Teaching, research, and learning in the university setting: what’s the relationship? by Tertiary Education Union

Teaching, research, and learning in the university setting: what’s the relationship? JULY 2016 A research note prepared by Charles Sedgwick for the Tertiary Education Union Te Hautū Kahurangi o Aotearoa

TERTIARY EDUCATION UNION Te Hautū Kahurangi o Aotearoa

INTRODUCTION This paper explores the relationship between teaching and research in the university setting. The aim is to state what it ought to be, but also to explore the very reasons why this possibility has been distorted and re-directed. The paper will also look at the impact of the above on those in the sector and on the future of tertiary education. The paper reviews the literature on research-led and research-informed teaching, before looking at how changes to policy and processes in tertiary education institutions have impacted upon the one connecting factor – learning by all who study and work in tertiary education.

THE ASSUMED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHING AND RESEARCH of Sydney (1998). In each case research is an imperative for learning, teaching and scholarship. Interestingly Robertson and Bond (2005: 80) affirm their claim, in the New Zealand case, by drawing attention to the Education Act 1989 and three published statements by the University of Canterbury.

The relationship between teaching and research has been considered and assumed to be intrinsic to the optimum accumulation and dissemination of knowledge since the writings of Humboldt. According to Elton (2005: 11):

Humboldt’s central idea (Humboldt 1970) was that, in both teaching and research, ‘universities should treat learning always as consisting of not yet wholly solved problems and hence always in a research mode’. This applies to both research and teaching: neither routine research nor school-like (verschult) teaching is appropriate in a university context.

The 1989 Act states:

[‘universities’] research and teaching are closely interdependent and most of their teaching is done by people who are active in advancing research. A Charter statement from University of Canterbury states:

The University of Canterbury is an institutions in which scholarship is valued and where teaching and learning are strongly linked to research.

The requirement from this according to Elton are such that “…in order to teach in ‘research mode’ – there is a great need to innovate, including putting students at the center of the curriculum” (Elton, 2005: 108). Robertson and Bond (2005: 79-91) argue that the rhetoric linking research and teaching, research-informed teaching and teaching supported by research are common pronouncements. They note the familiar use of these linkages in statements from the University of Manchester (1997), Victoria University of Wellington (nd) and University

University of Canterbury’s 2000 Audit Portfolio states:

For Canterbury, a strong relationship between teaching and research has always been a primary element of its culture.

And finally a University of Canterbury (1998) newsletter notes the nature of interdependence between teaching and research: “…the complex inter-relatedness of teaching and research in universities is

obviously important in this debate – we must ensure that at every turn the research input to ALL teaching is highlighted and documented.”

LEARNING AS THE CONNECTION BETWEEN TEACHING AND RESEARCH This linkage between research and teaching, no matter how much it is asserted, is not straight forward. In Reshaping the University, a whole chapter is dedicated to debunking the so called myth of the necessary linkage between research and teaching.

which it might exist or be more or less possible. That is, the connection could well vary by discipline, by teacher and the method of delivery they use, by a student’s ability, forms of assessment, institutional policy or national culture and politics (Hughes 2005: 19 in Barnett, 2005).

After examining the literature Hughes (2005) concludes that the assumed relationship is by no means proven beyond reasonable doubt. But he qualifies this position by noting that there is an acknowledged linkage, through the concept of learning, which is common to both teaching and research. This view is seen in the work of Barnett (1992: 623) who notes that there is a difference between discovering knowledge and transmitting that knowledge. What is shared by both however is the process of learning:

While university charters in the 1990s set out the link between teaching and research at universities, by 2004 charters were no longer required from New Zealand universities. So we have to turn to their respective strategic plans for some idea of what and how all current New Zealand universities intend to provide education. We can see the dramatic shift in a range of responses from their respective mission statements and visions (Appendix 1). There is one case where both life-long learning; and critic and conscience are mentioned. Otherwise it is only AUT which has a notional idea of the connection of research and teaching in a specific section entitled “Learning and Teaching”. In general the statements are all very broad aims rather than systematic unpacking of how they do what they do.

Learning however is the vital link between research and teaching. It is a shared process in these two enterprises. Teaching and research are correlated where they are co-related, i.e. when what is being related are two aspects of the same activity: learning! (Brew and Boud 1995b: 268).

As Jones (2000: 2) states in a report to the NZ Universities Academic Audit Unit:

Further Westergarde (1991: 27) makes the point that “…higher education must, for students no less than for staff, be investigative and exploratory, skeptical and critical..” and in this sense the common ground is learning - a process that both students and staff should share.

