Conference Agenda

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, member countries gained independence and sought to adopt educational practices from the West (Silova, 2010) in an attempt to break away from the Soviet model. Kazakhstan, one of those countries, has undergone significant reforms in the higher education system. It aims to transition from a centralised system controlled by the Ministry of Education and Science towards a market-driven structure that allows for greater institutional autonomy. Despite the government’s efforts since independence, the universities remained less competitive with a governance style similar to the Soviet system. The decision-making process lacked academic involvement and transparency and also displayed limited autonomy.

In 2018, the government introduced the Law "On amendments and additions to some legislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the expansion of academic and managerial autonomy of higher education institutions" to 29 public universities. The objective of the Law was to grant academic and managerial autonomy to higher education institutions by creating independent governing bodies with decision-making powers similar to those in Western countries. The Law was expected to be the foundation for transforming HEIs by enabling institutional flexibility and establishing an accountability system through governing boards. Universities have received increased powers to create endowment funds, open start-up companies, and attract additional sources of financial and material resources to implement statutory activities. Academic autonomy has been extended to determine the content of education programmes. Before the 2018 Law, this was the Ministry's responsibility. This has enabled universities to become more independent from state control and focus more on their core mission of education and research.

Indeed, enacting the 2018 Law transformed the landscape of governance structure, changed decisions and extended academic autonomy. However, transitioning to a more autonomous system through introducing and establishing a new governance model was challenging across the sector.

The study's main objective is to understand the factors of university implementation of the 2018 reform. We analyse how different types of public universities in Kazakhstan responded to, implemented and experienced a new governance model at institutions. Our analytical framework is based on the literature on higher education forms and the public sector. Accordingly, we hypothesise that 1) organisational age and size; 2) institutional type and mission; 3) distribution of resources; 4) geographical, economic and political centrality; 5) organisational identities affect the implementation of reforms. To achieve this, we conducted 46 semi-structured interviews with top management leaders of HEIs and analysed official governance documents such as the Law, by-laws, and institutional meeting minutes. Finally, we used national statistical data to compare universities' evolution over time.

The findings of the empirical study reveal variations in the implementation of governance reform at the organisational level. Interestingly, successful implementation was not contingent upon university age and size, types and missions, research activities, funding, or geographical location. Instead, it was strongly correlated with the active engagement of university leaders in the policymaking process at the governmental level. Findings show that peripheral universities in Kazakhstan successfully implemented the policy reform due to the involvement of the top and middle-level management team in the decision-making process of the Ministry. Based on our analyses, we have shown that the main factors affecting reform implementation are the following. 1) the greater involvement of institutional actors in policy-making activities leads to better implementation of reforms. 2) the key role played by the government in designing the consultations for the reform 3) the importance of the broader political national context 4) the significant role that peripheral universities can play in the reform process as well as in the development of the HE sector.

Existential crisis can be a major driver of transformations in the universities. Using interviews and survey responses from Ukrainian professors and administrators affected by the Russian invasion of 2014-2022, this paper examines the transformative agency of academic communities in Ukraine. The data are analyzed through the prism of agency as “relational pragmatics” (Emirbayer and Mische, 1998) where determination, creativity, will to power and other qualities of taking actions within social constructs of institutional development are supposed to lead to desired outcomes. Yet, the legacies and values of the previous phases of institutional development often interfere and generate unintended outcomes. Grounded in idiosyncrasies (Kramar 2014), human agency naturally develops tensions with forms of institutional agency that are constructed through the misaligned influences of governments and universities which are often unable to coordinate properly or respond to the stakeholders’ demands in a timely manner.

The agency undergoes a major transformation itself in the context of major crises (Oleksiyenko et al. 2023). In war zones affected by destruction and death existential crisis can be particularly glaring (Benedek, 1997; Oleksiyenko and Terepyshchyj 2023). The loss of intellectuals drastically impoverishes the human habitat and educational landscape of universities and their communities (Milton, 2018). While humanitarian assistance can play a significant role in alleviating the problem, technical intervention is only a temporary solution (Heath, 2009). More sustainable strategies, including the re-establishment of educational institutions and their infrastructure, are usually difficult to advance in the absence of substantial resources, and commitment of donors and local educators and governments. These challenges grow in the absence of respectful conduct among the belligerent parties (Milton, 2021). Leadership and determination for transformations in such environments is particularly back-breaking as hopes are difficult to sustain (Oleksiyenko and Terepyshchyj, 2023).

The reconceptualization of agency and examination of the impact of transformative powers on scholars’ strategies of teaching, research and service are increasingly important, as the war in Ukraine shows (Oleksiyenko and Terepyshchyi, 2023). The transformative agency is in high demand as scholars in vulnerable societies are urged to take a closer look at the processes of value-making and intentionality in their own institutions, especially as demand for strategies of trust- and partnership-building grows among colleagues, students and other members of society. These pressures also show to affect networks abroad. The massive engagement of Ukrainian refugees in the European space of higher education and science has shown to be reshaping the idea of university linkages and responsibilities. This became increasingly obvious as more Western scholars had been striving to reassess and reframe prevalent Russo-centric narratives on their campuses and in their programmes (Aslund, 2023; Prince, 2023). Ukrainians are also urging their colleagues to move away from the old paradigms of thinking about Ukraine as lacking agency, self-determination, and a predisposition to chart a European future.

With conflict-affected areas multiplying around the world, the transformative agency is becoming an intriguing concept which requires more investigation and reframing. In particular, the roles and responsibilities of academic leaders, as the core of transformative agency, grow in importance (Clifford and Montgomery, 2015), especially given that the crisis affects the growing number of stakeholders who believe in solutions to be made by exceptional individualities. The need to reconceptualize the transformative strategies for enhanced security looms thus larger on the academic radars for change management.

This paper is part of a Doctorate in Education at Maynooth University in Ireland. Focusing on an emerging technological university, the primary research question is “How do stakeholders experience and value change leadership?” Examining the development and utilisation of a suitable conceptual framework, this paper will provide insights into the inter-relationships between organisational context, leadership, culture and change.

A systematic literature review identified that higher education has multiple change drivers, diverse cultures and various leadership approaches and characteristics. Unsurprisingly many of those discussed ‘complexity’ (e.g., Lazaridou 2019; Drew, 2010). Complexity theorists argue that many forces drive complexity, and the underlying factors are greater interconnectivity and redistribution of power resulting from information flows that are facilitating people to link up and drive change in unprecedented ways (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018).

Mason (2008a) states that complexity theory can provide descriptive and pragmatic insights well suited to educationalists and argues that complexity theory’s strength is that it draws existing educational leadership and management theory together using existing and familiar concepts. Hence, this theory was chosen as a suitable theoretical lens for this research. Mason (2008b) outlines that complexity theory looks at complex systems as open systems, which survive through evolution and adaptation. He believes that organisations are complex, with many connected elements or agents, which facilitate the sharing of knowledge through formal bureaucratic structures and informal social networks.

