State and University Autonomy

This study focuses on university autonomy in Nigeria with a View to determining its efficacy in university administration. The study acknowledges that academic freedom and institutional autonomy are paramount to educational sector. Thus, university needs to be given full autonomy in all the three areas, that is: academic, administrative and finance.

RESUMEN La ley orgánica de universidades configura un servicio público único pero con dos estatutos jurídicos diferentes. En este trabajo, se analiza de forma crítica esta concurrencia imperfecta entre universidades públicas y privadas y se identifican los elementos diferenciales de las universidades públicas, tanto respecto de las privadas como también de las demás administraciones públicas. Sin embargo, se concluye que su singularidad no permite excluirlas sin más del ámbito administrativo a efectos constitucionales ni tampoco de las garantías comunes de los ciudadanos frente a las administraciones públicas. ABSTRACT The Spanish law of universities establishes a single service of general interest provided by two different types of institutions, each one with its particular legal statute. In this paper, this imperfect concurrence between public and private universities is analyzed in a critical way and the differential elements of public universities are identified, both with respect to private universities and other public administrations. Nevertheless, it concludes that the singularity of public universities do not allow to exclude them from the administrative scope for constitutional purposes, nor from the common guarantees of citizens against public administrations.

This book is the product of a long-standing collaborative project, one that has its roots in Almaty coffeehouses, where colleagues from KIMEP University discussed the practical aspects of the Kazakhstan’s proposed university autonomy reform. It is a joint effort of three people who have quite diverse academic, administrative, and managerial backgrounds, both locally and internationally. Its objectives of are threefold:
• To alert practitioners involved with the governance and administration of Kazakhstani universities to the challenges they can expect to face after the granting of university autonomy, including those related to the exploitation of the opportunities created.
• To identify the contending meanings that can be attached to the concept of ‘university autonomy’, and to the residual role of the state in the governance of autonomous universities.
• To articulate the key characteristics of a successful autonomous university, so as to inform the institutional response to management, financial, and academic autonomy reform.
Undoubtedly, the granting of autonomy will create many opportunities as well as numerous challenges for Kazakhstani universities. With a proper understanding of these opportunities and challenges, universities will be better prepared to transform themselves into successful autonomous universities. This book does not offer any generalized solutions, but presents “food for thought” for those who will have to deal with the autonomy issues at the systemic and university levels. It does this by identifying the challenges that require attention—and much consideration and deliberation—including the addressing of the concerns of stakeholders, and the deciding which of array of new opportunities must be exploited. It seeks to stimulate, discussion within the wider Kazakhstani university community on the practical issues associated with autonomy, so as to make individual universities better prepared for autonomy, in terms of their effective functioning and, thereby, their ability to enhance their performance—and, thus, the performance of the university system as a whole.
In its six chapters, this book covers a rich and diverse set of issues around “university autonomy”, as raised by both the Kazakhstani and international education communities over the last several decades. It offers a template of the challenges involved in shifting a university’s post-autonomy governance and educational orientation toward innovation and pro-activeness, including the introduction of new practices (embracing checks and balances); new indicators for institutional efficiency and effectiveness; and even the emergence of new professions within university administration. It also provides resources that can usefully guide further investigation. The book includes glossary of used terms and concepts, which could be useful for the practitioners in Kazakhstan and the Commonwealth of Independent States.
Its content is based on the professional experience of the authors, augmented by interviews conducted with senior university officials in Kazakhstan and United States. Structured and semi-structured interviews were focused on the interviewees’ understanding and perception of the “university autonomy”, their judgments on priorities and the importance areas of thought and action for a university facing autonomy, and their recipe for university success in the post-autonomy university sector. Each expert interviewed covered just one or two areas, while the senior university officials had more detailed interviews. The interviewees were selected based on convenience sample that included universities expecting autonomy and those that already have partial autonomy.
While this book is mainly written for the Kazakhstani community, it also may be interesting for practitioners elsewhere in Commonwealth of Independent States, and even beyond, who are facing the prospect of university autonomy.
Larissa Chekmareva, John Dixon, and Elise S. Ahn
November 2016