…it becomes evident that the critic and conscience role of universities should be closely tied in with other features of universities, namely, the centrality of research, and the close interrelationship between research and teaching - the research-teaching

So rather than dismissing the fact that there is a connection or even that there ought to be, one might ponder the conditions under

nexus. It should not be an add-on or a peripheral characteristic that can be safely marginalised in practice.

statements, relationships or paradox, and teaching and research in these institutions are just two of a set of marketable characteristics.

And warned:

Naidoo (2005) argues amongst other factors that changes in funding and governance implemented by government on the basis of “market principles have shifted…the terms on which fundamental activities such as teaching, learning and research take place in higher education”. This, to the same author, has the consequence of commodifying “… academic practices which may deter innovation, promote passive and instrumental attitudes to learning, threaten knowledge creation and entrench academic privilege rather than producing the intended ‘student empowerment, greater equity and higher quality” (Naidoo 2005: 27).

However, universities may not be consistent, encouraging staff to carry out research in some apparently abstruse areas of physics or medieval English, but subtly discouraging research into social or political issues having a bearing on university perspectives or relationships with outside funding bodies. If this has been the case, it is time to reassess the critic and conscience role, in an effort to explore the benefits that would accrue to universities, their academic staff and society in general if it was accepted as a core value of universities.

At this point we have to ask what effect all this has on teaching and research. It seems most useful to see the changes from the perspective of the student, the academic and the researcher, since we may well live in a far more divided world than was evident in the past.

These statements are important for two reasons. Firstly the imperative attached to linking a fundamental purpose of the university with the means to its accomplishment, through the two core related functions of teaching and research. Secondly the warning Jones gives about the effects of prioritisation of research foci and its effect on the university’s function as critic and conscience of society.

One wonders whether the requirements of an academic have been forgotten by the tertiary institutions for whom they work; by the academics themselves for a whole set of reasons and by students who have no basis to make judgments of the experience they are paying for. Jones et al (2000: 13) clearly laid out the requirements for academics: “…to prepare the students adequately to pass their examinations and practice as professionals…”; “…to provide a good education for this group of students, an education that will equip them with the skills required to be critical and analytical in their approach to professional issues…”; “…preparation for life-long learning…”; “…an obligation is to the university, to participate in its research ethos, and to ensure that all teaching is informed by the latest research findings and concepts…” and an “…obligation … to herself, to be a person of honesty and integrity, in both her research and teaching…” (Jones et al, 2000). Jones

Even by 2001 the Tertiary Education Advisory Commission argued that current research had supported the contention that the relationship between teaching and research had weakened. This contention Robertson and Bond (2005: 81) argue is based “on drawing causal relationships between variables that are ill defined and naïve”. The authors note (2005: 80): “…paradoxically in most universities, claims of the inseparability of research and teaching are undermined by policies and structures that simultaneously and perversely promote their fragmentation and position them as competing priorities”, because it seemed like the ideal still remained. By 2016 there appears to be no such

maintains that all these obligations should be taken into consideration: “This is what both academic freedom and academic excellence demand.”

their relatively privileged position in hard economic times.” (Trevett, 2011). Eriksen (2012) in an article titled “Skills crisis: Government tells students to target skill shortages” notes the government made their position clear about free choice for students. Preferential employment areas from the perspective of students were education and training, health care and medical, marketing and communication, environment and conservation, community service and development and arts (Eriksen, 2012). According to Joyce, “We have to adjust some of those expectations and aspirations”; that is, of having employment in the above areas. Joyce’s aspiration was to collect data to indicate “…how well people are turning their education at that institution into income.” He is further quoted as saying the information would be “…used to help guide decisions students made on career choices.” Students should be targeted from age 14 when they first start to think seriously about their career, rather than at school-leaving age and stop leaving too much to “…the all-knowing careers advisor at school.” As to whom should guide students - industry players - according to Joyce: “You [they] need to think about how you can take a role in where kids are going.” (Eriksen, 2012).

So how have the roles of students and academics changed in the last few decades, and what implication does this have for connections between teaching and research in universities? The changing nature of the student’s role in universities It may well be, as Karl Popper pointed out in 1945/1966, seventy years ago, that:

Instead of encouraging the student to devote himself to his studies for the sake of studying, instead of encouraging in him a real love of for his subject and for enquiry, he is encouraged to study for the sake of his personal career: he is led to acquire only such knowledge as is serviceable in getting him over the hurdles which he must clear for the sake of his advancement …. I do not know a better argument for an optimistic view of mankind, no better proof of their indestructible love for truth and decency … than the fact that this devastating system of education has not utterly ruined them (Popper1966: 140)

By 2013 the Ministry of Education produced “Moving On Up – What Young People Earn After Tertiary Education”, which correlated subjects and years of study with earning power. However as students pointed out, the study did not analyse job availability (O’Callaghan, “Degrees ranked by earning potential” Stuff, 22 January 2013).

