Leadership, Culture and Change in Higher Education: Theory and Practice in East Asia

This theme issue will examine change in higher education in East Asia with a focus on six national contexts: Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam, Singapore and Malaysia. During the past decade East Asian universities have made concerted efforts to step up onto the next rung of the global ladder in developing their capacities in teaching and research. Competition for international ranking, adoption of global standards of practice, and integration into international systems of quality assessment and accreditation all reflect the mission of East Asian universities to increase quality and competitiveness. This special issue bridges theory and practice by offering insights into policy contexts as well as implementation strategies employed by university leaders in the region. While the papers focus centrally on issues of leading change aimed at quality improvement in East Asian universities, the analyses are informed by discussions of how the cultural context shapes the implementation strategies and results. The authors contributing to this issue are well-known international academics and include

1. To examine the policy context that is framing change in higher education in the East Asia region,
2. To explore conceptions of quality in higher education that are gaining a currency in the region,
3. To examine how university leaders are implementing institutional change in the region,
4. To examine how the cultural context of is impacting efforts of East Asian universities to implement change.

This issue of the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management presents readers with a world voyage, as it comprises nine papers by authors from the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom, Portugal, the United States of America, and Australia. The topics covered by authors are as wide-ranging as the countries of origin of those authors. Job satisfaction is an important issue, and one would hope that all university employees are job satisfied, including Irish accountancy academics. Given the allegedly parlous state of the Irish economy, perhaps job stress is more prevalent now than in the past. Aamir Ali Chugatai and his colleagues present the balance sheet on this issue. Across the Irish Sea, and still seeking ‘balance’, John Taylor and Claire Baines present a lucid description of the use of the Balanced Scorecard approach to performance management in the United Kingdom. Heading south, a paper from Portugal reinforces the global nature of higher education. Sónia Cardoso and her colleagues present results of research into students' perceptions of quality assessment. Results in this paper have been percolated from a large number of semi-structured interviews. Across the Atlantic, James Monks examines job turnover of university presidents (aka vice-chancellors, aka rectors) in the United States. Monks' analysis finds that public university presidents' odds of leaving office are about 50 per cent higher than are their private university presidents. I don't think I'd be alone in having worked at a university where turnover at the very top didn't happen quickly enough! I have one specific instance in mind. Next, the paper by Australian Andrys Onsman, currently working for an English university in China, provides a stopover in the voyage to Australia. China is currently expanding and opening up its higher education sector, with the aims of increasing access and resourcing, improving scholarly outcomes and reducing official interference. These reforms are underpinned by Confucian philosophy Communist Party of China ordinances. Four papers from Australia, including two brief commentaries, complete the offerings in this issue. First, Franklin Obeng-Odoom considers housing the myriad international students drawn to Australia in their quest for higher education. About one-quarter of Australia's onshore student population is made up of students from abroad, so affordable housing in a new land is a crucial component of this important facet of international trade. Mark Pearson is a student counsellor, and presents evidence from the literature on the value of increasing counselling and mentoring care for higher degree research students. Attrition rates, especially in PhDs in the humanities and social sciences, are particularly high. Our sector could both save scarce funds and nurture more postgraduates if that attrition could be reduced. Still on the topic of research students, Graham Irvine wonders why it can take so long for PhD examiners' reports to come in. Is it reasonable for a student to have to wait nine months for results? I think not! What do you think? Last word in this issue has been left to a short piece ‘discovered’ by Australian academic Dr Richard Hil. In a mere 1,000 words, it presents an allegory of contemporary Australian higher education. In style and content one is reminded of disappeared author Joseph Gora, whose elucidations have been presented in this journal in the past. As always, your comments and (constructive) criticism will be gratefully received.