Graduates' retrospective program evaluations can provide relevant and reliable feedback on an institutions' performance in delivering quality instruction and services to its students. This descriptive survey research ascertains graduates' evaluations of science education program areas, including curriculum adequacy and relevance. Study participants comprised of 49 science education graduates of academic years between 2008 and 2018 who were comprehensively sampled from a state university in Central Luzon in the Philippines. A modified online survey questionnaire and an interview guide served as the main data gathering tools. Descriptive and inferential statistics and thematic analysis were used to treat quantitative and qualitative data respectively. Results revealed that the graduate respondents evaluated 10 areas of the science education program as good, indicating that the program outcomes were adequate and relevant. Moreover, the respondents provided varied suggestions for improvement of the science education curriculum. These suggestions include enhancements in instructional resources; pedagogical practice and capability; curriculum content; students' scientific literacy, and research competence. A significant positive high correlation was found between program outcomes' adequacy and relevance. The study therefore concludes that the science education program offered by the university is good, adequate and relevant. An intensive curriculum review may be considered by the university to align the program and course intended learning outcomes to the 21st Century learning landscape and to keep up with technological demands of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (FIRe).

La relación de Universidad –Estado ha sido largamente analizada a lo largo de la historia en virtud de su complejidad. Anclado en el contexto actual, este libro muestra tres formas diferentes de concebir el binomio “Autonomía – Planificación”. En un caso, el binomio de resuelve con la superación del segundo término sobre el primero. En otro, se reconoce la posibilidad de un ensamble de las partes. Una tercera visión plantea el vínculo como irresoluble, pero en tenso equilibrio. Los tres ensayos que aquí se presentan tienen la riqueza única de reflejar ideas desestructuradas, sin el requisito de la evidencia empírica propia de la producción científica. En cada uno de ellos es posible identificar concepciones diferenciadas de la universidad, del Estado y de la sociedad, provenientes tanto de diferentes perspectivas teóricas, como de procedencias disciplinares y posicionamientos políticos. Lejos de concluir con respuestas cerradas, los tres textos permiten seguir reflexionando sobre cómo lograr una adecuada relación entre el gobierno, la universidad y la sociedad que a la vez que posibilite desplegar de las instituciones sus mayores potencialidades, permita inscribir estos aportes en líneas comunes de política nacional para el desarrollo democrático de la sociedad.

The Handbook introduces and discusses key concepts in quality assurance in higher education, supplemented by examples of practices and methods from different higher education systems around the world. The examples presented, mainly from Europe, but also from Asia and North America, aim to illustrate the diversity that exists across higher education systems in the ways of addressing the issue of quality in higher education. Another specific aim of the Handbook is to facilitate the policy planning and decision making in Myanmar as part of the overall reform of the higher education system, in particular by helping to identify which questions to address in priority in the area of quality assurance and what measures to adopt and begin introducing incrementally in this area.

This practical handbook provides a concise overview of the key
aspects related to university autonomy, based on selected international
studies and other higher education policy literature. It elaborates on specific practical dimensions of institutional
autonomy that may be relevant for the reform efforts in Myanmar higher education.

Se  abordan algunos “momentos” del desarrollo del elitismo y del marxismo que implicaron un diálogo y una confrontación teórica entre ambas vertientes, recortando autores y cuestiones potencialmente fructíferos para enriquecer la búsqueda de un marco teórico pertinente para analizar la relación entre Universidad, “dirigencia universitaria”,  “clase” política, y aparato estatal.

The present work focuses on the potential conflicts that might emerge, in the university environment, between the professors’ academic freedom, on the one hand, and the exercise of the academic authorities inherent competence to organize the teachings, on the other hand. The concept of academic freedom as gathered in our university legislation is explained, as well as its two dimensions: the individual (academic freedom) and the institutional one (university autonomy). Specific cases are analyzed such as the opportunity to set up a course core program by the respective Department, the capacity to decide the evaluation method for the students, the right to teaching assignment, and whether this assignment should be a determined and specific teaching, etc.