Popper is obviously optimistic in his time that not all students would succumb, but the pressures are far more intense now with a burgeoning student debt nearing $15 billion for 720,000 students in New Zealand (Radio NZ, 2016).

In January 2016 the message seems to have taken root (Joyce, 2016):

Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment Minister Steven Joyce has welcomed figures released today that show a greater proportion of degree-level domestic graduates are completing qualifications in STEMrelated subjects (science, technology,

The pressure comes not only from the cost but from the Minister of Tertiary Education and the job market. The Minister has at various times suggested students ought to be far more utilitarian in their subject choice at university as well as “…keeping their heads down lest they draw attention to

engineering and maths).

researching and teaching at the same time? Hawke says:

“It’s important that we grow the number of graduates in areas where there is real industry demand,” Mr. Joyce says. “Producing more engineering, ICT and science graduates will help alleviate actual and potential skill shortages in these key areas.”

Education is about providing people with the capacity to respond to change and change is now so frequent for learning to be other than continual. It cannot be packaged and delivered separately from experience (Hawke 2008: 4).

“The growth we are seeing is a good start but we need it to continue”, Mr. Joyce said. “It is important that we continue to grow the number of students and graduates in these “maker” subjects, to fuel the growth in our tech sector.

… Contemporary society and economy requires not an educated elite but widespread capacity to deal with complex issues and change (Hawke 2008: 6).

The implication of this kind of structural shift is that there are not only clear signals to students in line with Popper’s contention and outcome but also clear ideas about the separation of teaching and research and the academic’s role. If students have no idea what an academic’s role is or should be then what can they expect – only that the person in front of them will provide what is needed for the job market and teach what is needed to be known, or for the exam. Even in the 1990s, according to Kelsey, “…staff reported growing pressure from students to curtail the more theoretical content of courses and focus on the instrumental and practical.” (Kelsey 2000: 237). This was very different to the student demands of the late 1960s and 70s to make whatever was being taught relevant to the society they lived in.

The point here is that current policy is heavily weighted in favour of “learning preparation for life” which means employment/skill acquisition – a job. According to Hawke “We should no longer think of taking young people apart for some years and educating them before they begin on work and life in the real world.” (Hawke 2008: 4) – much more is necessary. “Learning is part of modern life not a preparation for it” (Hawke 2008: 4). Interestingly a cross-sector conference ‘Innovations in Tertiary Education Delivery Summit’ in 2014 drew attention to a number challenges facing the tertiary sector. These included how students will be supported to be employable in terms of their skills. There was some concern from education providers about the extent to which education might be viewed (particularly by government) as a pathway to work rather than recognising the broad skill sets required across a range of careers; and, ensuring learners have the right information and support to design their own learning pathways, and providing appropriate pastoral care (ITES 2014, p 9). Parenthetically one of three characteristics of the system that should stay the same was identified as ‘research-led teaching’ (ITES 2014, p 9).

However, if the task of an academic, for instance, is to foster learning for life (Hawke 2008: 4) shouldn’t teachers have to be both

According to Hawke pathways are what is needed, not barriers and he draws attention to the Currie Commission’s 1962 “Report of the

We need to be as strong in engineering, physical sciences, and information technology as we are in our areas of traditional strength – the social sciences and the humanities.”

Commission on Education in New Zealand’ which advocated “maximum educational opportunity for all, since they regard the people as a whole as an important part of the natural wealth of the country; not to educate them to their maximum capacity is to leave part of the country’s resources undeveloped” (1962:12). This notion of education for all, of course, is not shared by all, and particularly those who argue that we should educate only to meet the needs of the economy, labour market, and employers.

student’s perspective, “Students will be reluctant to choose courses for which jobs are not easily obtainable, and which do not pay well in the market place”. The former feeds the competitive framework of tertiary institutions and the latter an instrumental attitude on the part of students. One further point needs to be made about the student’s lot. Expectations for outputs from ministerial requirements suggest the elevation of successful completions to one of the only acceptable results. With the added influence of economic variables impinging on tertiary education, according to Elton (2005: 110) these have serious consequences for staff and students: “…academic freedom is largely unprotected from financial pressures. Also the concept of Lernfreiheit, including the freedoms for students to switch courses and to fail, is totally foreign in the UK university systems which are increasingly tightly controlled.” One would suggest that the same mentality exists here as regards at least the notion of failure.

