The evolving societal, political and economic landscape has led to increased demands on higher education institutions to make their contribution and benefits to society more visible, and in many cases with fewer public resources. This book contributes to the understanding of the responsibilities of Higher Education and the challenges posed to the production and circulation of knowledge. It raises questions about the role of higher education in society, its responsibility towards students and staff, and regarding its intended impact. The book brings together a range of topical papers, and a diversity of perspectives: scientific investigations of reputed scholars, critical evidence-based papers of third space professionals, and policymakers’ perspectives on the daily practice and management of higher education institutions and systems. The variety of both content and contributors elevates the richness of the book and its relevance for a large audience. Contributors are: Victor M. H. Borden, Lex Borghans, Bruno Broucker, Hamish Coates, Gwilym Croucher, Lisa Davidson, Mark Engberg, Philipp Friedrich, Martina Gaisch, Solomon Gebreyohans Gebru, Ton Kallenberg, Kathi A. Ketcheson, Lu Liu, Alfredo Marra, Clare Milsom, Kenneth Moore, Roberto Moscati, Marjolein Muskens, Daniela Nömeyer, Attila Pausits, Svetlana Shenderova, Wafa Singh, Chuanyi Wang, Denyse Webbstock, Gregory Wolniak, and Jiale Yang. See inside the book.

"Is the university contributing to our global crises or does it offer stories of hope? Much recent debate about higher education has focused upon rankings, quality, financing and student mobility. The COVID-19 pandemic, the climate crisis, the calls for decolonisation, the persistence of gender violence, the rise of authoritarian nationalism, and the challenge of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals have taken on new urgency and given rise to larger questions about the social relevance of higher education. In this new era of uncertainty, and perhaps opportunity, higher education institutions can play a vital role in a great transition or civilisational shift to a newly imagined world. Socially Responsible Higher Education: International Perspectives on Knowledge Democracy shares the experiences of a broadly representative and globally dispersed set of writers on higher education and social responsibility, broadening perspectives on the democratisation of knowledge. The editors have deliberately sought examples and viewpoints from parts of the world that are seldom heard in the international literature. Importantly, they have intentionally chosen to achieve a gender and diversity balance among the contributors. The stories in this book call us to take back the right to imagine, and 'reclaim' the public purposes of higher education"--

More than a century ago, John Dewey challenged the education community to look to civic involvement for the betterment of both community and campus. Today, the challenge remains. In his landmark book, editor Thomas Ehrlich has collected essays from national leaders who have focused on civic responsibility and higher education. Imparting both philosophy and working examples, Ehrlich provides the inspiration for innovative new programs in this essential area of learning.

This book explores how the notion of the responsible university manifests itself at various levels within Nordic higher education. As the impetus of the knowledge society has catapulted the higher education sector to the forefront of policy agendas, universities and other types of higher education institutions face increasing scrutiny, assessment and accountability. This book examines this phenomenon using the Nordic countries as cases in point, given the strong public commitment towards widening participation and public research investments. The editors and contributors analyse the history and current transformations of the idea of the responsible university, investigate new innovations in the educational landscape and look into how universities have begun to organise themselves to become more responsible. Drawing together scholars from the humanities and the social sciences, this interdisciplinary collection will be of interest and value to students and scholars of the role and nature of the modern university, in addition to practitioners and policy makers tasked with finding solutions to address the competing and often contradictory demands posed by a responsibility agenda. .

This book provides a comprehensive description of the federal government's relationship with higher education and how that relationship became so expansive and indispensable over time. Drawing from constitutional law, social science research, federal policy documents, and original interviews with key policy insiders, the author explores the U.S. government's role in regulating, financing, and otherwise influencing higher education. Natow analyzes how the government's role has evolved over time, the activities of specific governmental branches and agencies that affect higher education, the nature of the government's influence today, and prospects for the future of federal involvement in higher education. Chapters examine the politics and practices that shape policies affecting nondiscrimination and civil rights, student financial aid, educational quality and student success, campus crime, research and development, intellectual property, student privacy, and more. Book Features: Provides a contemporary and thorough understanding of how federal higher education policies are created, implemented, and influenced by federal and nonfederal policy actors. Situates higher education policy within the constitutional, political, and historical contexts of the federal government. Offers nuanced perspectives informed by insider information about what occurs behind the scenes in the federal higher education policy arena. Includes case studies illustrating the profound effects federal policy processes have on the everyday lives of college students, their families, institutions, and other higher education stakeholders.