Computer network security plays a vital role in the information and communication technology (ICT) environment. This study investigates the status of the existing network security, potential risks, and the possible solutions to the existing network problems. The descriptive research design was used using a survey questionnaire as its main instrument in the conduct of the study. Findings reveal that the current status of the network security of the State University needs improvement as it handles complex information and is important in the university’s day-to-day transactions. The university needs to undergo intensive evaluation and system analyses to ensure that their operation will not be hampered by malicious software or cyber hackers.

Tässä tekstissä erittelen ensin yksilön täyden autonomisuuden, itsemääräämisen, aspekteja, ja sen jälkeen tarkastelen kollektiivisen toimijan, kuten yliopiston, autonomisuutta. Oletus on, että itsemääräämisellä on useita puolia, jotka voivat toteutua asteittain. Tarkastelen erikseen voiko kollektiivi ylipäätään olla toimija tai päätöksentekijä, ja voiko se olla autonominen. Sen jälkeen havainnollistan erotteluita tarkastelemalla yliopistojen autonomiaa Suomen kontekstissa: millaiset seikat voivat rajoittaa yliopistojen autonomisuuden astetta? 1. Yksilön täyden autonomisuuden aspekteja Tässä alaluvussa eritellään viisi täyden autonomisuuden aspektia. 1) Autonomisuus sisältää kyvyn tehdä päätöksiä, kyvyn toimia, sekä kyvyn ottaa vastuu päätöksistä ja toiminnasta. Autonomisen elämän edellyttämät kyvyt kattavat kyvyn tehdä päätöksiä sekä kyvyn toimia. Autonominen toimija voi olla vastuussa sekä päätöksistään että niiden toteutuksesta. Toimijat voivat toimia jonkin toisen vastuullisen päätöksentekijän nimissä, olla tämän edustajia. Thomas Hobbes (Leviathan) erottaa persoonan ja "autorin", joista ensimmäinen on edustaja, toimija, ja jälkimmäinen toiminnan määrääjä tai ohjaaja-se, jonka nimissä toimitaan. Toiminnalla voi lisäksi olla kolmas taho, joka hyötyy, tai jonka vuoksi asia tehdään. Jos A B:n päätöksestä auttaa B:n tytärtä, niin tytär on hyötyjä, A toimija ja B päätöksentekijä. Tällaisissa tapauksissa A voi toteuttaa B:n autonomisia päätöksiä, jolloin B on keskeinen vastuullinen taho-A toki myös koskien ratkaisuja siinä miten B:n tavoite toteutuu. Esimerkiksi testamenteissa päätöksentekijä ei enää ole elossa, mutta kyse on silti hänen tahtonsa toteuttamisesta. Mikäli B delegoi myös päätöksenteon, se vaikuttaa B:n autonomisuuden asteeseen. Voidaan lisätä, että autonomiaan sisältyy vastuu tehdyistä päätöksistä ja niiden toteutuksesta-ja erilaisissa toimijuuden ja päätöksentekijyyden delegoimisen tapauksissa tämä vastuu jakautuu eri tavoin. Kaksi seuraavaa autonomian aspektia voidaan muotoilla seuraavasti: 2) Kyky tehdä mitä todella tahtoo tai pitää hyvänä a. synnynnäiset edellytykset, "potentiaalit" b. kasvatus, harjoitus c. sisäisten motivaatioiden ja arvostelmien hallinta d. riippumattomuus manipulaatiosta ja heteronomiasta 3) Mahdollisuus toteuttaa autonomisia päätöksiä a. lupa b. materiaaliset resurssit c. kulttuuriset käytännöt, jotka mahdollistavat mielekkään toiminnan Debateissa negatiivisesta ja positiivisesta vapaudesta autonomiaa, itsemääräämistä, pidetään yleensä yhtenä positiivisen vapauden aspektina (Berlin, Pettit, Honneth, Laitinen). Autonomia on enemmän kuin vain vapaus ulkoisista esteistä tehdä mitä huvittaa, se edellyttää myös vapautta sisäisistä pakoista ja kykyä tehdä mitä todella tahtoo tai pitää aikomisen arvoisena. Kyvyllä tehdä mitä tahtoo, on synnynnäisiä sekä kasvatukseen että harjoitukseen liittyviä edellytyksiä. Silti on luonteva ajatella, että myös ulkoiset toiminnan esteet kuten kiellot voivat rajoittaa autonomiaa. Positiivisen vapauden esteinä pidetään yleensä myös resurssien ja aitojen toimintamahdollisuuksien puutetta.