An important aspect of this context, not mentioned, is the presence of the student loan which has two effects according to Peters and Olssen (2005: 45). (1) the pressures exerted by ‘top-up fees’ will serve to increase the responsiveness of universities to the market order. Variable fees are, in effect, a form of student loan, which must be paid back by students after education has been acquired. While in one sense they can be viewed as a form of targeted taxation, the effect on universities is likely to increase their responsiveness to market signals ... In addition, universities will find it easy to devalue blue skies research, and traditional discipline based subjects which do not have an easy translation into the occupational order…”. And (2) from the

Now if this is true for the learners then why do we not consider the providers/teachers also as lifelong learners who must continue to undertake research, make it part of their learning so their teaching is never devoid of experience?

THE CHANGING NATURE OF THE ACADEMIC ROLE IN UNIVERSITIES The irony then is that the re-structured activity of teaching and research within the contemporary university has had the same effect on teachers as it has on students. But equally well, as Popper notes, there is resistance and enough fortitude, on the part of some, at least, to not succumb.

the manner of a contract, by awarding tokens for the demonstration of prescribed outputs”. Nayland (2010: xix) is particularly concerned as to why we [educators] are so keen to please and answers: “…as educators we have a poor sense of who we are and what education is.” The question therefore has to be - what has happened to the academic’s sense of their (the academics) own vocation?

Nayland (2010: xix) captures the problem and the result: “When economists try to hammer and cut education into the shape of a market place where commodities are traded, we make it easier by thinking of teaching as the provision of a service, and, in

Macfarlane (2011) draws attention to the shift in the academic role. He refers to the ‘unbundling’ of the traditional role of academic practice which was a holistic

practice of teaching, research and service activities, now transformed into a series of para-academic activities. In other words you may de-skill the traditional role and re-skill it in another directions. This, he maintains undermines the professional identity, a process exacerbated by the use of a reward system which encourages specialisation over and above occupational responsibility. So you can have a ‘learning technologist’ a ‘research professor’ or managers (of schools) departments, or faculties or a specialist teacher or otherwise defined as ‘research inactive’. In the latter case how does the system respond in regard to teaching, research and service? The answer is they become ‘just a teacher’ and probably will be overloaded, since they invariably have to pick up the work of their specialist colleagues.

the teaching and learning functions in institutions, with increasing numbers of students with diverse needs and possibly increasing attrition rates. These changes require institutions to centralise and systematize, which can lead to the introduction of technology for teaching materials - and encourages on-line learning (e- learning), and on-line tutors. This may eventually end up with the on-line university – such as the University of Phoenix where the role of the academic has narrowed to tutor or instructor and where the curriculum is narrowed and centrally controlled. The university becomes a ‘service provider’. In addition there are a whole set of paraacademic positions created for student learning support and disability support. The more this has been the case the more academic control over curriculum has diminished (Moodie 1996). “Academic autonomy and control of the curriculum at a local level has been supplanted by a focus on more collective and institutional focus” (Macfarlane, 2011: 67 paraphrasing Coaldrake, 2001: 16). This is driven by increasing sensitivity to “quality assurance and institutional reputation” (Macfarlane, 2011: 67 paraphrasing Coaldrake, 2001: 16).

This process has been referred to as a ‘hollowing out’ of what it means to be an academic. This can mean that a structural shift takes place where part of the role of the academic/teacher to debate curriculum structure, pedagogical alternatives and student assessment let alone the direction of respective disciplines is foregone. These issues have now become the prerogative of managers (academic or otherwise) who are clearly part of line management in the institution with a consequence that the purpose of research and teaching has now been supplanted by the task of managing - we have become “fixated on carefully managing education”.

Another intended or unintended result is casualisation which cuts costs at one level and facilitates specialisation for others which can be capitalised on through processes such as the PBRF. In this space time consuming marking, tutoring, and question answering is done by contract workers. The constrained hours common to most types of teaching contract work leave no space for research, publishing and service.

The implications of this are that while we may assume a relationship between teaching and research, it will be just that –assumed and there will be no debate about how this might take place. Equally the unspecified/ unexplored assumptions can just as easily result in teaching and research being redefined as separate and unequal – the former equals the job and the latter what you do to retain the job and achieve status and mobility in competition with your peers, thus the beginning of unbundling.

Equally if you move to an actuarial-driven system where outputs are added up in terms of getting grants and publishing in peer reviewed outlets, then the temptation is to narrow the research activities of staff, encouraging a narrowing of focus or specialisation to areas likely to perform well in the grant-allocation process. Macfarlane calls it ‘narrowly performative’ but you will

Supposedly this is happening to improve

improved (Chalmers 1998: 39).

still employ them as an all-round academic or institutions will develop research-only and teaching-only roles.

In 2013 this was said:

One might marvel at the efficiency and accountability that this allows but what has it done to the roles of academics and students? In short they become modified to the point that both parties will at best be unsure of their roles as part of an educational community and the larger society and therefore perpetually uneasy, or at worst totally preoccupied with personal survival like the institutions they work for.