Ian R. Dobson

Editor

The issue co-editors are experienced academics who possess experience in both Eastern and Western universities. Professor Hallinger was formerly Professor of Leadership and Organizations at Vanderbilt University, Chief Academic Officer of the College of Management at Mahidol University in Thailand, and currently Director of the Asia Pacific Centre for Leadership and Change at the Hong Kong Institute of Education. He has worked in universities in East Asia for 20 years. Prof. Hallinger has also successfully edited issues of a number of respected international education journals including Educational Administration Quarterly, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Journal of Educational Administration (twice) among others. Professor Tjeldvoll was formerly a Professor of Management at the University of Oslo and more recently has been Professor of Management at National Chi Nan University in Taiwan.

Letter from the Special Issue Co-Editors

Professor Philip Hallinger
TSDF Chair Professor of Leadership
College of Management, Mahidol University
Thailand
Senior Research Fellow
Asia Pacific Centre for Leadership and Change
The Education University of Hong Kong
China

: hallinger@gmail.com

Professor Arild Tjeldvoll
Professor of Management
National Chi Nan University
Taiwan
Senior Research Fellow
Asia Pacific Centre for Leadership and Change
The Education University of Hong Kong
China

: arild.tjeldvoll@ncnu.edu.tw

The issue contributors are all experienced academics with extensive records of publication. All hold the rank of Professor or Chair Professor and have had experience not only as academic but also as senior university administrators. They will bring both scholarly perspectives and practical experience to bear on the issues of leading change in universities in East Asia.

Professor Kerry J. Kennedy
The Education University of Hong Kong
China

( Corresponding author )

Conceptualizing Quality Improvement in Higher Education:
Policy, Theory and Practice for Outcomes Based Learning in Hong Kong
DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2011.564995

Abstract

‘Policy borrowing’ continues to be an important factor in the construction of higher education policy in East Asia. This has meant that many post-colonial societies have continued to look to the West for models that will assist them to reengineer their universities in the quest for crating world class institutions. It is against this background that Hong Kong’s University Grants Committee adopted an outcomes based approach to teaching and assessment in 2006 and gained support from institutions under its responsibility for doing so. Supported with ample resources, the subject of numerous public symposia and incorporated into regular quality audit assessments, outcomes based approaches to teaching and assessment are in the process of becoming part of Hong Kong’s distinctive approach to higher education reform. This paper will review the policy context in which this initiative emerged, analyze institutional responses to it and provide a case study of how it was adopted in a single institution and how this case was similar to and different from similar attempts in other Hong Kong institutions. The multiple adaptations of outcomes based teaching and assessment provides some insight into understanding reform agendas and the resilience of universities in responding to them.

Change Leadership in Universities: The Confucian Dimension
DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2011.564997

Abstract

The intensified competition of the global, market-based knowledge economy requires changed leadership practices in universities and colleges everywhere in the world. National policy makers increasingly see knowledge as the core resource and dynamic of modern economies, and prerequisite for nations’ global competitiveness. The main source of productivity and competitiveness is knowledge production and production of human capital. Universities are seen as “power stations” for these production needs. By implication, the quality of their leadership turns crucial. At the core of organizational change is the quest for a renewed capacity to make relevant decisions about visions and missions, find adequate strategies for production, marketing and ways of restructuring available resources. On this backdrop it has turned interesting to wonder whether the leadership of universities located in “Confucian cultural Lands” has an advantage in the increasing global competition. Due to certain characteristics of Confucianism, university leaders in these countries may prove more effective and efficient than their competitors in other world regions in terms of changing their organizations to become more effective means for national policies. In this paper dominant university rationales are presented. Then university leadership competence is attempted linked to Confucian ideas, and it is discussed whether this is a clear-cut advantage, or, if these ideas also might be counter-productive.