The aim of the book is to present the author’s proposals on the reform of the governance model from a holistic and functional perspective. The first task when designing a system of governance should be to identify the function that it is to fulfil, which leads on to the question of exactly why universities are meant to be autonomous. For the good of society, universities as institutions have to guarantee that the knowledge they generate and transmit does not favour the interests of any particular group. They provide a public service that must act with autonomy. This autonomy must include all decisionmaking mechanisms, the whole system of governance, so that the public service of higher education and research can be rendered as efficiently as possible and without submitting to the influence of political, economic or religious interests. On the basis of the conclusions of the study University Autonomy in Europe II. The Scorecard and the current situation of the university, research and innovation system, this study proposes a well-defined set of governance elements that cover all the dimensions of university autonomy. The study makes explicit reference to the university system in Catalonia but its conclusions and argumentation are of more general applicability.

Con motivo de la reciente crisis económica, se han tomado una serie de medidas que tenían por objeto la contención del gasto público. Estas medidas han afectado a toda la Administración Pública, incluyendo las universidades. Sin embargo, estas gozan del derecho fundamental (en palabras del Tribunal Constitucional) a la autonomía universitaria, que puede verse afectado por algunas de las decisiones aprobadas, especialmente en lo que se refiere a su financiación y a su política de personal. En este libro se analiza, primero, en qué se concreta la autonomía universitaria en Europa y en otros países (Alemania e Italia).
A continuación, se aborda la situación en España, teniendo en cuenta la experiencia comparada. Así, se estudia la repercusión de elementos como la tasa de reposición de personal (docente o no docente), la elaboración de los presupuestos y su integración o no en los del Estado o de la Comunidad Autónoma respectiva, la suficiencia o no de la financiación de las universidades públicas, etc. Se acaba concluyendo que, si bien la autonomía financiera de las universidades está limitada en España, hay ciertos límites que no se deberían cruzar, porque se estaría vulnerando la autonomía universitaria en su configuración constitucional.

This chapter studies the history of university autonomy in Austria during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries through a specific lens: It explores the commemoration and reputation of Leo Thun-Hohenstein, the conservative Bohemian count who conducted the reform of Habsburg higher education in the 1850s. Leo Thun, minister of education from 1849 to 1860, has long served as a saviour-like saccharine hero for conservative public servants and academics who were embroiled in Austria’s university reforms of the twentieth century. Our contribution unearths the links that existed between three key issues of university politics, the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of teaching and learning, the structure and limits of faculties’ corporate self-governance, and the conception of value-free and apolitical science. After Thun’s resignation, liberals like Eduard Herbst accused him of hypocrisy: While professing to establish the freedom of teaching and learning as well as university autonomy, Thun had effectively curtailed both. While scolding Thun for these empty promises, liberal university politicians after 1867 tacitly continued his designs. Semi-autonomous universities were characterized by professorial self-governance, state funding, and ministerial power over the appointment of chair-holders. The debate over whether Thun secured or buried genuine university autonomy and free scholarship simmered on into the twentieth century. We discuss the two landmark studies of these matters by the legal historian and Catholic priest Hans Lentze and by Richard Meister that appeared in the 1960s. Lentze’s seminal book assessed Thun’s limited commitment to academic freedom and highlighted Thun’s failure in establishing the Greater Austrian, conservative academic elite he had dreamt of, proving that the reformed universities became hotbeds of liberalism and German nationalism instead. Richard Meister, a national Catholic philologist at the University of Vienna, who had served the Austrofascist regime and the Nazi potentates equally well, instead extolled Thun as the architect of limited university autonomy which was best suited to cold war Austria. We show that Lentze’s and Meister’s interventions need to be placed in the context of the 1955 law on the organization of the universities (Hochschulorganisationsgesetz) which Meister had co-designed together with conservative minister of education Heinrich Drimmel (ÖVP). Meister and Drimmel further embroidered Thun’s reputation as the trailblazer of academic freedom and apolitical, impartial science because they found his vision of the university congenial. Marked by effective state control over appointments and by professorial self-governance, the universities spawned science that was “apolitical”, “impartial” and “universal” in the sense that its results did not jeopardise conservative predominance over Austrian intellectual and cultural life. Consequently, everything that threatened to demolish this position of conservative supremacy was branded as “ideological” and “unscientific”. Here the invocation of Thun served to stave off socialist pretensions in public and university life and to paralyse disciplinary and methodological transformations (sociology, structural functionalism, political science), that undermined humanist Bildung.