Working conditions were clearly the most frequently reported most deteriorated area in the tertiary education sector. Some of these respondents referred to general deteriorations in working conditions, but many highlighted specific aspects. These included reduced job security (including as a result of continual restructuring) decreased staffing levels, increased casualisation of employment conditions, and few available jobs …. Other respondents highlighted a relative decrease in pay, and worsened opportunities (or equity in) staff advancement and promotion …While some respondents highlighted improvements in specific aspects of job conditions, these tended to relate to individual circumstances or reflect improvements in flexible working conditions. Other respondents reported deteriorating relations between staff within tertiary education institutions, including relations between managers and employees, relations between administrative staff and academic staff and reduced collegiality and collaboration within institutions…. Another group of respondents identified deterioration in staff health and wellbeing, including morale, increased stress, reduced work life balance and bullying (Bentley, McLeod and Teo, 2014: 26-27).

It is salutary to end this section with results from two surveys undertaken 25 years apart in 1998 and 2013 both on the state of the tertiary education sector in New Zealand. The following comes from the 1998 survey comparing results with research done four years earlier:

Compared with the 1994 survey results, there is a notable increase in the proportion of university staff registering deterioration in the overall management of their university, and in the funding for their work. The impact of changes to universities continues to have more negative than positive effects for university staff. The changes have had costs for university staff’s health and the quality of their personal lives. More university staff report a work-related illness or injury in 1998 than in 1994…. Twice as many academics believe the quality of their teaching and research has deteriorated compared with those who believe it has

WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN FOR RESEARCH? Finally it remains to try and tackle the trajectory of research and research funding in universities. Research as a separate

entity has become highly valued in the university sector, as a mean of introducing a competitive element into the relationship

between institutions; between individual staff members and as an actuarial means of evaluating this competition. Peters and Olssen (2005) view this trajectory as characterised by “…new synergies between universities and the business sector…” resulting in the “…commercialisation of research, new partnership arrangements, university start-up companies, technology transfer policies and the tendering for researching funding in a competitive system.” (Peters and Olssen 2005: 38). The separation of funding for research from teaching stems from the work of TEAC which, according to McLaughlin 2003: 26), included: developing “…a new funding formula with research and teaching separate; … create centres of excellence and a performance- based research fund”. The resulting system would be under the control of the recommended Tertiary Education Commission which would “…regulate, fund and monitor the performance of the tertiary sector.” Research funding has two trajectories – one leading to commercialisation and the other to more conventional sources for tertiary research such as the Foundation for Research Science and Technology, Health Research Council, Tertiary Education Commission (PBRF related), the Marsden Fund (Royal Society) and the New Zealand Venture Investment Fund Ltd (Collier and Gray 2010: 20). In 2007 a report from the OECD (2007: 15) reviewing innovation maintained that one of three main strategic tasks facing New Zealand was to:

Reinforce the public research system’s capacity to contribute to innovation and to human resource development, notably via improved steering and financing mechanisms. One should recognise that the CRIs and tertiary education institutions need to play a more important role

in applied research and in ensuring the international connectivity of the innovation system than they do in many other advanced countries, since New Zealand lacks large firms in R&Dintensive sectors and must find other ways of sustaining an adequate stock of knowledge. As of 2006 the source of funds for higher education research and development included $70.m from abroad, $21.8m from other sources, $47.5m from the private sector, $156.8m from the sector’s funds, and $ 346.4m from the NZ Government (Collier and Gray 2010:16). Collier and Gray’s 2010 piece on the “The commercialisation of university innovations …” is used for background material. This does not mean their views are supported here but they do represent a dominant tendency which, for example, supports a modification of PBRF’s criteria and institutions’ own promotion policies to give more weight to commercialisation outcomes. Their argument is this could in turn help encourage a greater number of younger and mid-career researchers to think about the opportunities and benefits that arise from engaging in commercialisation endeavours. (2010: 2). The prime reasons for research in the university they argue is “…its importance in attracting and retaining leading academic faculty members…” (2010: 30). According to Collier and Gray, in 1997 the Government initiated the Foresight Project in recognition of the importance of the knowledge revolution. This was followed in 1999 by the Blueprint for Change (MoRST 1999) which proposed four goals (2010: 11), all of which have a potential impact on universities and university TT&C [technology transfer and commercialisation activities], although they do not represent goals specifically directed to universities:

• Accelerate knowledge creation and the development of human capital,

social capital, learning systems and networks in order to enhance New Zealand’s capacity to innovate;

to national economic and social goals, and advising government on policies, priorities and sector performance. As a result, TEC has an interest in TT&C performance of universities but does not appear to capture or analyse relevant data”.

