Thread by @DrJoannaT

Logged into the #uniSTARS platform and ready to go for the first keynote! Pretending this is a breakfast session 😂 ☕️😴

So, livetweeting may be a bit disrupted as I start my day.... lovely welcome by @kjnnelson & team including reminding us all it is NAIDOC week (the theme is healing country) and acknowledging the traditional custodians of the lands from which we join.

Now Simon Marginson kicks off after ensuring his tech works. He contends that our 'public good' approach for higher education is what is needed, and wants to explore what this might look like into the future (and how we can communicate about it).

He starts with the context of the pandemic: it turns out that we've seen more deaths due to COVID-19 than we had from WW2 (as a proportion though it's perhaps dropped since popn growth? still very significant). And there have been different responses across the world.

Love it. "being populous and ineffective was a complete disaster"

Also the dissatisfaction on the wearing of masks - seen as a violation of personal rights, but actually about protecting society - these grumpy ppl saw pandemic as an individual problem rather than collective.

Contrast is with east Asia where response was collective, focus on common situations, and they fared much better. Aus & NZ only did well since we were able to close borders - if this wasn't the case we'd be stuffed.

All of this is to say, that we need to turn from individual perspectives towards a collective perspective, and work towards collective good - and this needs to take place in higher education as well.

It turns out that 40% of people worldwide have participated in the tertiary education system - and that in places like Australia, up to 3/4 of population have passed through at some stage.

There are already many things we can attribute to higher education which are collective goods - shaping professions, developing knowledge. But also people are more trusting, socially connected and politically connected after tertiary education.

(there are also individual things like higher earning) ... but none of these things are in the minds of governments when they set the economic policy which shapes and funds higher education.

(... I was wondering why my fingers are cold when I'm typing - turns out it is 9.6 degrees in my home office this morning. Yikes!!)

So, now Simon wants to talk about public good and common good as two aspects which higher education could contribute to. In terms of the public - Dewey said impossible to separate individual from society, like separating letters of the alphabet from the alphabet.

But it's a little more overlapping & complex - variously the state, market, civil society as 3 parts of society, and then the individual/family as the units which crossover to different extent. In western society - limited liberal state.

Whereas the market, civil society, individuals are always contested and in tension. But these lead to the concept of public vs private - which happens in education as elsewhere.

Hmm I feel like I'm getting a crash course in economics - ideas of non-rivalrous and non-excludable outputs/benefits as part of the public good (as opposed to private). But current foci means that these collective goods are ignored.

Oh, there's a political aspect to this as well - public/private distinction between state and non-state production. Populations want govts to do some things (like HE).

But can you trust govt to determine what's in the collective interest, or not?

But govts fall into the trap of identifying only the economic public good, and then the common public goods are left by the wayside.

So there's a 2x2 on [non]market goods, and [non]state sector goods.

Aha... so, if the state is in charge of higher education, then it ends up controlling/determining private goods as well as the public stuff. In our current paradigm we place these in opposition and it becomes zero sum. But can we do it a different way?

Alternative ways - could be the French tradition, where there is a communicative, inclusive, social-relation version of public. Represented in the layout of old towns with the square and public buildings. An inclusive approach but also vulnerable to being captured e.g. by media

Habermas also talked about this concept in terms of the 'public sphere' with a network of people who would discuss and talk about stuff which then informed what government did - still happens today (I'd argue in both cases who gets a seat at those tables still skews what happens)

So what is the public good then? just like many other terms like globalisation it's been used to mean so many things that it's difficult to know what people are talking about (a jingle jangle, then)

UNESCO has therefore introduced the 'common good' - which is more participatory, allows for variation across contexts, collective activity determined from the ground up. Importance of implementation is highlighted (not just conception)

And many actors/bodies can contribute to the common good - NGOs, industry, govt. Important key aspect is democratic control by local social communities. In this conception higher education could have an important role and also support its ongoing function.

Whew. Typing with gloves is difficult, but got to the end of Simon Marginson's #UniSTARS keynote. Now onto the Q&A - probably won't be so good at livetweeting these but we'll see.

First qn: How does the common good approach help universities in contributing to equity?
A: Equity a great positive in past 20 yrs, but perhaps has been harmed in the pandemic. Common good approach is about rights as well as collective responsibilities.

So a few problems remain: firstly if there is a limited supply of HE in elite institutions then some ppl do much better in getting in than others. Need to look at a stratification of entrants but also ensure all institutions are quality so can choose your local.

Also need to change the 'middle class white male' culture - all the others deserve equal place in the academy. Simon relates UK experience - bringing PoC in has been a lot harder than bringing those from state schools/low SES areas.

If we have a fee based approach then only middle class can afford to come. Solution might be lots more scholarships so more people can come - danger is might end up allocated to those who perform better and could actually afford to come. So focus on international & scholarships.

Next Q: need to inspire people on the ground - we seem to have moved more to individualist and competitive ideas in HE. How do we as educators in the frontline influence more collective ideas in how, what & why we teach, and influence policy and expectation?

Simon responds: can do this well in the classroom - flexible place where can do a lot. e.g. success comes from everyone learning and doing well. Possible for everyone to understand the course through discussion and collaboration. More difficult at institution level?

This is because of the accountability that institutions have - leadership to board, performance frequently framed about rankings and numbers which can be competitive. Could still have conversations about changing these metrics - e.g. relational and capacity building

Q: University missions frequently contain the term 'public good' and seek to develop graduate attributes around global citizenship. But how can universities engage graduates as part of the common good, and what about industry leaders?

A: Universities already do a lot of common good stuff - co-operation is amazing globally and is already pursued. But it could be done *better*. How do we ask everyone to be socially and globally responsible? Some disciplines more oriented to this than others but can be done.

Our hearts might be in the right place, but we need to understand the 'other' - preferably in different languages and cultures. Simon talks about transformative experiences internationally - would be great to do more of this.

Opportunities include through military - high status intelligent people doing very complex things engaging many communities - and industry - corporate leaders can think about common good not just their bottom lines. These ppl play a role in HE governance as well.

Q: If HE can drive trust and empathy, how does it impact what happens in overpolicing and politics??
A: in the UK, police have been supported to enter HE and this helps their confidence and broadens their view of the world - very successful.

HE importantly helps you develop your sense of agency, ability to work through challenges, learn as you go. This translates into confidence, adaptability. Don't need to only react with brute force, can deal with difference. Real conundrum in the US

Next Q: lots of the notion that if you have a go, you'll get a go. How do we progress notions of fairness?
A: meritocracy concept inadequate around opportunity, justice, fairness. Right to compete is default but insufficient.

Need to look at collective vs individual reward structures - shouldn't only be one winner. Not just one person getting well-paid interesting work, ideally everyone. So how to intervene in markets to achieve this fairness in distribution of rewards?

Markets will tend towards more and more inequality in rewards so need to intervene (I hear EBAs!!) - so in HE need to minimise stratification as much as possible so everyone has the right to be in education - and that all education must be quality.

Could push the credential race up to the postgraduate level, and fight out merits/performance within the workplace.

Comment from a student about the importance of collective discussion and action - difficult in the pandemic but so vital.

So, winding up now. A thank you from Rachel & team for all the ammunition from Simon that will help us make the change. He reminds us the work we do is really important and does make a difference, so keep it up!

#UniSTARS