“…Higher education was luxurious and was only access to elites for long, the postcolonial, free India higher education was considered important for national building and it was expanded but with huge public investment, however the expansion since 1990's (since India's explicit engagement with neo-liberalism) purely was driven by privatisation of higher education as the public fund for higher education began to decline (Carnoy & Dossani, 2013). This development has slowed down the democratic process for access to higher education in India and access to higher education was driven by more undemocratic means such a privatisation (David, 2014). Higher education institutions that have the status of institutions of national importance such as Indian Institute of Technology do not follow the national reservation policy (yet follow reservation in a different way) giving the rational of not diluting quality and strongly use merit door to admit students.…”
Section: Understanding Social Responsive Higher Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since independence Indian HEd has undergone a drastic change particularly in terms of expansion and inclusion. It is considered that equity cannot be achieved without enhancing capacity (David, 2011). Although there has been considerable growth in HEd in India, it is not remarkable when compared to other transition nations such as China.…”
Section: Higher Education Growth and Access In Indiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Government relaxed regulations for business to engage in profit making, which encouraged private investments in HEd. Thus more for-profit HEd institutions emerged, where students had to finance their education (David, 2011). Even public HEd institutions were advised to collect (at least 20% of the overall cost) student fees in the name of cost recovery and cost sharing.…”
Section: Higher Education Growth and Access In Indiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He therefore, proposes to balance fairness and inclusion (equal opportunity and equity) while addressing access to education. David & Wildemeersch (2014) identified the reproduction of caste hierarchy in the choice of course / subject selection among Indian students. Thus creating fair access to different class and caste groups are problematic and complex.…”
Section: Understanding Social Responsive Higher Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fraser (2008) points out two forms of injustice to the marginalized community; the first is cultural and symbolic, the second is socio-economic injustice. The socio-economic injustice poses the neo marginalization caused by privatization trends where financial merit is valued than academic merit which does not support equity and social justice demands (David, 2014) as the privatisation and commercialization dynamics have reduced the opportunity for the marginalized and have created double standards for haves and have-nots.…”
The purpose of this study is to understand and present multiple perspectives on the trends and developments on access to higher education in India. It particularly aims to contribute to the ongoing debate on access, equity and social justice as part of social justice demand for higher education. Higher education institutions in India use three approaches to admit students, namely; classical -merit/elite door, social responsive -reservation door and economic responsive -financial interest door or the combination of the three, depending on their status and background such as public, private aided, private unaided. The study consulted relevant documents and literature to understand the problem, gathered empirical data through semi-closed qualitative interviews and used critical reflection and social constructivism approach to analyse and discuss the results. The findings indicate that some of the respondents support merit/elite door, some favour reservation door, some demand fair and square reservation system, some others seem to accept financial interest door, while some others support the combination of the two or the three approaches. The findings confirmed the initial assumption of the study that privatisation of higher education and the emergence of self-financing programmes and institutions have slowed down and posed new challenges to the social justice agenda. The study argues that it is important that higher educational institutions to uphold social responsiveness by embracing equity and social justice. Moreover, it is important to raise conscious about the social responsiveness of higher education among various stakeholders and accounting divergent perspectives contribute to engineer fair and just society.