• Increase the contribution knowledge makes to the creation and value of new and improved products, processes, systems and services in order to enhance the competitiveness of New Zealand enterprises; • Increase knowledge of the environment and of the biological, physical, social, economic and cultural factors that affect it in order to establish and maintain a healthy environment that sustains nature and people; and

Statistics New Zealand compiled and published research data covering the 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008 years (the latest available). The principal features of the 2008 data were:

Total research and development (R&D) expenditure in 2006 was $2,140 million, a 17 percent increase since 2006; Business sector R&D expenditure was $913 million in 2006, up 20 percent since 2006;

• Increase knowledge of the social, biological, environmental, cultural, economic and physical determinants of well-being in order to build a society in which all New Zealanders enjoy health and independence and have a sense of belonging, identity and partnership (from MoRST “Blueprint for Change” 1999: 11 quoted in Collier and Gray 2010: 19).

University sector R&D expenditure grew 8 percent in 2006 to $643 million; Government sector R&D expenditure in 2006 grew 23 percent to $584 million; and

This according to Collier and Gray represented the New Zealand government’s recognition of the knowledge revolution, a revolution which in terms of commercialisation of the sector, it has not funded. Each university has a TTO [Technology Transfer Office] funded by ‘general income’(Collier and Gray, 2010:18) which is linked to the University Commercialisation Offices of New Zealand (2005) which in turn operates out of the NZVCC’s office.

Most R&D funding was provided for agriculture (19 percent of all expenditure, at $398 million), followed by manufacturing (17 percent, $356 million), and health and environment (13 percent each, $283 million and $276 million respectively).

According to Collier and Gray, (2010: 19) “The New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) is charged with allocating more than $3 billion annually to tertiary education organisations (which includes universities), building the capability and capacity of tertiary education and training to contribute

In addition Collier and Gray also point out that in New Zealand intellectual property is governed by general law with no specific legislation in this area to protect universities (2005: 24). Further, universities have no special advisory group set up to guide commercialisation in the sector and the only incentives available to encourage staff to get involved are relief from teaching, monetary reward, promotion or enhanced

reputation (2005: 24). Of course this becomes another area by which to rank university’s accomplishments as Collier and Gray (2005: 24) do, with the result that some institutions don’t rate at all. Again the overall thrust of this aspect of funding for research further affirms the redefinition of the tertiary education sector and particularly the universities. One is loath to do other than quote the policy:

The interaction of the universities with private business in New Zealand is a key area of focus for the government. The Tertiary Education Strategy 20102015 emphasises the need for better linkages between universities and firms. In addition, the government’s overall research direction is to use research to support its economic growth agenda. [And] Organisations that fund research only continue to do so if they consider they are getting good value from the funding they give. In the case of research funded by business, this means that the funding organisation considers that the knowledge and ideas they have ‘purchased’ from a university can be

translated into financial value for the firm (Smart 2011:1 & 3). While there is funding for research, other than that available for STEM subjects the economic imperative confronts all other topics of research. The problematic aspect of this focus in a small country like New Zealand is the loss of research on and support of research on our own country. There are already deficiencies in our research compendium since the 1980s and this in some respect must effect policy- evidence based policy should not be based on reactive investigation as opposed to thorough informed research. The context under which current academics teach and research is not done in the interest of the learner (student) and may even stifle the need of the academic to remain an active learner all through their career. Furthermore this environment of almost forced utilitarian behavior by both student and academic is hardly a conducive environment for the production of an informed and responsible citizenry in the future. In brief the trajectory now structured into processes, regulations and decision making in tertiary institutions seem to have forgotten the very fundamental reasons for tertiary education as outlined in the Education Act 1989.

Appendix 1: Mission Statements UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO: The University of Otago will create, advance, preserve, promote and apply knowledge, critical thinking and intellectual independence to enhance the understanding, development and well-being of individuals, society and the environment. It will achieve these goals by building on foundations of broad research and teaching capabilities, unique campus learning environments, its nationwide presence and mana, and international links. http://www.otago.ac.nz/about/otago089882.html

MASSEY UNIVERSITY: Massey University is committed to meeting the needs of New Zealand and New Zealanders, enhancing access to university study for diverse populations, preparing students for life-long learning, and meeting international standards of excellence in research and teaching. Massey University is an integrated multi-campus institution of higher learning that creates new knowledge and understanding; synthesises, applies and disseminates knowledge; develops advanced learning and scholarly abilities for a national and international student body; and promotes free and rational inquiry. We offer high-quality learning experiences that empower people and their communities to prosper in an increasingly knowledge-dependent and technologically advanced world https://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-massey/university-management/charter/mission. cfm

UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND: The mission of The University of Auckland is to be: “A research-led, international university, recognised for excellence in teaching, learning, research, creative work, and administration, for the significance of its contributions to the advancement of knowledge and its commitment to serve its local, national and international communities.” The values of the University reflect its commitment to:

• Conserving, advancing and disseminating knowledge through teaching, learning, research and creative work of the highest standard. • Creating a diverse, collegial scholarly community in which individuals are valued and respected; academic freedom is exercised with intellectual rigour and high ethical standards; and critical enquiry is encouraged.