Cilj ovog rada je ponuditi pozitivnu argumentaciju direktne demokracije u prilagođenom obliku i bez obzira na njezinu učestalu isključivost u pogledu prevladavajućeg upravnog političkog mehanizma.
U uvodu napominjem kako je pojavnost raznolikih oblika direktne demokracije u svijetu svakako povod dublje razrade tog upravnog oblika. Najavljujem i obogaćenje teorijskog razmatranja detaljnim primjerima vezanima uz oprimjerenje ovog demokratskog oblika za vrijeme blokade Filozofskog fakulteta 2009. godine u Rijeci,
Prvi dio rada sastoji se od određenja diskusijskog okvira kojeg zahvaćam baveći se ovom temom, vodeći računa i da je ona vezana uz povijesni i teorijski okvir koji se uz nju uglavnom veže – poglavito atensku demokraciju i teoriju Jeana Jacquesa Rousseau. Završavam ovaj dio navodeći se određenjem položaja direktne demokracije u političkoj teoriji u pogledu rasprave s predstavničkom demokracijom, s kojom pretpostavljeno stoji u opoziciji.
U drugom se dijelu bavim obranom direktne demokracije na temelju vrijednosti koje ona ispoljava i na kojima bi njeni djelatnici trebali inzistirati da bi bila funkcionalna i poželjna. Od ključnih vrijednosti ističem: deliberaciju, generativnost, građansku aktivnost, hiperproduktivnost, solidarnost, jednakost i informiranost. Naposljetku, branim se i od učestalih prigovora upućenih direktnoj demokraciji, a neke i anticipiram navodeći se pretpostavkama u kojima bi se sve oblicima direktna demokracija mogla pojaviti. Kritike koje detaljno obrađujem su: tiranija većine, apatija građana, grupna polarizacija i dubinska politika.
U završetku se, kao i tijekom rada, osvrćem na potencijalnu sofisticiranost modela direktne demokracije, u slučaju da se navodi predloženim oblikom, a upućujem i na njenu kompatibilnost s predstavničkom demokracijom u širem društvu.

A partir del análisis crítico de diversas fuentes documentales, en especial sus normativas y actas de funcionamiento, el presente artículo analiza la actuación del Consejo Interuniversitario Nacional (CIN) en el período 1990-1999. Examina el papel de los rectores en el Protocolo de la Concertación Universitaria; la Comisión de Concertación de las Universidades Estatales con el Poder Ejecutivo Nacional; el acuerdo celebrado con la Secretaría de Políticas Universitarias en 1993 respecto a la Ley de Educación Superior y el involucramiento del CIN en la implementación de los principales programas gubernamentales de la etapa. Se procura demostrar que en esta etapa se desplegó un proceso de "heteronomía concertada", en el sentido que, por un lado, se impulsaron intensas y asimétricas políticas gubernamentales sobre el campo universitario, pero, al mismo tiempo, el núcleo central de dichas políticas fueron concertadas con los rectores nucleados en el CIN, siendo estos agentes activos en la implementación de estas.

The strong endorsement of neo-liberal policies by successive Indian governments has severely affected the education sector. Not just the funding cut but also growing privatization has significantly affected the quality of and access to education. The logic of the competitive market and one’s ability to pay determines the access to education; education is increasingly treated as a commodity rather than a social good.

