Khor, 2003). 

            The government of Singapore now concerns about translating research into “intellectual property and hence into the development of the Singaporean economy” (Andersson & Mayers, 2010). For solving this issue, NTU came with a plan that includes development of entrepreneurialism among students and faculty staff and enhancing research cooperation with industry.

            Being a highly competitive on local and international arena higher education institution, NTU represents the “ambitions and success of Singapore in the 21st century – the century of Asia” (Andersson & Mayer, 2010, p. FA13). With its clear strategy, NTU certainly will be among leading universities not only in Asian region.

           

References

Andersson, B., & Mayer, T. (2010). Singapore and the Nanyang Technological University – A young country with a young university on the move. Biointerphases, 5(3), FA9-FA14.

Gopinathan, S., & Lee, M. H. (2011). Challenging and co-opting globalisation: Singapore's strategies in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33(3), 287-299.

Khor, K. (2003). Thermal spray research at the advanced materials research centre. Journalof Thermal Spray Technology, 12(3), 323-326. 

Lee, J., & Win, H. N. (2004). Technology transfer between university research centers and industry in Singapore. Technovation, 24(5), 433-442.

Private vs. Public Schools: Personal Experience

           

Image source: http://www.greatschools.org/find-a-school/defining-your-ideal/59-private-vs-public-schools.gs 

           Debates about the value of public schools versus private ones are constantly appear in the media and the society. However, diversity of opinions are subjective, as each individual perceives the value of education whether private or public differently. In my secondary school history, I had both public and private schooling experiences and encountered some differences that could affect personal and academic development of schoolchildren.

            There were significant differences in teachers and teaching approaches in public and private secondary schools. In my private school teachers were more positive, open for dialogue and tried to design interesting lessons in order to engage students and provide more comprehensive overview and deeper understanding of the subject. Contrary, in my public school teachers were very captious and strict, and we had little discussion and opportunity to express our own ideas and thoughts. However, teachers in public school were more experience and from my subjective point of view better qualified, than those who taught in private school.

            The obvious reason is approach a difference is possibly hidden in the material side of the issue, as salaries of public and private schools’ teachers are incomparable. Probably there were some other reasons concerning professionalism, general attitude towards teaching and personal characteristics, but what I encountered is that teachers in private schools are more apprehensive about their positions, and try to do their best to educate and engage students in the learning process.

            As the focus of schools were different (math&physics vs. humanities) it is hard to compare the curriculum. The same time, I was quite surprised that public school offered more additional courses than private one, where initially more electives should be offered. I had “The history of art” and “Political science” lessons in public school, while in private I had only specific focus oriented subjects.

            To sum up, it should be mentioned that there is no common opinion regarding the values of public and private schools. From my experience, I am proponent of private type of schooling, as it provided me with the opportunity to study in friendly and supportive environment, focus on subjects that I really liked and develop not only academically, but also personally. However, I cannot generalize my experience to other Kazakhstani public and private schools, as each school is unique and possesses its own advantages and disadvantages. Also, in the recent years the emergence of alternative types of schooling such as international schools and Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools can provide diversity of choices for Kazakhstani schoolchildren.  

The World-Class University: In Search of Excellence

       

Image source: http://www.futuretimeline.net/forum/topic/8235-the-good-future-thread/page-7

    In the context of globalization, the emerged need in establishing world-class universities reflect the national policies of competitiveness increase in the knowledge economy era. Consequently, every ambitious country sets a goal to establish a world-class university in order to create a critical mass of talented students and faculty members who will be able to foster socio-economic and industrial-innovative development of the country. World-class universities also can be considered as the promoters of country’s prestige and status on the global level. However, despite the fact that the concept is commonly used in many research papers and articles, there is no clear and explicit definition of the nature of world-class universities, which provokes debates regarding of what it means to be a world-class institution (Altbach, 2004).

            According to Salmi (2009) there are three main components of world-class institution, such as concentration of talents (local and international students, faculty and researchers), sufficient funding (public and private budgets), and favorable governance (autonomy and academic freedom). Those three elements like important screws of a giant mechanism; they are interconnected and all together can embody the idea of world-class university.

            World-class university is a cherished dream of many countries all over the world. Some of them are trying to upgrade existing institutions, others merge universities in order to create a strong comprehensive institution, yet others decide to establish a world-class university from the scratch. In the case of China, the government introduced two main initiatives in upgrading existing universities to the “world-class” level. Project 985 and Project 211 aimed to provide Chinese society with high quality education and research and promote the prestige of the country on international higher education arena. As the result of financial support and favorable governance, 9 Chinese universities are became the leading institutions in the country with high qualified faculty, excellence in research and internationally recognized status. One of them, Tsinghua University is the most internationalized university in China, which takes leading positions in Chinese and global university rankings and accumulates talents from all  over the world (Yang, 2011).