Grant and Osanloo (2014, p.16) argue that a ‘conceptual framework offers a logical structure of connected concepts that help provide a picture or visual display of how ideas in a study relate to one another within the theoretical framework.’ When reflecting on the purpose of this study, related literature, and gaps in knowledge, as well as the theoretical framework of complexity theory and its limitations, a change leadership conceptual framework has been developed. As well as serving as a suitable conceptual perspective for this study, it also intends to address the limitations of complexity theory identified in this study.

The framework synthesises the core areas relevant for this study. Firstly, it incorporates the themes of change drivers, context and staff identified in the literature review. Secondly, key complexity theory and complexity leadership concepts have been added. These include the primary concepts of continuity (Mason, 2008a, 2008b), emergence (Mason, 2008a, 2008b; Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018), alignment (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018), and adaptability (Mason, 2008a; Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018). Also, sub concepts of diversity (Tsai et al., 2019), feedback (Mason, 2008a; Tsai et al. 2019), networks (Mason, 2008a; Tsai et al. 2019), linking up (Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018) and sponsorship (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018) have been added where appropriate. In addition, complexity leadership components of entrepreneurial leadership, enabling leadership and operational leadership are incorporated (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKevley, 2007; Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018).

Furthermore, change leadership characteristics are important for this study and the change leadership themes of strategy, tactics, relationships, culture, and capability synthesised from literature are central to this framework as they relate to all types of change. Finally, Cameron and Quinn’s (2011) competing values of clan, adhocracy, market and hierarchy outlined in have been incorporated and link the central concept of culture and other change leadership themes to the other primary concepts through these values. The competing values framework dimensions have also been included (external focus and differentiation, stability and control, internal focus and integration, flexibility, and discretion).

It is hoped that the proposed conceptual framework will be considered by other HEIs so that a better understanding of the complexities of change leadership in higher education can be gained.

Writing about the relevance, position and contribution of research and teaching in the humanities and, to a growing degree, the social sciences also, seems to reach back at least 200 years, if not into the Middle Ages (e.g., Gengnagel & Hamann, 2014). However, also in younger times, academic publications have not shied away to problematize this topic, and disciplines and faculties on the social sciences and humanities (SSH) spectrum are consistently being argued to face an uncertain future and are experiencing increasing pressure to justify their relevance and contribution towards universities and society (e.g., Barnett & Nixon, 2012; Biesta, 2015; Nussbaum, 2016).

The wealth of publications about SSH seems to be growing, and the corpus of writings can only be described as diverse. Authors have both underpinned and challenged notions of whether SSH is in crisis in terms of students and graduates (e.g., Roberts, 2021); others have added nuance through differentiating sites and arenas of the debate (e.g., Meranze, 2015). Also, notable efforts have been made to propose and implement evaluation and performance measurement systems that cater to the specific attributes of SSH knowledge production and dissemination (e.g., Johansson et al., 2020). However, what has not been noted in detail so far is that these writings, produced by the scholarly community, themselves can be seen as interpretations of the situation of SSH, thus contributing to and shaping the discourse around SSH’s future. Moreover, they must be understood as a reaction to political decisions, economic rationalities, and societal expectations, thus shifting and evolving over time.

It must be acknowledged that discourses on SSH have unfolded in different parts of the world over the last fifty years. Notably, a strong North American tradition can be traced, with publications specifically diving into the role and relevance of the US college systems and the integration of liberal arts (e.g., Franke, 2009; Harpham, 2005). The heavy debates in some of the American publications around declining student numbers in SSH programs can furthermore be interpreted as an effect of a heavily monetized private university sector (e.g., Meranze, 2015). In contrast, the European perspective seems to be influenced more by the interplay between universities and the welfare state as their primary source of economic revenue, and the European Union as the supranational funding source to the higher education sector. Concomitantly, other topics have come to the fore, such as the measurement of impact and relevance of SSH for society (e.g., Sivertsen, 2016) or the contribution SSH can make to the progress of innovation in Europe (e.g., Felt, 2014). For analytical clarity, we are focusing our analyses on academic writings originating in and/or elaborating about SSH in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

Against this backdrop, the current paper reports on two studies aimed providing insights into the state, development, and topicality of the academic discourse on the role, relevance and organization of social sciences and humanities over the last 50 years, as expressed in academic writings.

This study aims to investigate and compare the strategies employed by Kazakhstani universities in diversifying their revenue streams, with a specific focus on the alignment between these practices, institutional strategic planning, and government policies.

Given this purpose, this study aims to address the following question: To what extent do Kazakhstani universities align their revenue diversification practices with their strategic planning and adhere to government policies, and how does this alignment impact their financial sustainability and overall effectiveness?

This study will employ two theories as a framework: cost-sharing and resource dependence theory (RDT). To apply the cost-sharing theory and resource dependence theory frameworks to this study, we will utilize a comprehensive approach that aligns with the research objectives. The cost-sharing theory, proposed by Johnstone (2002), suggests that higher education costs should be shared among various stakeholders, including students, parents, and the government. In the context of this study, we will examine how Kazakhstani universities distribute financial responsibilities among these key entities and assess the implications of such cost-sharing mechanisms on revenue diversification.

Simultaneously, RDT introduced by Pfeffer and Salancik (2003) posits that organizations must adapt to the requirements of their key resource providers for survival. In the case of universities, these providers include students, government funding, and other external sources. This framework will guide our exploration of how Kazakhstani universities strategically align their revenue diversification practices with external resource dependencies and whether these strategies are in harmony with institutional objectives and governmental policies.

By applying these frameworks in tandem, we aim to unravel the intricate relationships between revenue diversification, strategic planning, and government policies in Kazakhstani universities. This holistic approach will shed light on the effectiveness of current practices, providing valuable insights for both academic research and policymaking in the higher education system of Kazakhstan.

The study explores how program and department leaders in academic institutions in Israel and the Czech Republic manage during a crisis, reflecting their perspectives on higher education policy-governance. It details the various approaches these middle managers use and their resilience.

Resilience

Resilience represents the ability to adapt and thrive in the face of adversity, challenges, and change. It includes the capacity of individuals and organizations to withstand and recover from traumatic events, such as disasters, as noted by Bonanno et al. (2010). This resilience extends to professional domains, as Grabarski (2023) illustrated, through adaptability and career resilience observations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In organizational contexts, Carmeli (2013) and Fisher et al. (2019) discuss the cultivation of resilience through leadership and organizational culture, underscoring its importance across various life and professional domains. The resilience explored in the business sector, especially during times of organizational change, is highlighted by Foerster & Duchek (2018). An industry-specific perspective is examined in the airline industry's development of resilience following the 9/11 attacks (Gittell et al. 2006), while Williams & Gruber (2017) offer a comprehensive overview of organizational resilience in crises, showcasing various strategies and approaches employed to withstand and recover from crises. The concept of leadership resilience, as explored by Forster-Duchek (2017), highlights the role of personal qualities and strategies in effectively navigating leadership challenges.

The current study focuses on the resilience of middle management levels in both countries and traces their characteristics during periods of crisis.