The recent history of Venezuela's student movements illustrates the paradox of academic autonomy. The student left used autonomy to resist repression during Venezuela's liberal democracy (1958). Yet, after 1998, the former supporters of the parties which had violated that autonomy started to capitalise on it in order to block the progressive reforms. The Bolivarian government's decision not to interfere with autonomous universities , but to create a parallel Bolivarian university system instead repli-cated one of the reform patterns of previous governments. Despite the government's intention to fight inequality, the reform contributed to further stratification of higher education and polarisation among the student movements.

It is possible to analyse in a systematic manner the evolution of university autonomy and academic freedom in Europe after 1999-2000, a distinct and remarkable period in the history of European higher education. A consistent, albeit surprising, pattern can be identified: it consists of a combination of diverging paths of development. We define the path of development as a distinguishable, cohesive, interconnected and relatively stable sequence of events or changes taking place over a longer period in a given area, which are characterised by a distinctive combination of speed, direction and substance (content). To illustrate briefly, we propose two examples, which we will analyse in this chapter. We argue that there is a difference of direction, speed and content, or different paths of development, in the evolution of institutional autonomy compared to academic freedom: this period shows much faster and mainly progressive changes in autonomy, as opposed to slower and rather regressive changes in academic freedom in Europe, both at the conceptual level and in practice. If we look at autonomy alone, we notice a particular path of development: an accelerating tendency to define, measure and practice it in relation to efficiency, rather than intellectual, moral and legal references, including human rights. We call this the instrumental path of development of autonomy in the EHEA. In this chapter, we attempt to identify the most important paths of development in academic freedom and university autonomy in the EHEA, analyse their interaction and explore their significance for the broader discussion about the present and future of higher education in Europe.

Our world has been rendered topsy-turvy by the current crisis and it is extremely difficult to predict its short-and long-term impact on our everyday lives, the political, economic and social realms including higher educational institutions. There have been several pessimistic as well as optimistic approaches since then. Even though we simply don't know what kind of changes will take place in the near future, it could be predictable that these rapid changes could have a devastating and harsher impact on those who are politically underrepresented, usually disadvantaged and deprived groups. There is therefore an urgent need to address the current and probable challenges caused by the ongoing crisis in universities and to raise questions of how it could provide a better educational opportunity for all in higher education.

We the undersigned condemn these actions and stand in solidarity with the students and faculty of Boğaziçi University. We call upon Professor Bulu to decline the position and we call upon the Turkish government to release any students still in custody, withdraw all charges, and respect academic freedom and university autonomy. Link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc_m3StSsK4Zm8Rp54aBMey5fgrCnEfX6_cMV5knhIsjaTrBA/viewform

The article explores major milestones in reforming higher education in Ukraine, applying the methodology of case studies. It analyzes political and social conditions that influenced the process of reform. The author pays particular attention to the concept of university autonomy, its development, and implementation in Ukraine, considering legal and institutional efforts. The impact and experience of some leading institutions like Kyiv-Mohyla
Academy is discussed. The author concludes that the task of ensuring comprehensive university autonomy is of a political nature. This is the only
reliable instrument for raising of quality of Ukrainian higher education.

As students and academics in Poland are fighting to defend democracy and autonomy of the universities, this post is a battle cry. It outlines the threats to intellectual freedoms posed by the new law on higher education being introduced by the Polish government. It also describes the ongoing protests and sketches an analytic view of the situation.

The article takes up an issue of the Humboldt's idea of university in two perspectives. In the first part of the analysis, in reference to the Max Weber's lecture Wissenschaft als Beruf, we present the reasons for the failure of the Humboldt's program due to the changes in the structure and function of the science, which occurred in the 19 th century. In the second part, however, we depict the transformation of Humboldt's program that was carried out by Wilhelm Dilthey. His justifying of humanities (Geisteswissenschaften) has retained, from today's perspective, its topicality. It can be demonstrated with the aid of investigations of Jürgen Habermas, Eva Illouz and Hans Joas. Dilthey's solutions, which continue the Humboldtian tradition, can be used to define the role and tasks of the humanities in the contemporary education model based on the idea of lifelong learning. Wprowadzenie Stworzony przez Wilhelma von Humboldta model uniwersytetu został pod-porządkowany koncepcji wszechstronnego kształcenia osobowości i zdolności poszczególnych jednostek biorących udział w pracach naukowo-badawczych, prowadzonych przez instytucje szkolnictwa wyższego. Koncepcja ta, określana