Professor Mok Ka Ho
Lingnan University
China

( Corresponding author )

Professor Anthony B. L. Cheung
The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
China

Global Aspirations and Strategizing for World-Class Status:
New Form of Politics in Higher Education Governance in Hong Kong
DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2011.564998

Abstract

Professor Dato Ibrahim Ahmad Bajunid
INTI International University
Malaysia

( Corresponding author )

Leadership in the Reform of Malaysian Universities:
Analysing the Strategic Role of the Malaysian Qualifications Agency
DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2011.564999

Abstract

The paper addresses the contemporary development and reform challenges in tertiary education in Malaysia at both the national and global contexts. The politico-cultural contexts of change directions in an intensified competitive environment for quality higher education, and, for employment creation initiatives, are analyzed critically. The critical role exercised by the Malaysian Qualifications Agency in driving strategic change in Higher Education cultures is described and analyzed. The paper examines the adoption, generation and institutionalization of global standards of practice in teaching and learning and in other fundamental dimensions of the provision of quality education. In this paper contending models and rationales of universities and the contributions these institutions make to educational provisions are examined. The paper scrutinizes the collective and divergent global and parochial leadership ambitions in higher education and the agenda of various educational elites in shaping individual and societal futures. It evaluates the substance of policy debates and initiatives as well as the practical obstacles to such articulated agenda as, the democratization of higher education, the building of Malaysia as a Centre of Educational Excellence with world class universities, the fostering of innovation, research and development niches and hubs, and, the fostering of graduate attributes of intellectual character and competencies acting and responding to local needs while engaged with global matters. The analyses are informed by the development reforms in other sectors of government and society within the integrated framework of the nation’s strategic vision of development - Vision 2020.

Professor Philip Hallinger
Mahidol University & The Education University of Hong Kong
Thailand & China

( Corresponding author )

Dr. Lu Jiafang
The Education University of Hong Kong
China

Implementing Problem-based Learning in Higher Education in Asia:
Challenges, Strategies and Effect
DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2011.565000

Abstract

This paper broadly addresses the addresses the question whether learner-centered education can work in an Asian context. The paper presents a case study of implementation of a problem-based curriculum in a Master of Management program at the Graduate College of Management in Thailand. The paper describes the challenges of implementing a learner-centered strategy in an Asian institution of higher education. Drawing upon student course evaluation data collected from more than 1,500 course sections over a seven-year period, the study examines the implementation of new teaching and learning strategies from the perspective of students. The paper employs a theoretical model of change to frame the change implementation process and interpret the results. The paper suggests that overall implementation of the PBL curriculum was successful when judged by faculty and student responses. The results demonstrate that student-centered learning strategies such as problem-based learning can be used successfully in higher education in an Asian nation known for its reliance on traditional instructional approaches. The results also confirm that implementation of large-scale changes in teaching are not accomplished without leadership that overcomes obstacles with respect to the changing roles of teachers and students.

Professor S. Gopinathan
National Institute of Education, N.T.U.
Singapore

( Corresponding author )

Dr. Michael H. Lee
National Institute of Education, N.T.U.
Singapore

Challenging and Co-opting Globalization: Singapore’s Strategies in Higher Education
DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2011.565001

Abstract

Singapore, adopting a developmental state orientation, has placed a very strong emphasis on education to meet its socio-economic development needs since its independence in 1965. Yet given its resources and high levels of academic achievement, the Singapore government is only aiming at ensuring 30% of the relevant age cohort receive tertiary education in state supported universities by 2015. Other interesting features are a recent decision to establish a fourth university with significant US and PRC collaboration in 2012, following earlier collaborations with MIT, Duke, Wharton and the University of Pennsylvania. R&D spending is being ramped up and universities have become noticeably more research intensive. Singapore’s three universities are rapidly strengthening international links. In line with its aspirations to be a regional education hub, the Singapore higher education system hosts a number of prestigious institutions. In this paper, we seek an explanation for these distinctive features of the Singapore model of higher education. We ask how commonly understood features of globalization such as ranking, quality assurance etc are expressed in the Singapore context. Further, we ask what lessons, if any, can be drawn from the Singapore experience and what challenges the Singapore state faces in meeting its vision for higher education.