            Meanwhile, the European countries are more focusing on institutional merger, as the possibility to create a strong and comprehensive university. Merger is one of the ways of establishing world-class universities, as it gives the opportunity to unite leading profile institutions and create a new university which possesses strengths of previous institutions, and able to provide high level professional education and excellent research. The costs are also insufficiently high, which makes this approach more favorable for governmental budgets. However, the main weakness can be considered, as the class of institutional cultures and disorganization at the beginning stage. Thus, it seems to be crucial to ensure the internal coherence of newly emerged institution. Aalto University is a Finish initiative to create a world-class university resulted from the merger of Helsinki School of Economics, University of Art and Design Helsinki and Helsinki University of Technology. This institution aims to accumulate the knowledge and experience of leading profile universities and bring radical changes to the Finish system of higher education, consequently, facilitate the process of educational reform and promote finish education on the global arena (Cremonini, Westerheijden, Benneworth, & Dauncey, 2014) 

            Alternative way, which is chosen by many developing countries, is to establish a world-class university from the scratch. It is probably the most expansive approach, but the same time the most convenient from the reformation point of view. Nazarbayev University is an excellent example of governmental initiative to create a new and unique university for Kazakhstani higher education system, which aims to become a world-class institution and facilitate the process of socio-economic development of the country (Abazov, 2011). Nazarbayev University is established as the benchmark, which aims to achieve excellence in research and concentrate knowledge and experience, which then can be transferred to the mainstream higher education institutions in Kazakhstan. As the result, the possible “domino effect” is highly emphasized by institutional and governmental authorities.     

            So far, it is hard to evaluate the necessity and outcomes of the world-class universities, due to the relative novelty and differences in national contexts. However, it is vital to assess the value of those institutions for overall education system development, as the main raison d’être of world-class universities can be considered as being the agents of educational reforms and facilitators of overall socio-economic and innovative-industrial development of the country. In this regard, the question, which is commonly raised both by opponents and proponents of the “world-class” concept - “What is the real added value of world-class universities? Whether they are pursuing their own institutional benefits or able to produce greater public benefits?” remains unanswered.  

References

Abazov, R. (2011, April 13). Kazakhstan Takes Universities Global (13 April 2011). Central     Asia-Caucasus Institute Analyst. Retrieved May 01, 2015 from <http://cacianalyst.org/?q=node/5534>.

Altbach, P. (2004). Costs and benefits of world-class universities. Academe, 90(1), 20-23. 

Cremonini, L., Westerheijden, D. F., Benneworth, P., & Dauncey, H. (2014). In the Shadow of Celebrity? World-Class University Policies and Public Value in Higher Education. Higher education policy, 27(3), 341-361.

Salmi, J. (2009). The challenge of establishing world-class universities. Washington: World Bank Publications.

Yang, R. (2011). Advanced global strategy in China: The case of Tsinghua. In S. Marginson, S. Kaur,

& E. Sawir (Eds.), Higher education in the Asia-Pacific: Strategic responses to globalization (pp. 

143-159). Dordrecht: Springer. 

Board of trustee, who are they?

Board of trustee, who are they?

Every organization as well as the university needs to be governed by certain amount of  people, in order to undertake rational decision-making and problem-solving actions. Before the Organization and Governance theory of Higher education classes, I used to think that there is nobody higher and powerful than President (rector) of university. The president is the one who usually reports any changes and initiatives, current day-to-day life of organization to a bunch of people called Board of Trustees.

Any type (public, non-profit, private, for-profit) of universities are run by the Board of Trustees. Their responsibility lies in overseeing, but not managing or controlling the organizational management, financial issues, quality of organization, supporting the president’s leadership, modifying the strategic plan and setting the direction. They are ought to “ensure the fulfillment of institution’s mission”, building relationships with other bodies related to university and international partners, constituting ethical standards and values (Arnwine, 2002).  Also they have an authority to fire and hire the President for the University.

The amount of the board varies from few individuals to more than fifty people depending on the institution charter or bylaw. The members of Board are voluntary based body, usually not educators, have some business background or currently is a business related entrepreneur, alumni of that university or having other beneficial interests in that particular university.

The members are elected for certain period or term. After the termination or self-cancellation, they can be reelected to the post again. The Board members do not see each other every day, they might have a meeting twice or three times in a year to discuss particular issues, or future perspectives and sustainable development of that university. For this job they do not get any compensation (salary), unless in Western countries.

However, there are some criticism that, some trustees do not have continuous perspective towards institution existence. Often, individual trustees affect to the board’s decision with their subjectivity or personal interest (Hendrickson et al 2013).  Such disregarding actions of trustees to the bylaw and fiduciary responsibilities of trusteeship might have negative influence and harm to institution.

Each board member is believed to serve the institution best and taking into consideration the abovementioned responsibilities oversee the whole institution’s organization and governance structure. 

References

Arnwine, D. L. (2002). Effective governance: the roles and responsibilities of board members. Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 15(1), 19.

Hendrickson, R. M., Lane, J. E., Harris, J. T., & Dorman, R. H. (2012).Academic leadership and governance of higher education. Stylus Publishing, LLC.