Departments and program heads in the academy

Traditionally, universities have been praised more for their academic prowess than their management abilities, a trend influenced by their historical societal role. In recent decades, universities have experienced profound transformations, facing a more complex external environment and evolving stakeholder demands. They've also grown larger and more complex, driven by increased student enrollment and specialized research. These shifts have led to a new paradigm in management and leadership, aligning more with a managed professional public organization model (Boer, Goedegebuure & Meek, 2010).

In this context, program and department heads occupy some of the most critical and challenging positions in higher education (Tietjen-Smith, Hersman & Block, 2020; Maddock, 2023). Heads are responsible for the daily operations of their units, including setting strategic goals and ensuring efficient functioning. They handle budgeting, resource allocation, and programmatic decisions (Machovcova et al., 2023). They build social networks and manage relationships and resources, helping their teams compete in the academic world, characterized as a quasi-market environment. Their goal is to attract students and secure research funding (Bobe & Kober, 2015; Deem, 1998).

The research questions: What are the coping characteristics of the academy's heads of the programs and departments with the challenges that include financial strains, new systems of assessment as well as COVID-19 epidemic, in the comparison between Israel and the Czech Republic? What distinguishes the resilience of the heads, and what are the causes of this?

In recent days, the examination of the international mobility and activity of teachers has been at the center of researcher attention. Unsurprisingly, the group that by population was significantly larger, student academic movement, received greater scrutiny. For instance, according to the European Commission’s 2007 survey, the examination of the countries of the European Union showed that for every international teacher trip taken on average 16 student trips took place in the given year (European Commission, 2007). Teichler’s (2011) view is that the reason why researching higher education employees may have been pushed to the background was due to the phenomenon that, as long as the internationalization strategies of universities focus more on organizing and supporting student mobility, the academic travels of teachers “evidently” are viewed by institutions as the responsibility of the individual.

Instructor mobility differs in many ways from that of student, since it is much more complex (Teichler). Thus defining it is not easy at all, it can be approached from several angles depending on its length, purpose, the motivation of the individual, and the relationship with the institution. Its effect and influence on the individual though, and through them on the colleagues, students, their own institution and their teaching, as well as on the economy are undeniable. A research carried out in 2014, based on the almost 5000 instructors’ responses who took part in the Erasmus mobility program, focused on how and to what extent the individual’s participation in mobility programs has an effect on their own, as well as their narrower and wider environment. As a result it was understood that the vast majority of respondents thinks very positively about the experience that international mobility provides them (Brandenburg, 2014).

In our study, we focused on the international mobility activities of instructors in higher education. We examined what effects of restrictive factors can be seen, which make participation in teaching and researching programs abroad more difficult. For this, we used the Central and Eastern European Teachers in Higher Education (CEETHE 2023, N=821) database. First, we were curious as to the differences between fields of study, second, the effects of various demographic factors (e.g. age, family status, children, financial standing, country of origin). Other than these, we attempted to detect the effects of restrictive factors previously discovered in early studies, thus, foreign language knowledge, embeddedness in workplace community, institutional support, the effect of support from direct colleagues, workplace burnout, or the balance between private life and work.

The goal of the study is, with the secondary analysis of the Central and Eastern European Teachers in Higher Education database, to examine the factors that obstruct university teachers from their education- and research-oriented mobility abroad. This question is actual because, though internationalization is the flagship area of higher education and many studies prove that instructor mobility has a positive effect on student mobility, still, the scrutiny of factors that promote or prevent instructor mobility falls far behind the examination of student mobility, or the analysis of the condition of foreign students studying at institutions from different aspects (like studying difficulties, cultural adaptations, language learning, etc.). Our study, therefore, focuses on the teachers.

The international mobility of students plays a crucial role in the ongoing process of the internationalisation of higher education, garnering growing attention and interest (Bista et al., 2018). This phenomenon exhibits a significant and widespread presence of international students across diverse countries (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2021). In 2019, the enrolment of international students in higher education institutions reached 6.1 million, reflecting an annual growth rate of 5.5% from 1998 to 2019 (OECD, 2021). The trends, however, were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic (Kanwar & Carr, 2020). Nevertheless, the reopening of borders has offered hope for a potential reversal in the pandemic-induced decline. New Zealand, for instance, experienced a 33% decline in international enrolments between 2019 and 2021. However, international student visa applications soared from 7,710 in October 2022 to 43,541 by July 2023 (Education New Zealand, 2022; 2023). This trend mirrors a global pattern, supported by a significant increase in international student numbers in OECD countries (OECD, 2023).

Research on the experiences of international students is crucial for informing policies and practices (Deuchar, 2022). Yet, a challenge lies in defining the term 'international student.’ This definitional challenge not only presents a semantic hurdle but also complicates the development of targeted strategies to address their diverse needs. The prevailing definition focuses on individuals pursuing education outside their home countries, often emphasizing the geographical dimension and using criteria such as visas or national affiliations (Bista et al., 2018). Despite seemingly clear criteria, the term's inherent ambiguity persists, and interpretations may vary based on the specific context in which it is used (OECD, 2021).

A common tendency is to view international students as a uniform group, hindering effective university responses (Lausch et al., 2017). Advocates for a nuanced viewpoint argue that this simplification overlooks the complexities of the international student experience (Heng, 2019). Additionally, while existing research has explored the experiences of international students, their own viewpoints and narratives have received limited attention (Koo & Mathies, 2022). Language and ethnicity are often used to generalize the identity of international students (Tavares, 2021). Broad categorizations may not fully grasp how some students shape identities in new socio-cultural settings and fail to capture how personal characteristics and experiences influence their perception of self (Tian & Lowe, 2009). Furthermore, the dominant deficit-oriented view of international students, focused on challenges and generalizations, neglects their individual identities (Tavares, 2021).

This paper reports findings from a qualitative study using phenomenology to explore the experiences of 12 international undergraduate students at a university in Aotearoa New Zealand, delving into their perspectives on being 'international.' While focused on a specific university, the insights gained have important implications for policymakers globally, nationally, and institutionally. They guide the development of more informed and tailored strategies to enhance the overall international student experience.

The findings challenge the conventional notion that the label international student should exclusively define individuals based on visa status and shared characteristics. Instead, they emphasize the nuanced complexity of international students' experiences, questioning the tendency to homogenize this diverse group. It not only identifies elements contributing to a collective group identity but also recognizes those shaping individual identities. In doing so, the study illuminates the rich diversity within the international student community in higher education, emphasizing the significance of individual experiences and unique perspectives in shaping their sense of self.

Volunteering has played a key role in the historical development of communities. It is an act of civic engagement that involves pro-social, planned and long-term behaviours with the aim of altruistically benefiting other individuals or groups in a particular organisational setting (Penner, 2002).

In the university context, volunteering is formal due to its organisational characteristics, through programmes managed by higher education institutions (HEIs) through their services or departments in collaboration with non-profit organisations (United Nations Volunteers [UNV], 2015). In general, volunteering programmes make it possible to articulate processes of collaboration and reciprocity between students, institutions and social organisations that benefit all the actors involved (Haski-Leventhal et al., 2020). In view of the challenges posed by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, volunteering expands and mobilises the university community to provide an effective response to global challenges (United Nations, 2021).

