Search

The political, social, and institutional environments in which contemporary universities operate have changed rather dramatically over the past two decades in ways that threaten the resilience of the academic core, both in its ability to map knowledge comprehensively and also to maintain a balance between the branches of the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. This paper traces historical changes (2003–2019) in the academic core of two "flagship" research-intensive universities located in Northern Europe. The results show that some branches of the academic core are undergoing dynamic processes of program churn that make them resilient. Furthermore, the data show that this resilience is enabled in large part by bridging different branches of knowledge by establishing what we term interbranch programs. In addition to the abovementioned findings, the paper links ongoing discussions regarding change in HE systems and institutions to the literature on organizational resilience, and it advances insights for a possible future theory of how adaptation plays out in the academic core over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the recent growth of experiential learning (EL) and the university-community (or so-called town-gown, TG) connections created as a result of this expansion. The research is framed by critical scholarship on the nature and role of the university and the place of liberal education specifically, as well as policy drivers aimed at social and economic impacts from EL. Two subthemes are also examined: first, the role of the arts, humanities and social sciences disciplines in EL expansion and, second, the extent to which TG connections focus on the university's local host community as opposed to more distant and even international arrangements. Mixed research methods including public document analysis and key informant interviews are used to document and interpret EL developments across nine varied universities in Ontario, Canada. The results underline broad sector commitment to EL that in turn creates new and different TG connections for the university. Rapid expansion has brought a variety of challenges identified both by universities and community EL partners. The paper concludes with discussion of policy implications and consideration of the future of EL in light of the 'digital pivot' of the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines patterns of knowledge production in the social sciences (SS) and in the arts and humanities (A&H) in Latin America (LATAM). We report on a longitudinal analysis of 127,515 journal articles published between 2002 and 2018. The analysis reveals six major patterns: (i) a rapid growth in the production of journal articles; (ii) large differences in article production across nations; (iii) significant variations in the magnitude and the growth of articles across disciplines within the SS and the A&H; (iv) a present predominance of single-authored articles that has nevertheless been declining in favour of collaborative articles; (v) a significant variation in the magnitudes of collaborative articles with researchers outside LATAM, a collaboration that tends to be with the global North; and (vi) differences in research leadership across LATAM nations. A set of possible explanations is offered for each of these patterns, set within a dynamic global knowledge production context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current expansion of English language publishing by scholars from China is supported by national and university policies, including monetary and career incentives to publish in English. These incentives, which extend to work in the humanities and social sciences (HSS, the focus of this paper) as well as the sciences and technologies, are situated in evolving strategies of internationalization. China has moved from an internationalization strategy simply based on learning from the West, to a 'going out' strategy designed to both lift domestic research capacity and advance China's influence in the world. However, the 'going out' strategy nonetheless embodies ambiguities and dilemmas. The world of academic knowledge is not a level playing field but more closely approximates the centre–periphery dynamic described in world systems theory. This study explores the influence of publication incentives in the context of a centre–periphery world. It draws on analysis of 172 institutional incentive documents and interviews with 75 HSS academics, university senior administrators, and journal editors. The study identifies practices within China's HSS that reproduce centre–periphery relationships. By focusing on international publications, Chinese universities run the risk of downplaying Chinese-language publications and adopting standards and norms from global centres to assess domestic knowledge production. These could result in creating knowledge from and about China primarily in Western terms without adding a distinctive Chinese strand to the global conversation. Nonetheless, the study also identifies alternative dynamics that challenge the existing power hierarchies in global HSS, highlighting indigenous knowledge and the need to pluralize global knowledge production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International mobility of doctorate holders is one important dimension of the general phenomenon of internationalization and globalization of research systems, which is supposed to have positive effects on economy and society. Although issues of international mobility for doctorate holders have been largely investigated, there is still relatively little information about the factors affecting those with degrees specifically in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). Considering this, the aim of the current paper is twofold: first, to investigate whether the