• Placing a strong emphasis on serving our student body. • Working to advance the intellectual, cultural, environmental, economic and social wellbeing of the peoples of Auckland and New Zealand. • Recognising a special relationship with Māori under the Treaty of Waitangi. • • Providing equal opportunities to all who have the potential to succeed in a university of high international standing. • Engaging with national and international scholars, educational and research institutions to enhance intellectual development, educational quality and research productivity. • The development and commercialisation of enterprise based on the University’s research and creative works. • Providing high quality management marked by open, transparent, responsive, and accountable academic and administrative policies, practices and services. https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/central/about/the-university/official-publications/ documents/strategic-plan-2013-2020_web-version.pdf

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON Mission: Victoria University of Wellington’s mission is to undertake excellent research, teaching and public engagement in the service of local, national, regional and global communities. Vision: Victoria University of Wellington will be a world-leading capital city university and one of the great global-civic universities. The University will adopt a distinctive academic emphasis, underpinned by excellence and with a particular focus on advancing Wellington, New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific region. Victoria will be imbued with distinctive qualities through its values and through the Treaty of Waitangi, mātauranga Māori and te reo Māori. The University will be distinguished internationally by the excellence of its fundamental and applied research, the success of its alumni and the depth of its intellectual influence. The student experience at Victoria, the quality and relevance of the teaching and learning, and the career opportunities that result, will be second to none. Victoria’s staff, postgraduate and undergraduate students will be proud of the role they play in cultivating intellectual, social, cultural and creative capital. They will thrive in Victoria’s highly creative, multidisciplinary and entrepreneurial environment. The University will attain the scale, quality and academic profile appropriate to a leading public university. Victoria will be respected for leading thinking on the major issues confronting environmental, societal, cultural and economic wellbeing, for resolutely fulfilling

its ‘critic and conscience’ role and for its contribution to the betterment of society. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/about/governance/strategic-plan/vision,-mission-and-purpose

LINCOLN UNIVERSITY: Mission Deliver a great whole-of-university experience for students, clients and staff Vision A specialist land-based university that’s a great place to learn discover and share Note: the core aims of Lincoln seems to focus on ‘Feed the world, ‘Protect the future’ and ‘Live well’ and their strategic Plan focuses on ‘Opportunities and threats. Strengths and weaknesses’ and a response: ‘Key strategic issue for Lincoln University’. http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/Documents/Marketing/Publications/LincolnUniversity%20 Strategic%20Plan%202014-2018.pdf

AUT UNIVERSITY: AUT’s primary focus is the education of its students, their learning experience and their success. Through its research and teaching, AUT creates a dynamic learning environment that inspires students to achieve their aspirations. AUT is outwards-facing, promoting intellectual debate, curiosity and discovery, determined to be engaged with the current and future issues of national and international importance to communities, industry, business and the professions. The University aims to be a great place to work and learn with an attractive, collegial and challenging culture and environment, increasing staff and student engagement, development and achievement. By investing in staff, infrastructure and resources, AUT will continue to make a significant contribution to the social, cultural, environmental and economic wellbeing of the nation and the world. Learning and teaching: AUT focuses on its students, their learning experience and their success. Through their research and innovation, teachers create an inspiring learning environment. Knowledge exchange with communities, industry, business and the professions ensures a contemporary, relevant and challenging curriculum. http://www.aut.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/263139/AUT_Strategic_Plan_2012-16_FINAL. PDF

References Barnett, R. (Ed). 2005. Reshaping the University New Relationships between Research Scholarship and Teaching, Maidenhead, Open University Press Bentley, T, McLeod, L, and Teo, S. 2014a. The State of the Tertiary Education Sector in New Zealand -2013 New Zealand Work Research Institute, AUT University.