The development of transversal competencies -called in research soft skills, transferable skills or generic competencies- has become a crucial factor for the employability and social inclusion of university students in the current context characterised by globalisation, digitalisation, social exclusion, unemployment and precariousness of European and especially Spanish youth (García-Álvarez et al., 2022). These can be defined as a "dynamic combination of cognitive and meta-cognitive, interpersonal, intellectual and practical skills" that "help people to adapt and behave positively so that they can deal effectively with the challenges of their professional and everyday life" (Haselberg et al., 2012, p. 67).

In European policies, volunteering is a recurring training strategy in search of more opportunities to promote young people's social participation and employability by developing competencies in a lifelong learning approach (European Parliament and Council of the European Union, 2021). In the same way, universities have added to their agendas, alongside volunteer, service-learning or entrepreneurial initiatives, work placements or internships for students to gain experience in real learning environments (Evans & Yusof, 2022; Holmes et al., 2021).

In this sense, the Conference of Rectors of Spanish Universities (CRUE, 2021) has highlighted the need to keep working on the development of undergraduates' skills, not only through teaching projects, but also through other actions such as volunteer work. The aim is to improve their skills (upskilling) or acquire new skills (reskilling) for effective action in uncertain environments.

Reflecting the public interest of voluntary activities, the scientific literature contains numerous studies on the impact of such activities on participants' satisfaction, physical and mental wellbeing, self-awareness and self-reflection, altruism, intercultural competence, democratic participation, academic performance, moral development, social responsibility, employability, career development and higher levels of self-efficacy (Evans & Yusof, 2022; Haski-Leventhal et al., 2020; Holmes et al., 2021).

Overall, studies on the link between volunteering and the development of transversal competencies have focused on non-formal learning contexts, i.e. initiatives organised by non-profit organisations or other public or private institutions (cf. Santos Rego et al., 2018; Souto-Otero, 2016). As a result, there is less evidence that highlights the impact of these experiences from the management of university services (i.e. Khasanzyanova, 2017), particularly in the Spanish context.

In light of the above, this study aims to analyse the transversal competencies that students develop through their participation in volunteering programmes managed by higher education institutions in Spain. In this sense, the study addresses a main research question (RQ): What are the transversal competencies that students develop through their participation in volunteer activities managed by university services?

This research is the result of the specific collaboration agreement between the Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Universitat de Girona and Fundación Mutua Madrileña for the development of the study "Volunteering and Social Participation in University Studies". Ref. (2022-CL060).

The global COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected education systems worldwide, leaving an enduring impact on students across diverse grade levels. Extensive literature, including reports from the World Economic Forum (WEF, November 14, 2022) and UNESCO (2021), underscores the widespread consequences of the pandemic, revealing significant learning losses at all educational stages. Notably, lower grades have experienced more substantial setbacks than higher education (HE), particularly in subjects like Mathematics and Reading.

The swift transition from traditional to online or hybrid learning formats, imperative for curbing the virus's spread, posed considerable challenges for students. The urgency of this shift, exemplified by Portugal's one-month adaptation period, emphasized the critical need for students' access to digital resources. Unfortunately, students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds encountered heightened barriers, resulting in severe learning setbacks and diminished motivation.

A comprehensive literature review (Fricks, C. (2020), Garcia, E. & Weiss, E. (2020), UNESCO (2021), Dorn et al. (2021), Stark et al. (2022)) demonstrates the exacerbation of inequality in learning and access to Higher Education (HE) due to COVID-19.

This research builds upon prior studies exploring factors influencing academic achievement, dropout rates, and delays in HE enrollment, demonstrating how these factors vary with economic cycles. In this study, we aim to assess the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic has intensified these existing challenges. Additionally, we will evaluate the effectiveness of measures taken by the Portuguese government to address pandemic-induced learning losses by comparing academic performance trends from 2018 to 2022.

Digital learning and higher distance education programmes have surged in popularity, almost tripling from 10.6 million students worldwide in 2017 to 27.4 million by 2023, and predicted to rise further to 46.5 million by 2028 (Statista, 2023). The entry into the realm of distance learning for the first time is marked by complexities, as highlighted by Mittelmeier et al. (2019), making the initial experiences, study approaches, and adaptation strategies not straightforward or clear-cut. On the one hand, students acknowledge benefits, such as high flexibility and easy integration with other commitments (Belousova et al., 2022). At the same time, they also report facing a host of challenges, including motivational hurdles and limited student interaction (Brown et al., 2015).

The transition phase into higher education is pivotal for successful learning, whether students are studying in person or digitally (Coertjens et al., 2017). Navigating the initial study requirements effectively allows students to cultivate essential study skills, laying the foundation for successful academic pursuits (Trautwein & Bosse, 2017). However, the study start is often challenging for many students. In general, retention rates at the end of the first year of higher education show up to a quarter of students leaving their degree (see e.g., Van Herpen et al., 2020). Notably, distance learners exhibit lower success rates compared to their on-campus counterparts, as evidenced by Fojtík’s (2018) study, where only 39% of distance learning students in a computer science program successfully completed their first semester courses, compared to 64% of in-person students. For distance learners, establishing a sense of belonging to the university and course of study proves particularly troublesome, contributing to higher attrition rates than those observed among on-campus students (Canty et al., 2020).

Focusing on the period of transition into higher education is important because the more positive the experience of this period, the more likely students are to remain enrolled and persist (Haktanir et al., 2021). However, in general, there is still little international research on the transition specifically into distance education and digital learning environments, leaving gaps in our understanding of student experiences, expectations, needs, and challenges during this crucial phase and in this specific context. To consolidate existing knowledge on this topic, we are undertaking a scoping review aimed at consolidating existing knowledge on the transition into distance education in higher education settings. Our research question, “What is known about the transition into distance education in higher education settings?” will guide a methodical exploration of published sources, aiming to discern insights into this transitional process within distance education. Key concepts will be identified and classified, theoretical and empirical insights will be gathered, and content boundaries will be defined. Our ultimate goal is to translate these findings into practical guidance for distance education providers, lecturers, study advisors, and prospective students, contributing to more effective digital learning. This urgency is underscored by the growing global importance of distance education and the pivotal role the start of studies plays in fostering successful learning.

One of the most significant processes that has established Kazakhstani higher education in the global arena was entering the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and joining the Bologna Process (BP) in 2010. Being the first Central Asian country, Kazakhstan became the forty-seventh member of the EHEA. After signing the Bologna Declaration, Kazakhstani higher education switched to the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) and adopted the National Qualifications Framework (IQAA, n.d.).