propensity of a doctorate holder in SSH to experience a period of international mobility during the career is influenced by mobility during the educational stage; second, to examine whether the mobility after doctoral degree affects the choice of doctorates to return to their country of origin, as opposed to remaining abroad, controlling for peculiar aspects of the higher education sector of employment. The results show that international mobility during graduate education and at the moment of choosing the first job on attaining the PhD are important factors influencing the future mobility of doctorate holders in the SSH areas. These same factors also influence the individual's propensity to diverge (continue abroad) or converge (remain, return) with respect to their initial country of employment. The results of this investigation improve our knowledge about the effects generated by the early choices of individuals, which could support decision-makers in designing instruments addressing the international mobility of doctorate holders and, when relevant, creating the conditions for their return. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses the problem of curriculum design in the Humanities and Social Sciences, and more specifically the challenge of designing foundation courses for first-generation or 'disadvantaged' learners. Located in the social realist school of the sociology of education studies that builds on the legacy of Basil Bernstein, we emphasise the importance of knowledge and understanding the principles that generate 'what counts' in particular courses and disciplines. In order to operationalise this, we used Maton's Legitimation Code Theory to uncover the knowledge/knower structures in eight first year courses in four of the most popular majors in a Faculty of Humanities. Our data sources were curriculum documents and exam papers in particular. The findings are presented and the 'codes', 'gazes' and 'lenses' for each set of courses delineated. The findings are being used to inform the design of a set of curriculum and pedagogic interventions that aim to offer powerful ways of knowing to novices in the Humanities and Social Sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how and why academics in different parts of the academy collaborate. In this paper we argue that: (1) There is a useful analytical distinction to be made between collaboration (fluid and expressive) and Collaboration (concrete and instrumental); (2) These two are not mutually exclusive and their use varies between disciplines; and (3) This distinction is an informative one for policy making that aims to encourage collaboration. Two interview based studies were used to explore the differences in collaborative practices across disciplines. The first was small and confined to a single university (n = 36) and the second was a larger study conducted in three countries (n = 274). Cross tabulations and analysis of open ended questions demonstrated many differences across the humanities, sciences and social sciences in collaboration. The C/collaboration distinction proves useful in understanding different disciplinary approaches to research, and in pointing to implications for research policy and funding. Attempts to increase collaborative research through Collaboration only, may well have deleterious effects on both collaboration and Collaboration. Research policy and funding should bear these differences in mind when seeking to stimulate collaborative research, so as to gain better outcomes across a range of disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study was an attempt to explore international English-medium publication in humanities and social sciences in Iran. In so doing, 50 PhD students from 8 humanities and social sciences disciplines, who had already published or attempted to publish in English-medium journals, were requested to write reflection guide accounts and to take part in follow-up semi-structured interviews. The reflection guide and interview data were analyzed based on the principles of grounded theory research yielding the four major themes of motivations, hurdles, strategies, and call for support. The results indicated that the Iranian PhD students in the fields of humanities and social sciences are strongly motivated to publish in English-medium journals though they face considerable discursive and non-discursive challenges too. Moreover, although they pursue some strategies to rise to these challenges, they could not fight them off on their own and claim support by other more competent academics and officials. The authors also call for a firm action plan to improve the status of English-medium publication in humanities and social sciences. The action plan could count on support from more experienced doctoral students, professors and other university level officials, editors, reviewers, and high-level national policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender segregation in higher education (GSHE) is recognized as a key factor to explain the persistence of gender inequalities in the labor market despite the reversal of gender gap in educational attainment. Women are systematically overrepresented in fields of study, such as social sciences and the humanities, which offer relatively poor labor market prospects; at the same time, they are underrepresented in fields that perform above the average, as engineering and ICT. Several explanations for GSHE have been proposed in the literature, but their explanatory power has to be assessed yet. Using a rich longitudinal dataset on a recent cohort of Italian upper secondary school leavers, in this paper we jointly test seven potential mechanisms for GSHE. Our results show that rational choice explanations—such as skill-based explanations and gender differences in career preferences—fail to account for GSHE. On the