Hon. Steven Joyce. 2016. “More students completing qualification in STEM subjects“Media release, New Zealand Government https://www.beehive.govt. nz/release/more-students-completingqualifications-stem-subjects Hughes, M. 2005. “The Mythology of Research and Teaching Relationships in Universities” in Barnett, R.(Ed) 2005 Reshaping the University New Relationships between Research Scholarship and Teaching, Maidenhead, Open University Press

Chalmers, A. 1998. “Workload Stress and New Zealand Universities in 1998 - a follow-up to the 1994 study”. Wellington NZCER and AUSNZ

Humboldt, W. von. 1810. Über die innere und äußere Organisation der höheren wissenschaftlichen Anstalten in Berlin, in H. Weinstock (ed.) (1957) Wilhelm von Humboldt. Frankfurt: Fischer Bücherei, pp. 126–34.

Collier, A, and Gray, B. 2010. “The commercialisation of university innovations – a qualitative analysis of the New Zealand situation”, Research Report, University of Otago, Centre for Entrepreneurship, School of Business http://www.otago.ac.nz/ entrepreneurship/publications.html.

Humboldt, W. von. 1970. “On the spirit and organisational framework of intellectual institutions in Berlin“Minerva, 8: 242–67.

Education Act 1989 http://www.legislation. govt.nz/act/public/1989/0080/latest/ DLM183668.html

ITES. 2014. “Innovations in Tertiary Education Delivery Summit”, Summary of Proceedings https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/ assets/pdf_file/0019/152272/ITES-2014Summary-of-Proceedings.pdf

Eriksen, A., 2012 ‘Skills crisis: Government tells students to target skill shortages’ New Zealand herald, 23 Nov 2012. http://www. nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_ id=3&objectid=10849313

Jones, G, D, Galvin, K, and Woodhouse, D. 2000. ”Universities as Critic and Conscience of Society: The Role of Academic Freedom” AAU Series on Quality, Number 6, New Zealand Universities Academic Audit Unit.

Goedegebuure, L, Santiago, P, Fitznor, L, Stensaker, B, and van der Steen, M. 2008. “OECD Reviews of Tertiary Education: New Zealand”.http://www.oecd.org/ newzealand/38012419.pdf Hawke, G. 2008. “Aligning Education with our Contemporary Society and Economy“ IPS Lecture Series, New Zealand Future Maker or Future Taker http://www.treasury.govt.nz/ downloads/pdfs/tfr-hawke-4nov09.pdf

Kelsey, J. 2000. “Academic Freedom Needed Now More Than Ever” in Crozier, R. (Ed) .2000. Troubled Times, Academic Freedom in New Zealand, Palmerston North, Dunmore Press. Macfarlane, B. 2011. “The Morphing of Academic Practice: Unbundling and the Rise of the para-academic” in Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 65, No. 1 pp 59-73.

McLaughlin, M. 2003. “Tertiary Education Policy in New Zealand” http://www. fulbright.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ axford2002_mclaughlin.pdf

Radio NZ. 2016. ‘Student debt a ticking time bomb –Labour’ 2 March 2016 http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/ national/297912/student-debt-a-ticking-bomblabour

Naidoo, R. 2005. “Universities in the Marketplace: The Distortion of Teaching and Research” in Barnett, R. (Ed) 2005. Reshaping the University New Relationships between Research Scholarship and Teaching, Maidenhead, Open University Press

Robertson J, and Bond, C. 2005. “Being in the University”, in Barnett, R. (Ed) 2005 Reshaping the University New Relationships between Research Scholarship and Teaching, Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Neyland, J. 2010. Rediscovering the Spirit of Education After Scientific Management, Rotterdam, Sense publishers

Smart, W. 2011. “External research income earned by New Zealand universities”, Tertiary Sector Performance Analysis, Wellington, Ministry of Education https://www. educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0004/104395/External-Research-IncomeEarned-by-NZ-Universities.pdf

O’Callaghan, J. 2013. ”Degrees ranked by earning potential” Stuff, 22 January 2013 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/ education/8205505/Degrees-ranked-byearning-potential

Smyth, R. and Smart, W. 2012. “Commercialisation of university research” Tertiary education occasional paper, 2012/1, Tertiary Sector Performance Analysis, Wellington, Ministry of Education.

OECD. (2007). “Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: New Zealand” Paris, France, OECD. Peters, M. A. and Olssen, M. 2005. “Useful Knowledge’: Redefining Research and Teaching in the Learning Economy in Barnett, R. (Ed) 2005 Reshaping the University New Relationships between Research Scholarship and Teaching, Maidenhead, Open University Press

Trevett, C. “Minister to students: “Keep you heads down”, New Zealand Herald, 27 September 2011. Victorious. 2016, Issue 1, Wellington, Victoria University of Wellington.

Popper, K. 1966. The Open Society and Its Enemies Fifth edition (revised) https:// www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/A%20 Good%20Atheist%20Secularist%20 Skeptical%20Book%20Collection/Popper%20 -%20The%20Open%20Society%20and%20 its%20Enemies.pdf