I enjoyed the Universities Australia conference, especially listening to academic managers doing what we do best – making simple things complicated.
Part of the meeting was devoted to discussing whether universities have lost ‘social licence’, and what should be done.
I think the answer is quite simple and wonder whether you will agree.
My thoughts took shape when one speaker pointed out that organisations “gain trust when they deliver on their purpose”.
So, what is the purpose of universities?
Surely, it has always been LEARNING – helping students learn current knowledge via TEACHING, and generating new learnings through RESEARCH.
But in the last few decades something has been added to this purpose – a clue was in the name of the conference, the Universities Australia SOLUTIONS Summit.
Today the purpose of universities is often framed as solving the world’s problems.
This makes sense because new knowledge can help solve many problems.
But here is my point – have we expanded our purpose so far that we can no longer deliver on it?
I think we started introducing this big purpose in order to demonstrate that we are worth more investment. In the old days university costs were manageable. When universities first began, students paid lecturers directly. Later colleges were established with land grants, and often generated ample income from their estates.
But recently higher costs, associated with the increasingly sophisticated infrastructure for both teaching and research, have changed things. Universities have increasingly courted external funders.
For the most part this has worked very well. The partnerships have been mutually beneficial. They have enriched life within universities, as ivory towers have been broken down, and society has benefited as learnings have been translated.
In countries like China, which is intent on lifting the standard of living of its citizens, strong investment continues. But in the West, where the urge to catch up with leading nations is not an incentive (though a fear of falling behind should be), the relationship between universities and their funders (primarily governments) is not going as well.
Accordingly, many universities have elevated their rhetoric, highlighting their ability to solve the world’s most difficult problems. Some universities now frame themselves as addressing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
While this big new purpose can be inspiring, I wonder if it is eroding the trust between university managers and our stakeholders – academics at the chalk face, our students, and are partners across society.
Imagine you are a dedicated maths lecturer, and have had a career equipping generation after generation of students with vital learnings, enabling graduates to go out and to contribute to society in engineering, science, health, business, and beyond. It may be hard to see how your daily teaching and research work fits into your university’s strategic plan, which like the UA Solutions Summit, may emphasise solutions to grand challenges, not learning.
Imagine you are a student. You may wonder why the university talks so much about the UN development goals, and less about your curriculum, lecturers, and assessments.
Imagine you are a politician or a member of the public. You could be forgiven for asking – how are we going in terms of actually solving big problems like climate change, environmental stability, energy, cancer, Alzheimer’s, justice, equality, sexism, racism, the costs of living, etc?
I think you would conclude that universities do genuinely make contributions to all these problems, but just as citizens sometimes despair that their governments are not doing enough, when universities take on the problems of governments, you might conclude that universities are letting you down and not delivering on their promises.
You might want to vote us out rather than voting for tax increases to better fund universities.
Many university managers understand all this, so they seek to build their own revenues.
They sometimes enrol more and more international students or establish new offshore campuses. These endeavours, which make perfect sense if you are trying to balance the books to protect your staff and students from cuts, may seem irrelevant or even harmful to your local stakeholders.
Additionally, since grand challenges are often seen as left-leaning, people may conclude that universities have become politically biased, although in fact we have many traditionalists (but they naturally attract less media attention than those studying radical ideas).
When you mix in a series of surveys that highlight the fact that universities, like all parts of society, are far from perfect in terms of eradicating from their campuses the very problems they say they are committed to solving – e.g. sexism, racism, and injustices – trust erodes further.
I do believe that we need to define our purpose more narrowly so we can deliver on it. We need to work harder to communicate and celebrate our teaching and our specific research achievements.
If we can do that, I can see two benefits.
Firstly, there are always spinoffs from learnings – expert graduates, as well as widgets, industries, and specific solutions to smaller problems that have big costs (e.g. the Gardasil vaccine, WiFi, income contingent HECS loans).
But there will be another benefit. Concentrating on learning, especially by listening to interesting stories, is a human quest in itself, a purpose in itself, it gives life meaning, it generates thought provoking new ideas as well as wealth, and it distracts us from attacking each other and squabbling over existing resources and existing ideologies.
I hope I will ultimately convince you all that it is worth investing more in learning in Australia – Minister – if you’re listening!
Professor Merlin Crossley is Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic Quality) at UNSW