The impact of the Bologna Process on Kazakhstani education is undoubtedly significant. In 2011, Kazakhstan replaced the Soviet two-tier system for training researchers, comprising the Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science degrees, with the PhD system, aligning with the European Bologna Process (OECD, 2017). This had a great impact on faculty promotion and remuneration policies in Kazakhstani universities. Awarding titles like professor and academic professor signifies the research and academic pursuits of faculty members subsequent to earning their academic degrees. The process for accrediting scientific and educational staff is a critical step in advancing within the academic sector. In the years following independence, the criteria and approach for conferring these titles, especially regarding research activities, have been modified. From 2011 onwards, a key requirement for receiving an academic title has involved publishing in globally acknowledged peer-reviewed journals featured in Scopus and Web of Science. Additionally, career policies and management processes in universities are steered by principles of accountability and transparency. The tradition of producing annual reports, accessible to the public and authored by rectors of national universities, has been established and recently expanded to include all universities in Kazakhstan (IAC, 2022). Consequently, faculty in higher education are increasingly driven to demonstrate their research effectiveness to align with the modern standards of higher education.

Even within the local policy context of Kazakhstan, there is a dearth of empirical critical research on faculty performativity in regional universities. Much research has been done in major cities and megalopolises of the country (see for example, Kuzhabekova & Mukhamejanova, 2017). This study specifically focuses on regional universities located in three provinces of Kazakhstan.

The proposed study has explored how faculty members at regional public universities adapt to and experience neoliberal reforms in the post-socialist context of higher education. The study pursued the following research question: (1) What are the changing patterns of the academic profession in regional public universities in Kazakhstan?

Numerous studies have examined the academic profession globally (Cummings, 2008; Teichler et al., 2013), but post-socialist higher education contexts remain less explored (Lee & Kuzhabekova, 2019). Notably, the prominent “Changing Academic Profession”study primarily focuses on leading educational systems, overlooking post-socialist regions (Teichler et al., 2013).

Overall, this study makes an effort to bring attention to underrepresented voices in academia, inform policy reforms that better cater to the needs of regional public universities, and contribute to the professional development and recognition of faculty members in Kazakhstan’s higher education landscape. Moreover, the study aims at contributing knowledge about changing academic professions to international literature by shedding the light on the Central Asian region as the survey had been adapted to the Kazakhstani/Central Asian post-socialist context.

In the current educational landscape, the Learn to Learn (LtL) competence stands out as a crucial element in the academic and personal formation of university students, highlighting the urgent need for curriculum design that promotes its development. This study, which is part of a broader research project focusing on the design and curricular development of this competence in university programmes, presents the results of the implementation of two methodological proposals aimed at promoting and assessing this competence.

The LtL competence, conceptualised as a personal, social and learning skill according to the guidelines of the European Competence Framework (CE, 2018), has gained crucial importance in the contemporary educational context. Its definition has evolved over time, expanding beyond the cognitive, metacognitive and affective-motivational dimensions initially considered (Pintrich, 2004; Weinstein, Husman & Dierking, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). Additional dimensions such as the social-relational (Hadwin, Wozney & Pontin, 2005; Järvelä, Järvenoja & Malmberg, 2019; Zimmerman, 2000) and, more recently, the ethical dimension (Gargallo-López et al., 2020) have been included, enriching its understanding and scope.

Given the intrinsic complexity of LtL competence, this intervention phase includes experiences aimed at validating methodologies focused on the development of specific dimensions and sub-dimensions. In particular, this study focuses on the cognitive dimension, emphasising effective information management and the use of information and communication technologies (ICT), and the metacognitive dimension, with a particular emphasis on problem solving as a fundamental strategy for developing critical and reflective skills in students.

The strategies implemented took place in specific subjects of two different university programmes. Firstly, the first year course in Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage (CRBC) addressed the specificities of this discipline and its multidisciplinary context, where problem solving is essential for academic and professional success. Secondly, attention was drawn to a second year course in the Dual Degree in Food Science and Technology / Business Administration and Management (CTA/ADE), highlighting its intrinsic relationship with information management and analysis.

The main relevance of this research lies in its contribution to the design of specific interventions that address the cognitive and metacognitive dimensions of learning-to-learn competence. The results obtained will not only provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of these strategies in different university environments, but will also provide a solid basis for future research and curriculum improvement. In this context, it is expected that this study will not only benefit the academic community involved, but will also have a positive impact on society at large by promoting the holistic development of students and preparing them for the changing challenges of the contemporary world.

In recent years, the service-learning (SL) methodology has experienced an unprecedented boom in the countries within our political and cultural sphere, creating a challenging terrain for researchers interested in studying its impact, measuring its outcomes, and even effectively developing its implementation. This pedagogy, which integrates academic learning with community service, fosters deep and meaningful educational experiences for those involved, surpassing the cognitive-social expectations of more conventional educational strategies.

The inherited university model from the past (20th century and earlier), sometimes referred to as the "ivory tower," has recently faced significant criticism from both civil society and the academic sphere due to its perceived detachment from social reality. In our immediate context, this underlying issue influenced efforts to adopt the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), the seed of more comprehensive views on learning and competency development (Santos Rego, Mella-Núñez et al., 2020).

We are talking about a paradigm shift, as the central idea promoting it is that knowledge, dynamically linked to human activity, should ideally resonate with the notion of (social) change. Therefore, it is not surprising that SL has become a significant strategy for bridging the university-community gap. However, it seems clear that its scope and effectiveness will depend largely on the quality of experiences, and it is the responsibility of the research community to discover the best strategies for these purposes.

In summary, we could discuss two predominant approaches in research on SL (Bringle, 2003): on the one hand, the comparison of subjects where the methodology is applied with those using more conventional strategies, and on the other hand, the evaluation of how different course configurations impact better or worse outcomes.

It is evident that when delving into the study of SL implementation, we encounter a rich diversity of experiences, interventions, and contexts reflecting the adaptability of the methodology. However, it is precisely in this variety where difficulties arise in evaluating the quality of courses accurately and coherently. Thus, energizing a homogeneous method to study them becomes a challenge of great relevance.

It should not be surprising, therefore, that due to this added difficulty, many studies point out the lack of research on the conceptual and operational quality of the methodology itself. Most analyze the results obtained by participants, ignoring other issues related to the form of participation (Imperial et al., 2007). Sufficient reason to consider quality evaluation a promising research line, especially if we want to ensure that SL courses achieve their goals and intensify benefits, naturally including the necessary emphasis on civic engagement.

Historically, we attribute to Sigmon (1979) the merit of establishing the first quality principles in Service-Learning. Since then, we have witnessed a sufficiently constructive dialogue that would impact future SL courses and the deliberative axis around what are, or should be, best practices in using the methodology. Despite the emergence of multiple classifications to elucidate quality programs, what matters is to show dimensions with a real impact on results.

However, the study we have conducted primarily aims to analyze the most relevant quality criteria in Service-Learning. To achieve this, we carried out a systematic literature review, specifically focusing on understanding how criteria affected real experiences. The goal is to illuminate 'key factors' that can contribute to good methodology practices, helping - in the process - to better understand the positive impact of SL in those circumstances.

This paper is framed in the Research Projects: “Service-Learning (SL) and employability of university graduates in Spain: competences for employment” (EDU2017-82629-R) and “The impact of the university in the community through service-learning projects. A study focused on reciprocity (SL)” (PID2021-122827OB-I00).