contrary, expressive motivations related to preferences for school subjects and for specific occupations are found to mediate to a significant extent GSHE. However, our most important result concerns the key role of curricular track choice at upper secondary level which, alone, mediates two third of the gender difference in access to the humanities and social sciences and one third of the gender difference in access to engineering and ICT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How much university students learn in their studies is highly debated and important to understanding the value of higher education. Yet, information on learning gains at this level are scarce. Our paper contributes to the debate by using unique data for Brazil to estimate absolute test score gains across various fields of study in higher education and to assess whether students who attend certain categories of programs (public/private, research/non-research, highly selective/less selective) make greater relative gains than in others. Our results suggest that students in STEM fields tend to have higher absolute achievement gains compared to students in humanities and pedagogical programs, and that in a few fields, such as civil engineering and history, the relative gains for students in highly selective programs in that field of study are significantly higher than if they had attended somewhat less selective programs. However, students attending lowest quintile selective programs in a field of study have consistently lower gains across a range of study fields than similar students attending programs just one quintile higher. The results have important implications for the equity effects of higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on a study conducted as part of an action-research project-INTEGRA I&E-aiming to promote the research and teaching (R&T) nexus at the School of Social Sciences and Humanities of a Research University in Lisbon, Portugal (Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, ISCTE-IUL). This study set out to investigate a multi-informant perspective of the academics' rhetoric (conceptions, perception of barriers/facilitators and consequences) concerning the nexus, which can be considered at different levels of the curricular and organizational structure. Focus groups were conducted with 26 professors and 8 researchers from six different disciplinary areas and, afterwards, recorded and transcribed. A content analysis was used to categorize and quantify participants' responses. Four themes emerged: practices linking R&T, barriers, facilitators and consequences of the nexus. Different levels of analysis were identified for each theme, namely, the level of ISCTE-IUL, Research Centers, Departments, Courses and Classes. Some disciplinary differences were also encountered. This study contributes with a multi-informant and multi-level perspective of academics' conceptions of the R&T nexus in a Portuguese research-oriented university. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the 2000s, China has been fast establishing English-language academic journals to further internationalize research. This article delineates a national scenario of such journals in the humanities and social sciences (HSS) and explores their efforts and predicaments in bringing China's HSS research to the world. Based on first-hand data collected empirically through interviews and documents, it shows that HSS English-language journals in China attempt to challenge yet are conditioned at the same time by the imbalanced international knowledge structure. While still at a preliminary stage of development in terms of quantity and quality, the journals have already been confronted with major challenges including English language hurdles, unfavorable position in research evaluation systems, unfamiliarity with standards of international academic writing and publishing, and tensions between international ambition and local commitment. This article argues that HSS journals in non-Western societies including China need to strike a balance between their contemporary bid for international visibility and long-term contribution to multiple perspectives in global HSS research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces a model for group facilitation in the humanities based on Carl Roger's model for group psychotherapy. Certain aspects of Carl Roger's reflective learning strategies are reappraised and principles, specific only to psychotherapy, are introduced. Five of Rogers's axioms are applied to the tutorial discussion model: a non-directive approach, climate-setting, facilitation, reflective listening and positive regard. The model, which has been trialed in tutorials at The University of Queensland encourages active learning, self-direction and critical thinking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars have studied epistemological development – or how one understands knowledge and knowing – of college students for many years. Research in this domain has included benchmarking studies of epistemological development, examinations of how curricular innovations impact epistemology, and some studies of differences in epistemological development based on disciplinary areas. The latter group of studies has generally focused on differences in epistemological beliefs for students who are studying in two different domains (e.g., nursing students versus physics students). In this study, we qualitatively investigate whether the epistemological perspectives of 60 science/engineering college students differs across the disciplinary areas of the sciences and the humanities. Our results indicate that such differences do exist and include a proposed grounded theory that describes how students' epistemologies may vary across knowledge domains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]