“…Higher education was luxurious and was only access to elites for long, the postcolonial, free India higher education was considered important for national building and it was expanded but with huge public investment, however the expansion since 1990's (since India's explicit engagement with neo-liberalism) purely was driven by privatisation of higher education as the public fund for higher education began to decline (Carnoy & Dossani, 2013). This development has slowed down the democratic process for access to higher education in India and access to higher education was driven by more undemocratic means such a privatisation (David, 2014). Higher education institutions that have the status of institutions of national importance such as Indian Institute of Technology do not follow the national reservation policy (yet follow reservation in a different way) giving the rational of not diluting quality and strongly use merit door to admit students.…”
Section: Understanding Social Responsive Higher Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since independence Indian HEd has undergone a drastic change particularly in terms of expansion and inclusion. It is considered that equity cannot be achieved without enhancing capacity (David, 2011). Although there has been considerable growth in HEd in India, it is not remarkable when compared to other transition nations such as China.…”
Section: Higher Education Growth and Access In Indiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Government relaxed regulations for business to engage in profit making, which encouraged private investments in HEd. Thus more for-profit HEd institutions emerged, where students had to finance their education (David, 2011). Even public HEd institutions were advised to collect (at least 20% of the overall cost) student fees in the name of cost recovery and cost sharing.…”
Section: Higher Education Growth and Access In Indiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He therefore, proposes to balance fairness and inclusion (equal opportunity and equity) while addressing access to education. David & Wildemeersch (2014) identified the reproduction of caste hierarchy in the choice of course / subject selection among Indian students. Thus creating fair access to different class and caste groups are problematic and complex.…”
Section: Understanding Social Responsive Higher Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fraser (2008) points out two forms of injustice to the marginalized community; the first is cultural and symbolic, the second is socio-economic injustice. The socio-economic injustice poses the neo marginalization caused by privatization trends where financial merit is valued than academic merit which does not support equity and social justice demands (David, 2014) as the privatisation and commercialization dynamics have reduced the opportunity for the marginalized and have created double standards for haves and have-nots.…”
The purpose of this study is to understand and present multiple perspectives on the trends and developments on access to higher education in India. It particularly aims to contribute to the ongoing debate on access, equity and social justice as part of social justice demand for higher education. Higher education institutions in India use three approaches to admit students, namely; classical -merit/elite door, social responsive -reservation door and economic responsive -financial interest door or the combination of the three, depending on their status and background such as public, private aided, private unaided. The study consulted relevant documents and literature to understand the problem, gathered empirical data through semi-closed qualitative interviews and used critical reflection and social constructivism approach to analyse and discuss the results. The findings indicate that some of the respondents support merit/elite door, some favour reservation door, some demand fair and square reservation system, some others seem to accept financial interest door, while some others support the combination of the two or the three approaches. The findings confirmed the initial assumption of the study that privatisation of higher education and the emergence of self-financing programmes and institutions have slowed down and posed new challenges to the social justice agenda. The study argues that it is important that higher educational institutions to uphold social responsiveness by embracing equity and social justice. Moreover, it is important to raise conscious about the social responsiveness of higher education among various stakeholders and accounting divergent perspectives contribute to engineer fair and just society.
PurposeTertiary education has been going through dramatic transformation in recent times. Such transformation is seen in teaching and learning at tertiary education. This study, therefore, aims to understand the transformation of teaching and learning in tertiary-level education, particularly by accounting the experiences and perspectives of postgraduate learners.Design/methodology/approachThe study narrowed higher education transformation into four key drivers such as expansion, excellence, extension, external and explored their dynamics and impacts for teaching and learning in tertiary education. The data was gathered from 25 doctoral students from three different cohorts, who shared their critical reflection on their experiences and perspectives on the transformation of teaching and learning in a reflective journal. The 25 reflective journals were used as the qualitative transcripts for analysis. Standard required ethical protocols were followed in the research. The results were analysed using thematic analysis.FindingsThe findings indicate that teaching and learning in the higher education are transformed largely using technology, by engaging various stakeholders, several pedagogic methods, a range of assessments and numerous contents and materials. The findings suggest that higher education transformation has affected teaching and learning in tertiary education positively in the UAE, while identifying some relevant areas for improvement.Research limitations/implicationsSingle data and small sample size (although suitable for the study) are the limitations. The experiences and perspectives of the postgraduate scholars on teaching and learning offer relevant insights for postgraduate learners, academic, researchers, curriculum developers, policymakers. The study asserts that accounting student's experiences and perspectives supports the understanding on the transformation of teaching and learning in tertiary education.Originality/valueThe study contributes to the ongoing debate on how students are helping shape teaching and learning practices in tertiary education, particularly from the UAE context using informed critical reflection. The study contends and concludes that teaching and learning in tertiary education are continued to be shaped by emerging trends and development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.