The purpose of this article is to analyze the efforts that have been made to Islamize Iranian universities, specifically since the emergence of hardliners in 2005. After the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the Islamic regime relentlessly intensified its efforts to Islamize universities to train a new generation of ideologically driven students. In the three decades following the Revolution, three major periods of university Islamization have been implemented.The Cultural Revolution, which started in 1980, was the first step in the Islamization of Iran's universities: to cleanse the higher education systems from students and professors who criticized the new established Islamic regime. By increasing the number of students and the development of universities throughout Iran in the Rafasanjai era, the second wave of the Islamization of the university was triggered by Ayatollah Khamenei in 1994. During the reform era, the Islamization of universities slowed because of the many confrontations between the Supreme Leader and the reformist administrations. With the victory of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the 2005 presidential election, the Islamization of universities intensified. While there are a few publications about the Islamization of universities, they mainly focused on the first and second decades following the 1979 Revolution. Focusing on the third period, this article will investigate the different strategies and tactics for the Islamization of universities, as well as reasons for its failures. Cultural Revolution: The First Wave of University Islamization T he university as a modern institution has continued to play an important role in the political transformation of Iran. Political regimes have used the university to produce and transform knowledge, and as an important agent for political socialization. Since the 1920s, when Tehran University was established, the university has been one of the most prestigious institutions in the struggle for political change in Iran. For more than seven decades, student movements have played a leading role in sparking and promoting social and political insurgency in Iran (Parsa, 2000, p. 95). That is why both the Pahlavi and the Islamic regimes have tried to control and suppress these movements through different mechanisms (Golkar, 2007). The relationship between the university and the Iranian state has been highly controversial since the establishment of Islamic regime in 1979. Clerics were aware of bs_bs_banner Digest of Middle East Studies-Volume 21, Number 1-Pages 1-23

The recent history of Venezuela's student movements illustrates the paradox of academic autonomy. The student left used autonomy to resist repression during Venezuela's liberal democracy (1958). Yet, after 1998, the former supporters of the parties which had violated that autonomy started to capitalise on it in order to block the progressive reforms. The Bolivarian government's decision not to interfere with autonomous universities, but to create a parallel Bolivarian university system instead replicated one of the reform patterns of previous governments. Despite the government's intention to fight inequality, the reform contributed to further stratification of higher education and polarisation among the student movements.

Deeply rooted in custom, law, and historical memory, autonomy and self-rule or governance is an often combative reality in Hispano-America, intimately bound with questions of self-determination and sovereignty in their broadest possible definitions. Pursuing it, defending it, or mobilizing through it in different epochs, indigenous populations, maroon societies, acequia irrigation boards, factory and infrastructure workers, pluri-ethnic peasant communities, as well as modern university students and faculty all have had some relationship with self-governance and autonomy in one form or another. From the late eighteenth century onwards, these usages have often been either linked to revolutionary processes or provided fertile grounds for revolutionary ideas to take root and intertwine in practice.
This paper is neither scholarly nor impartial: it is a historically-rooted call to democratize US universities by importing Latin American models, asking what we could achieve if we also expropriated the Ivy League universities to inject their capital into  public higher ed.

Information on how to access paper and join discussion at:
https://history.princeton.edu/centers-programs/shelby-cullom-davis-center/seminar-fall-2020-schedule