Learning to Learn (LtL) is one of the eight key competences that the European Commission proposed for education systems (EC, 2006) and this competence was described as follows:

“Learning to learn” is the ability to pursue and persist in learning […], to organise one’s own learning, including through effective management of time and information, both individually and in groups. […] awareness of one’s learning process […] identifying available opportunities […] overcome obstacles in order to learn successfully. […] gaining, processing and assimilating new knowledge and skills. […] to use and apply knowledge and skills in a variety of contexts […]. Motivation and confidence are crucial to an individual’s competence. (p. 16)

Later, the European Council reformulated this competence, setting out the “Personal, Social and Learning to Learn Competence” (EC, 2018), which places more importance on social aspects than in the earlier definition:

Personal, social and learning to learn competence is the ability to reflect upon oneself, effectively manage time and information, work with others in a constructive way, remain resilient and manage one’s own learning and career. It includes the ability to cope with uncertainty and complexity, learn to learn, support one’s physical and emotional well-being […] empathize and manage conflict. (p. 5)

The definition of LtL relies mainly on the scientific literature on Strategic Learning (SL) (Weinsten, 1988) and Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) (Pintrich, 2004; Zimmerman, 2002).

Based on a literature review, our research team developed a model on LtL, including the three classical dimensions coming from the theory about SL and SRL: Cognitive, Metacognitive and Affective-Motivational, an also the Social-Relational dimension, rooted in the social-cognitive theory (Thoutenhoofd & Pirrie, 2013). These ideas clearly influenced the current proposal of the EU (2018), who has renamed LTL as ‘personal, social and learning to learn competence’ (Caena, 2019); Sala et al., 2020).

We added to these four dimensions a fifth one, an Ethical dimension (Gargallo et al. 2020). It is necessary, to handle the learning to learn competence well, that students respect ethical codes and contribute to create an increasingly equitable society (Cortina, 2013; Buxarrais & Conceiçao, 2017).

The European Union aimed for students to achieve an adequate mastery of LtL at the end of compulsory schooling. Generally speaking, we tend to think that students manage it quite well when they start university, and that this management will improve as they continue their university studies. However, this assumption needs to be verified. It is not proved that university students handle this competence with an adequate skill, and there are some researchers who defend that they need specific training (Cameron and Rideout, 2020; Viejo and Ortega-Ruiz, 2018).

So, we believe that is very important to establish whether university students manage LtL well and to analyse its impact on academic achievement, given that there are few studies available on the topic in higher education. For this purpose, we have collected data from the research Project we are developing[1].

The aim of this work is to concrete the level at which this competence is managed, and also to delimit profiles of LtL use by university students and their relation to academic performance.

Based on these data, we are developing in our current research project an intervention model for teaching this competence, which may be useful for European researchers and university teachers.

[1] ‘The learning to learn competence in the university, its design and curriculum development. a model of intervention and its application in university degrees’ Project PID2021-123523NB-I00, funded by the MCIN/AEI /10.13039/501100011033 and by ERDF A way of making Europe.

Higher education is essential for economic and social mobility (Brown, 2013). First-generation college students (FGCS) are students who are the first in their families to pursue higher education (Garriott & Nisle, 2018). For FGCS, being a college student means having to contend with more potential stressors throughout their higher education (Garriott & Nisle, 2018). Furthermore, FGCS are more likely to drop out than non-FGCS (Fletcher et al., 2022). Compared to non-FGCS, FGCS are disadvantaged in terms of academic achievement and sense of belonging at college (Wilbur & Roscigno, 2016). A notable percentage of FGCS come from ethnic minority groups (Longwell-Grice et al., 2016). This combination, of being FGCS and an ethnic minority, is associated with adversities in terms of academic achievement, wellbeing, and academic stress (Williams et al., 2024). Additionally, it highlights the importance of targeted interventions for ethnic minority FGCS as underrepresented group (Gehringer et al., 2022).

There is a growing recognition regarding psychosocial resources with which a student can manage the challenges required for successful integration into academic studies (Phillips-Berenstein et al., 2023). The Psychosocial Readiness for College (PRC) model and measure (Phillips-Berenstein et al., 2023), describes six psychosocial resources that ease the challenges of academic performance and enable academic persistence: (a) academic self-efficacy; (b) educational commitment; (c) social comfort; (d) campus engagement; (e) self-discipline; and (f) resilience. Based on the research of Robbins et al. (2004), we aimed in the present research to add an additional factor: (g) institutional commitment, referring to a student’s commitment to study in the current higher education institution and their preference for the current institution over others. Phillips-Berenstein et al. (2023) found that FGCS were higher than non-FGCS in educational commitment and self-discipline. Additionally, they found that students with low levels of educational commitment, social сomfort, and campus engagement are two to three times more likely to dropout of college (Phillips-Berenstein et al., 2023).

An additional factor that may affect optimal college integration is the meaning individuals ascribe to higher education. The Higher Education Orientations model and measure (HEO; Willner et al., 2023) is conceptualized with five distinct purposes for attending college: (a) gaining a profession; (b) gaining knowledge; (c) external pressure; (d) prestige; and (e) social networking. Willner et al. (2023) used the HEO questionnaire among deliberating young adults and college applicants to see how these factors affected their career decision making process. According to their research individuals seeking to gain profession and knowledge were found to use productive coping strategies and were further along the decision-making process. Contrary, individuals leaning more towards the social, prestige, and external orientations faced more career decision-making difficulties, used nonproductive coping strategies, and were farther behind the decision-making process (Willner et al., 2023).

The Present Research

The intersection of being an ethnic minority and a FGCS may lead to heightened levels of disadvantages. This highlights the importance of understanding two essential factors concerning integration and persistence in higher education: psychosocial readiness for college and higher education orientations. Despite their importance, they have not been studied among ethnic minority FGCS and non-FGCS. Thus, the first goal of this study is to test differences in psychosocial readiness for college and higher education orientations among FGCS and non-FGCS Arab ethnic minority first year college students in Israel. The second goal is to test how these factors predict academic satisfaction one year later. Examining these factors enriches the knowledge about ethnic minority FGCS and non-FGCS, which may contribute to other ethnic minorities. Considering the contribution of academic satisfaction to college persistence, understanding the link between the studied factors and academic satisfaction can enrich the knowledge about college attrition.

The concept of internationalisation is complex and contested, embodying diverse interpretations and perspectives that vary significantly across higher education. Marginson (2023) has recently explored the dominant understandings of internationalisation and highlighted the contradictions and limits of internationalisation, noting the importance of understanding the interactions between concepts such as internationalisation and the ‘larger and changing environment’ (Marginson, 2023 p.2). Internationalisation in higher education is influenced by its social, political and cultural environments and globally we are experiencing an era of extreme uncertainty, what Stein (2021) characterises as the volatility, unpredictability, complexity and ambiguity of contemporary societies. There are complex issues which mean that existing paradigms for internationalised higher education are becoming inadequate (Stein, 2021, p.482). This complexity of current global challenges raises the question of the role of international higher education in solving these issues and whether higher education can or should operate for the common good (Locatelli and Marginson, 2023).

