Mapping the Borderland of the Knowledge Society: Strategic Global Partnerships and Organizational Responses of Universities in Transition
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MAPPING THE BORDERLAND OF THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY: STRATEGIC GLOBAL PARTNERSHIPS AND ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSES OF UNIVERSITIES IN TRANSITION PETER SZYSZLO Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Globalization and International Development © PETER SZYSZLO, OTTAWA, CANADA, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Thesis Abstract iv Acknowledgements vi List of Tables viii List of Figures ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Aims and Research Question 4 1.2 Context 5 1.3 Problematic 10 1.4 Guiding Assumptions 15 1.5 Contributions 16 1.6 Structure of the Thesis 17 CHAPTER 2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 19 2.1 Globalization 22 2.2 Internationalization 24 2.3 Knowledge Society 28 2.4 Knowledge Economy 30 2.5 Internationalization through the Lens of Institutional and 33 Organizational Change CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 41 3.1 Research Design: Case Study 41 3.2 Research Questions 44 3.2.1 Selection of Location and Universities 45 3.2.2 Doctoral Schools 53 3.2.3 Demand-Side Drivers 57 3.3 Data Collection 59 3.3.1 Fieldwork 59 3.3.2 Interview Methods 61 3.3.3 Documentary Evidence 64 3.3.4 Researcher Positionality 66 ii 3.4 Data Collection Methods 70 3.4.1 Semi-Structured Interviews 70 3.4.2 Documentary Analysis 76 3.4.3 Data Analysis 77 3.5 Applying the Conceptual Framework for Data Analysis 80 3.6 Transliteration and Translation 84 3.7 Ethical Considerations 85 3.8 Procedural Challenges and Limitations 87 CHAPTER 4 KYIV-MOHYLA ACADEMY 91 CHAPTER 5 KYIV POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE 168 CHAPTER 6 TARAS SHEVCHENKO NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF KYIV 232 CHAPTER 7 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 277 7.1 Organizing Principles of Internationalization 278 7.2 Rationales 281 7.3 Strategies 292 7.4 Outcomes 306 CHAPTER 8 CONCLUDING SUMMARY AND OBSERVATIONS 314 8.1 Advancing a New Conceptual Model for Internationalization 316 8.2 Internationalization Discourses in Context 318 8.3 Reconciling the (Post-)Soviet with the Global 319 8.4 Emerging Geographies in the Europe of Knowledge 322 8.5 Future Areas of Research 325 REFERENCES 328 APPENDICES Appendix 1: Interview Schedule (English) 349 Appendix 2: Interview Schedule (Russian) 353 iii THESIS ABSTRACT Globalization has motivated universities to calibrate institutional responses for strategic purposes. Yet, specific challenges remain for Ukrainian National Research Universities insofar as the interplay between global and (post-)Soviet knowledge discourses reveal a dual framework, whereby adaptive responses to globalization and entrenched state- centered logics run parallel, and often in conflict, with one another. This study took a critical approach to identify and interpret how the phenomenon of internationalization manifested in the development of strategic partnerships, was translated and re- contextualized into structural innovations, and resulted in systemic institutional change. The thesis delves into the institutional behaviour of three flagship universities in Kyiv, Ukraine and their respective doctoral schools. The selected universities – Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Kyiv Polytechnic Institute and Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv – represent a mixture of organizational types which fall into one or more of the three education archetypes, including the Humboldtian, Soviet and Anglo-American models. These governance models allow for differentiation of institutional interpretations of internationalization and a means of capturing the various ways in which university actors negotiate their spaces of action and translate higher education discourses into practice. The analysis addresses issues of ‘hybridity’ which is not evident in this categorization. The study attempts to problematize internationalization anew by shifting focus on non-linear accounts of the phenomenon in order to comprehend the complex, multi-faceted and often contradictory ways the process plays out across different university landscapes. The inquiry employs conceptualizations combining the Delta Cycle for Internationalization (Rumbley 2010) and a new institutional approach (North 1990). The study is structured as a single-case embedded case study design as described by Yin (2015). Data were collected via 45 semi-structured interviews with university actors and higher education stakeholder agencies, including: senior administrators, mid-level leaders, faculty members and doctoral candidates. The data were supported by scholarly literature, official documents, reports, strategy papers, grey materials, policy statements, field notes, iv as well as university and ministerial websites. These data were analyzed for content and triangulated according to a modified content analysis approach. This study expands and contributes knowledge on the internationalization of higher education by distinguishing variations of how the phenomenon manifested within different university settings. It examines the place of the university as an organization that not only produces and disseminates knowledge, but assimilates and adapts global knowledge to national needs. Finally, the inquiry explores internationalization as an academic innovation and a process of institutional change which shapes academic identities and legitimizes the university as a global actor. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This doctoral thesis is the result of a many years of innovative learning and practice that I have gained in the field of international higher education. The study echoes Nerad’s (2011) assertion that “[I]t takes a global village to develop the next generation of PhDs and postdoctoral fellows.” As such, this dissertation is a continuum of an intellectual journey that I began when working on the first generation of post-Soviet higher education reforms as a Visiting Faculty Fellow with the Soros Foundation’s Civic Education Project in Belarus and Ukraine. This study is the culmination of a number of collaborators to whom I am deeply indebted. I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor Prachi Srivastava for her guidance and insight throughout the entire process of developing this thesis. Her talent and support helped shape my capacity to learn and substantially added to the quality of the investigation. Je suis également reconnaissant aux contributions de professeur Gilles Breton et professeur Philippe Régnier pour leurs collégialité, soutiens et conseils professionnels. I would also like to acknowledge the valuable contributions of Professor Iveta Silova (Arizona State University) and Professor Sanni Yaya for their role on my Thesis Advisory Committee. Special thanks go to the Shevchenko Foundation, the University of Ottawa’s Professional Development Bursary and the J.D. Hearnshaw Memorial Bursary for the generous financial support. I would also like to thank Professor Stefano Bianchini and the International Office staff at the University of Bologna for facilitating my Erasmus Mundus mobility program during the summer of 2016. The valuable insights that I gained from the UNIVIA (TEMPUS) project and exchanges with Eastern university partners added substantial perspective and depth to this study. I am especially grateful to my colleagues in Kyiv, whose ongoing efforts and dedication to the internationalization of higher education are commendable at this critical juncture in Ukraine’s history. vi Finally, I owe a debt of gratitude to my wife Iryna, our son Alex and to my family for their unwavering support and sacrifices in order to realize my lifelong dream of pursuing doctoral studies. No words can express my thanks. vii LIST OF TABLES 1 Three Higher Education Models 9 2 Organizations and Participant Profiles 71 3 Organizing Principles of Internationalization 279 viii LIST OF FIGURES 1 Synthesis of Policy Rationalities 13 2 Internationalization Cycle 37 3 Delta Cycle for Internationalization 39 ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Globalization is bringing about a redefinition to the mission of higher education and research, described as nothing less than an ‘academic revolution’ (Altbach, Reisberg & Rumbley 2010, 1). In line with this assertion, the phenomenon of globalization has acquired “many shades of meaning arising from its multiplicity of dimensions and differentiated impacts in different parts of the world” (Maringe & Foskett 2010, 1). Similarly, knowledge production has become a central element to economic development, national security and identity (Pestre 2003, 250). Thus, universities have acquired a crucial role as organizations that not only produce and disseminate knowledge, but assimilate and adapt global knowledge to national needs. Universities are major interlocutors and contributors to the global knowledge society discourse; however, for higher education systems in the former Soviet space, specific challenges remain. The coexistence of Soviet and European governance models reveals a dual framework, whereby adaptive responses to globalization and entrenched state- centered logics run parallel, and often in conflict, with one another. Since gaining independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukrainian universities have undergone a series of profound transformations. However, questions about competing academic and institutional frameworks, the changing logic of policy rationales, the adequacy and outcomes of internationalization strategies, as well as gauging Ukraine’s place in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), remain. The latter represents a space for dialogue and reference engaging its members in a process of voluntary 1 convergence and coordinated reform of higher education systems (Yerevan Communiqué