The article deals with the student strike at the University of Zagreb, which occurred in the summer term of the academic year 1907/1908 and was motivated by the politically influenced forceful retirement and suspension of the university professors Đuro Šurmin and Gavro Manojlović, imposed by the regime of Ban Pavao Rauch, which violated the honor and the autonomy of the university. On the basis of relevant scholarship and sources, in the first place materials from the Archive of the Rector’s office of the University of Zagreb, the Archive of the Faculty of Philosophy, the daily newspaper Obzor [The Horizon], student periodicals and memoirs, the author has tried, besides reconstructing all events connected with this student action, to depict the atmosphere existing among various political student organizations that operated within the university, as well as the reaction of university professors and the domestic and foreign public to the retirement of the professors and the student strike. For the first time in the history of the University of Zagreb, the students, with a fairly small number of exceptions, boycotted the classes and did not enrol in the summer term of 1907/1908. They left Zagreb and continued their studies in foreign university centres, mostly in Prague. From the extant sources one can get an impression of student unity regardless of the political factions to which they belonged, although it is clearly visible that the group of the so-called Naprednjaci [the Progressives] led the action. Their mutual motive was to raise their voice against the attack on academic liberty, and the whole action had a substantial echo within the country and abroad. Although the strike was formally unsuccessful, it still registered as an exceptional joint action of all the students of the university, whose primary goal was the defense of its autonomy, and in the wider sense, it also represented a strong demonstration against the current government of the country.

The aim of the book is to present the author’s proposals on the reform of the governance model from a holistic and functional perspective. The first task when designing a system of governance should be to identify the function that it is to fulfil, which leads on to the question of exactly why universities are meant to be autonomous. For the good of society, universities as institutions have to guarantee that the knowledge they generate and transmit does not favour the interests of any particular group. They provide a public service that must act with autonomy. This autonomy must include all decisionmaking mechanisms, the whole system of governance, so that the public service of higher education and research can be rendered as efficiently as possible and without submitting to the influence of political, economic or religious interests. On the basis of the conclusions of the study University Autonomy in Europe II. The Scorecard and the current situation of the university, research an...

Se adelanta una descripción contextual acerca de algunos factores sociales y acontecimientos particulares que intervinieron en la configuración de la actual política en educación superior colombiana a la luz de tendencias y corrientes sociales globales, así como la identificación de algunos  momentos históricos que las refieren, en un marco de reformas políticas continentales. Se detallan asimismo características generales de tales políticas, que posteriormente permiten evidenciar algunas tensiones surgidas de las relaciones entre la globalización, los movimientos o corrientes de allí originadas y, los momentos que afectaron la sociedad con respuestas asumidas como reformas en política de educación superior en Colombia.

Academic autonomy as institutional and individual self‐determination in the sphere of education and scientific research faces a wide scope of challenges, caused by the fundamental changes in the life of contemporary society. Both primary and secondary schools expected to provide knowledge and training, necessary for human development, respecting choices of students and their parents. High expectations for the quality of curriculum and the impact of science are prescribed by modern standards of the human economy, unifying the global world. Such expectations are often reflected in legislation, policies, and regulations imposed in reaction to activities of different pressure groups, blaming teachers, scholars, and universities for the lack of sufficient integrity and capacity to satisfy public demand. Measures to defend academic autonomy (particularly, in legal studies) are proposed, such as socialization and popularization of education and science, public discussion of knowledge policies, interdisciplinary research and training targeted to solve practical problems of public interest, and strengthening critical thinking with a deeper usage of mathematical methods.

Sheliazhenko, Yurii. "Academic autonomy and perspectives of interdisciplinary research: mathematical analysis of law." Scientific Papers of the Witelon State University of Applied Sciences in Legnica 32, no. 3 (September 2019): 155-62.

The implementation of the European Space for Higher Education has entailed a process of profound renewal and change in all European universities. This paper analyzes the development of the objectives of what has been called the «Bologna Process,» first on the European level, and later, in the specific case of Spain. In addition the paper analyzes the repercussions the process has had on the work of teaching personnel. Although it seemed that the universities were going to have much greater autonomy in terms of organizing teaching, the work of the evaluation and accreditation agencies has had a particularly limiting effect on this option. Furthermore, along with flexibilization and diversification of university teaching, the methodological change put forward under the body of regulations passed under the aegis of the European Space for Higher Education has undoubtedly meant an infringement on the professor´s academic freedom, which may lead to new, hitherto unknown, conflicts. This paper does not question the fact that university teaching personnel´s academic freedom has, among other limits, the need to coordinate and organize university teaching. Nonetheless, in view of the novelties that the European Space for Higher Education has provided in this area, it is worrisome that the limits on academic freedom have notably increased. One will have to make an evaluation as to whether such limitations are admissible or not.