Globalisation and education equity: The impact of neoliberalism on universities’ mission

Abstract

In his writing in the mid-nineteenth century – The Idea of a University, John Henry Newman argues that the university provides a platform for human advancement through teaching and research. Over a century later, our public university now hedged on several social, political, ecological and economic factors that bully its traditional mission daily. More recently, neoliberalism – a key feature of globalisation, knowledge economy, environmental crises and other economic logic – continues to significantly shift universities’ missions in another direction by creating winners and losers. Drawing on a range of theoretical perspectives, such as the glonacal agency heuristic, global economic and social forces, and empirical data, this paper examines the implications of these changes for equity in education, highlighting how global and national market-oriented policies, practices and outcomes continue to add to the stratification of higher education. Although the benefits of this global phenomenon are enormous, we maintain that the disbenefits are dire and could contribute to the narrowing of universities’ traditional missions, increased academic managerialism, the death of academic collegiality, and uneven development and unhealthy competition among universities locally and globally if not carefully considered. We admit that competition will continue to transform universities because the pressures of globalisation, as seen in recent times, increasingly influence higher education systems. However, since universities still operate mainly in their national context, we believe national educational policies can focus on reducing competition with other universities and promoting equity. To cement this way of thinking in universities both nationally and globally, we must understand the critical role of leadership as well as get it right.

Power and place: Uncovering the politics of global medical education

“…The neo-liberal project reinforces stratification rather than equalising the power relationship. 36 The colonial and post-colonial nature of globalised medical education has been raised by many voices who ask whether global medical education is not actually a Western export, typical of neo-imperialism or neo-colonialism. [37][38][39][40][41][42] The same political critique is levelled specifically at global accreditation:…”