As a crucial element in Higher Education, internationalisation can offer connective ways of creating relevant knowledge around some of the uncertainties and challenges which we face. Internationally and culturally diverse research and knowledge production (including diversity in disciplinary knowledge; methodological diversity; ethnicity; gender; or race) is integral to ‘good’ science (Olenina et al, 2022). Therefore, the role of internationalisation in knowledge generation is a crucial part of the higher education research and science picture (McGloin, 2021). Moving across and within boundaries, mobile staff and students can act as ‘knowledge brokers’ enabling universities to generate new knowledge relating to global issues through their participation in research, capacity building and internationalisation (Bilecen and Faist 2015, p.218).

However, internationalisation has developed against a background of global divisions and long-standing patterns of inequalities in power, wealth, and cultural influence (Connell, 2007, p. 212; Stein, 2021) and current fragile global relations are intensifying the precarity of international research collaborations, for instance between China and the US (Postiglione, 2021) and across Europe (Courtois and Sautier, 2022). Mobility as part of internationalisation also encompasses immobilities and alongside forced migrations due to political persecution and war, there are asymmetries in resources for higher education and previously colonised contexts continue to experience epistemic injustices (Marginson and Xu, 2023).

This paper focuses on an analysis of the ways in which internationalisation is changing against the current volatile geopolitical context. Considering the lack of plural, democratic and reflexive cross-border relations in higher education, it aims at contributing to critical reflections which have highlighted the need to promote alternative and more equitable approaches to the definitions and practices of internationalisation (Stein, 2021). We centre this exploration on Europe and begin ‘at home’ with one Italian university, and explore the past, current and planned internationalisation activities of this university across Europe and beyond. As well as investing significant resources in the internationalisation of education, and the establishment of a dedicated Centre for research in internationalisation, the university in question is part of a Strategic Alliance of Catholic Research Universities (SACRU) whose mission is to foster global cooperation amongst the partners located in 31 campuses around the world, aiming to advance research and teaching excellence through global collaboration. In this paper we analyse and map the complex ways in which internationalisation is reforming itself in one discipline, that of Education, and we particularly focus on engagement for ‘common good’ against the changing and volatile picture of international and geopolitical relations. We will draw from this picture some implications for the meanings and purposes of contemporary internationalised higher education and consider how internationalisation can engage with the volatile, unpredictable, complex and ambiguous world in which we live (Stein, 2021).

In this conceptual essay, I provide a metaphysical critique of the “international(ization)” logic pervading global higher education (HE), by introducing and probing how the nation-state ‘worldsense’ dominates international(ization) of HE practices and policies. I use worldsense as opposed to “worldview”, borrowing from Yoruba feminist scholar Oyèrónké Oyĕwùmí (1997, 2–3) who explains, the term worldsense is more conducive to indigenous ways of knowing and being. While many have debated the role of nation-state or national scale as a unit of analysis in global HE research, practice, and policy (Shahjahan & Grimm, 2023; de Gayardon, 2022; Komutzky, 2015; Marginson, 2022), the nation-state worldsense (an onto-epistemic grammar) remains unpacked and unchallenged. By such a grammar, I mean a dominant set of assumptions, related to the ‘nation-state’ category, such as anthropocentrism, bounded spatial containers, statist ontology, linearity, and singular notions of human progress (material accumulation, social mobility and so on) (see Anderson, 2006; Burke, 2013; Walby, 2003). Such a worldsense defines what is real, ideal, desirable and knowable, thus structuring ways of knowing/being. Drawing on Anderson’s (2006) notion of “imagined communities” and affect theory, I unpack the ways in which the nation-state as a category (and an entity) comes to being and informs globally facing HE policies (“internationalization” policies) and practices (i.e., engaging with “international” students).

The “international” was an adjective coined by Jeremy Bentham in 1780 to help capture the kinds of laws that would govern the relations between sovereign states (1780) (Suganami, 1978). “International”, as originally conceived, was thus a means to articulate a phenomenon that happened between two separate self-contained entities (i.e. sovereign states). Where does the nation-state world sense come from? A brief history of the “nation-state” idea reveals that it came from both Europe and Spanish Colonies in Latin America in the 17th and 18th centuries (Vergerio, 2021). Through decolonization movements in the 1950s, and sovereign states replacing empires worldwide throughout the 1970s, the nation-state ontology of space became the norm of the international order, obscuring the role of other polities. Instead, the nation-state world-sense reifies the nation-state category by identifying “a political or social unit with a territorial unit” and “leaves no room for other polities in this physical space” (Walby, 2003, p. 540). As such, the nation-state worldsense, as a statist ontology, underlies the emergence of the nation-state category as the signifier for a political unit of material space (i.e., self-contained, borders) to help consolidate power. The nation-state worldsense also helps constitute a signifier of “imagined communities” as mental and emotional spaces (Anderson, 2006). More specifically, the nation-state world sense helps construct the idea of shared origins, mutual interests and horizontal comradeship, binding strangers from different communities together—via language, history, culture, religion, or ethnicity. The nation-state world-sense acts as a velcro that ties particular bounded spaces to ideas, shared origins or cultures, and/or groups of people with each other.

I also draw on 'affect' theory as a conceptual resource to offer an ontological understanding of the nation-state referent and its related markers and processes (e.g., international students or offices, internationalization policies) as they emerge in relation to each other. By the term ‘affect’, I emphasize the ‘becoming’ properties of affect (Ahmed, 2013; Seigworth & Gregg, 2010), in that affect brings objects (i.e., an international student) into being by making them ‘sticky’ through encounters with other objects, e.g., national actors, or institutional policies or practices. I am suggesting that the nation-state worldsense underlies these encounters helping surface, articulate, and solidify these various entities in global HE. The nation-state worldsense is the velcro that helps stick and mediate these mutual encounters.

This study examines university teachers’ notions of knowledge and knowers in higher classical music education during a curriculum renewal process in a Finnish higher education context.

Knowledge in music has been distinguished between theory and technique already from Greek philosophers such as Aristotle (McPhail, 2022). This divide is still visible in music education. It is also claimed that higher music education has been based on the conceptions of craftsmanship and artistic skill (Moberg & Georgii-Hemming, 2019). More recently, the process of academization has raised the question of knowledge and knowledge practices in higher music education especially in the European context (Johansson & Georgii-Hemming, 2021). It is argued the traditional knowledge of music is not enough in the future society (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2021; López-Íñiguez & Bennett, 2020), the future of classical musicians is unclear and employment conditions are changing (Moberg & Georgii-Hemming, 2019). Higher music education institutions are asked to redefine their work and consider “how they engage with students in changing societies” (Gaunt & Westerlund, 2021).

Knowledge of craft in classical music is traditionally taught and learnt in master-apprentice relationship that is a hierarchical relationship between a master and student (Angelo et al., 2019; Gaunt, 2011). In this process, a student acquires some of the master’s knowledge and skills and becomes part of the musical community (Angelo et al., 2019). It is argued the tradition is based on imitation and reproduction as ideals (Georgii-Hemming et al., 2020). Consequently, the individuals involved in the learning process, both the ‘master’ and the student, hold a distinct significance in the acquisition of knowledge practices within the realm of arts. In arts education students are deeply engaged with the context where the knowledge is processed (Shay & Stayn, 2015). It is described that knowledge in the arts exists in individuals, communities, networks, bodies, objects (Orr & Shreeve, 2018) and in tools and materials (Addison, 2014; Sennett, 2008).