In the United States, broad study in an array of different disciplines â€"arts, humanities, science, mathematics, engineeringâ€" as well as an in-depth study within a special area of interest, have been defining characteristics of a higher education. But over time, in-depth study in a major discipline has come to dominate the curricula at many institutions. This evolution of the curriculum has been driven, in part, by increasing specialization in the academic disciplines. There is little doubt that disciplinary specialization has helped produce many of the achievement of the past century. Researchers in all academic disciplines have been able to delve more deeply into their areas of expertise, grappling with ever more specialized and fundamental problems. Yet today, many leaders, scholars, parents, and students are asking whether higher education has moved too far from its integrative tradition towards an approach heavily rooted in disciplinary "silos". These "silos" represent what many see as an artificial separation of academic disciplines. This study reflects a growing concern that the approach to higher education that favors disciplinary specialization is poorly calibrated to the challenges and opportunities of our time. The Integration of the Humanities and Arts with Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Higher Education examines the evidence behind the assertion that educational programs that mutually integrate learning experiences in the humanities and arts with science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) lead to improved educational and career outcomes for undergraduate and graduate students. It explores evidence regarding the value of integrating more STEMM curricula and labs into the academic programs of students majoring in the humanities and arts and evidence regarding the value of integrating curricula and experiences in the arts and humanities into college and university STEMM education programs.

Americans now obtain college degrees at a higher rate than at any time in recent decades in the hopes of improving their career prospects. At the same time, the rising costs of an undergraduate education have increased dramatically, forcing students and families to take out often unmanageable levels of student debt. The cumulative amount of student debt reached nearly $1.5 trillion in 2017, and calls for student loan forgiveness have gained momentum. Yet public policy to address college affordability has been mixed. While some policymakers support more public funding to broaden educational access, others oppose this expansion. Noting that public opinion often shapes public policy, sociologists Natasha Quadlin and Brian Powell examine public opinion on who should shoulder the increasing costs of higher education and why. Who Should Pay? draws on a decade’s worth of public opinion surveys analyzing public attitudes about whether parents, students, or the government should be primarily responsible for funding higher education. Quadlin and Powell find that between 2010 and 2019, public opinion has shifted dramatically in favor of more government funding. In 2010, Americans overwhelming believed that parents and students were responsible for the costs of higher education. Less than a decade later, the percentage of Americans who believed that federal or state/local government should be the primary financial contributor has more than doubled. The authors contend that the rapidity of this change may be due to the effects of the 2008 financial crisis and the growing awareness of the social and economic costs of high levels of student debt. Quadlin and Powell also find increased public endorsement of shared responsibility between individuals and the government in paying for higher education. The authors additionally examine attitudes on the accessibility of college for all, whether higher education at public universities should be free, and whether college is worth the costs. Quadlin and Powell also explore why Americans hold these beliefs. They identify individualistic and collectivist world views that shape public perspectives on the questions of funding, accessibility, and worthiness of college. Those with more individualistic orientations believed parents and students should pay for college, and that if students want to attend college, then they should work hard and find ways to achieve their goals. Those with collectivist orientations believed in a model of shared responsibility – one in which the government takes a greater level of responsibility for funding education while acknowledging the social and economic barriers to obtaining a college degree for many students. The authors find that these belief systems differ among socio-demographic groups and that bias – sometimes unconscious and sometimes deliberate – regarding race and class affects responses from both individualistic and collectivist-oriented participants. Public opinion is typically very slow to change. Yet Who Should Pay? provides an illuminating account of just how quickly public opinion has shifted regarding the responsibility of paying for a college education and its implications for future generations of students.