In this study, we approach curriculum renewal as a process where knowledge practices are negotiated in the academic community (see e.g., Annala, 2022; Bovill & Woolmer, 2019). This context enables us to explore the underlying conceptions of knowledge and knowers in the contemporary higher music education. The research questions are: What is viewed as legitimate educational knowledge in higher music education? How the relationships between knowledge and knowers are depicted?

The theoretical and methodological framework in the study is based on Karl Maton’s (2014) Legitimate Code Theory (LCT). Maton continued Bernstein’s (1996) theory of knowledge structures. It describes a way of developing and producing knowledge. In the humanities and arts, the knowledge structure is said to be horizontal. Knowledge is described as a series of parallel but strongly delimited approaches. Knowledge develops by adding a new approach alongside existing ones. However, according to McPhail (2022), knowledge in music theory is hierarchical which means the concepts must be obtained in successive order, but, on the other hand, approaches to composition and performance in music are more horizontal. Maton (2014) claims that focusing only on knowledge and the knowledge structure may simplify and overlook the strengths of some fields. Attention should also be paid to knowers and knower structure. Although knowledge structure is horizontal in the arts, knower structure is claimed to be hierarchical. Hierarchically structured knowers are organized in relation to the ideal knower. Therefore, in this study we build on the so-called Specialization code in the LCT theory (Maton 2014), which includes both knowledge and knower structures as analytical perspectives.

Perspective(s) or theoretical framework

Research on generic skills has been taking on increased importance in higher education over the last decade (Tuononen et al., 2022; Van Damme & Zahner, 2022). Generic skills refer to universal expert skills applied across different disciplines and contexts of jobs (Tuononen et al., 2022). These skills together with domain-specific knowledge enable students to draw on their field-specific knowledge in a variety of situations (Ursin et al., 2021). There is no one definitive list of generic skills; instead, this is a unifying term under which sets of skills belong. While remarkable variation in concepts and operationalization of generic skills have been found (Braun et al., 2012; El Soufi & See, 2019; Tuononen et al., 2022), researchers have acknowledged the importance of learning generic skills in the context of higher education. For example, there is evidence that generic skills are related to adjustment and adaptation to higher education (Kleemola et al., 2022; Van der Zanden et al., 2019) and progress in studies and study success (Tuononen & Parpala, 2021). Additionally, earlier research has suggested that a student’s background—both educational and socioeconomic—has a strong influence on the level of generic skills (Arum & Roksa, 2011; Kleemola et al., 2022; Ursin et al., 2021).

Since generic skills research is mainly conducted using self-assessments, the research field has stressed the need for more performance-based research (Tuononen et al., 2022). Performance-based assessment aims to evoke authentic performance, covering aspects of generic skills through situations that resemble the real world (Hyytinen et al., 2023; Van Damme & Zahner, 2022). Previous research on performance-based assessment has shown that test-taking effort and engagement have a substantial impact on test performance (Hyytinen et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2016).

Objectives

Generic skills of higher education students have been assessed through the CLA+ (Collegiate Learning Assessment) in a number of countries, including the United States (where it is used extensively) and Finland. CLA+ is a performance-based assessment of generic skills such as critical thinking and written communication, directed particularly to higher education students. The assessment is accompanied by a survey of students’ demographic background, attitudes, and fields of studies.

Comparisons of the assessment results of entering and exiting higher education students in Finland and the US have shown that while students from both countries exhibited learning gains in generic skills (i.e., there was a significant difference in the overall gain of these skills between entering and exiting students), this overall gain was clearly larger among the American students (Ursin et al., 2021). The purpose of this study is to further investigate a reason behind this finding. We consider variables measuring students’ effort and engagement in the CLA+ as well as sociodemographic variables such as students’ gender and parental level of education, and whether students’ primary home language is the same as the instructional language of the institution.

This research attempts to answer two questions:

1. In what way are the overall gains in generic skills between the entering and exiting students different in the two countries?
2. Are there background variables that can explain the possible difference in gain between the two countries?

The focus of this workshop is to analyse the experience of academic staff, and the impact of the changes taking place at the university on their teaching practices, professional identity, well-being and career paths in three different European universities. This workshop is based on the findings from an international research project “Pathways of academics in the context of educational innovations and institutional changes. Exploring professional lives, identities, experiences and well-being” (2021-2023). This project is the result of the international research collaboration with researchers from Malta University and two research groups: ÕPPES TECH-METH (Tallinn University) https://eduspace.tlu.ee/en/learn/ and Higher Education in Transition (HET) research group https://research.tuni.fi/het/ from Tampere University.

Higher education institutions across Europe have been the subject of continuous transformation. Many higher education reforms, institutional innovations, and revised institutional focus have produced profound changes to academic roles and work (Deem & Lucas 2007). Higher education institutions and academic staff are being continuously challenged due to these kinds of changes to re-define their roles, practices and identities. The socio-cultural paradigm (James and Biesta 2007) explains the development of identity and experience concerning environments and relations between people and groups. Contextual factors may strengthen or constrain academic development possibilities. For example, Lankveld et al. (2017) have identified various levels of contextual effects in their review, ranging from students, the direct work environment, and staff development activities, to the wider context of higher education. Adapting to these changes and new roles always involves re-considering and re-constructing professional identities.

What it is to be an academic is at risk in a changing environment when there is no automatic respect for academic values, especially when they have not been articulated clearly (Blackmore 2009, 3). The changes taking place at universities are affecting the well-being of academic staff, entrenching existing professional identities and thus teaching and learning cultures and practices. At the same time, identities are variable and evolve in parallel with teaching practices. Teaching practices are mainly formed through experience and are part of both the professional identity of the university teachers and the institutional culture of learning and teaching in the university. The professional identity influences how academic teachers teach and support student learning. Academic staff need to meet high standards of academic excellence and professionalism, to understand how to support student learning, be able to do this in real teaching practices, and use novel educational and technological approaches.

The theoretical-conceptual framework of our study is based on neo-institutional (Scott 2008) and socio-cultural approaches (James et al. 2007), learning culture theory (James & Biesta 2007), and the cognitive model of change (Spillane et al 2002). Forming the identity means becoming aware of what matters most in their professional practice and what experience, values, relations, and interests shape the development of identities (Trede, Macklin & Bridges 2012). There is tension between personal identities and the university environment surrounding it. The significance of the identity of academic staff is related to how their identity may contribute to their teaching and research practice, and how they experience the university environment, relations and well-being. The interplay between the identity, teaching-researching practice and the university environment has not been much explored in an international context (Jõgi et al 2020). As researchers, we are interested in the comparative aspect of this problem. Therefore, the purpose of this workshop is to critically reflect on the interplay between the experience, identity and teaching-researching practice of university teachers and the university environment in the context of three European universities: Tallinn University, Estonia; Tampere University, Finland and Malta University, Malta.