Is there a best practice model of governance for PNG universities?

In this post I raise and theorise on a question that is perhaps best deliberated on at the national higher education sector level in my country Papua New Guinea (PNG). The question is: Is there a best practice model of governance for PNG universities?

If there is an existing ideal model or one that is being envisioned, then it may have been alluded to last November by Sir Rabbie Namaliu, a former prime minister of Papua New Guinea. At the 28^th graduation of Pacific Adventist University (PAU) Sir Namaliu was reported to have praised both PAU and Divine Word University (DWU) as the best universities in the country.

Sir Namaliu singled out two specific points for praise, one, high ethical standards and two, prudent management of limited funds. Public appraisal such as this seems to advance a model of governance that is primarily external in referencing. This model, it can be concluded, is one that is accountable and best deals with environmental uncertainty particularly funding uncertainty.

Sir Namaliu’s commendation was also noteworthy as it was made on the back of a recent review of the tertiary sector by a joint PNG and Australian governments’ committee chaired by Prof Ross Garnaut, which included Sir Namaliu himself.

As an insider of one of the two universities commended, DWU, I would like to share my view of its governance model. In the process of preparing for the resumption of the 2011 academic year later this month, I recently reflected on DWU’s theme for 2011: Matching Higher Education to the Labour Market. Adopting an annual theme around which to plan activities and measure outcomes for the year is one of DWU’s practices that perhaps epitomises its model of governance.  DWU’s president expounds on the thinking behind the practice of adopting an annual theme:

Any institution which has a clear vision and Strategic Plan needs to have a driving force which focuses on specific tasks during each academic year that is pointed out by a theme.  DWU has a very clear direction, thus each year, the University theme is assisting us to achieve our set of objectives and measure them accordingly.

Dwelling on the topic of university governance reminds me of the illustration (see below) I had developed for my PhD thesis. [My thesis titled: Exploration of a University Culture: A Papua New Guinea Case Study can be sourced from http://eprints.vu.edu.au/2027/1/salonda.pdf].  It may be a bit simplistic, but the illustration assisted me to encapsulate and plot the continuum of university governance models as I had been informed by the current literature on higher education I had reviewed, particularly the works by distinguished Australian academics, Professors Simon Marginson and Mark Considine.

It can be concluded from the illustration that multiple models of university governance exist at the same time. However, to ensure survival, different models have to negotiate and accommodate two competing realities, the uncertain fast changing external environment on the one hand, and the more stable deeply embedded internal operative principle of academic freedom on the other.  The type of governance at the either end of the continuum is likely to exclude one reality to the detriment of the organization. The pure collegial model being predominantly influenced by the internal operative principle of academic freedom and closed off to the external environment can not survive in the current context. Either irrelevancy or sustained resource deprivation will kill it off. The entrepreneurial or market model at the other end of the continuum, by being too market-driven, may be stigmatized for non-conformity to some accepted ideal of a university.

Returning to my opening question of whether there is a common best-practice model of university governance in PNG, the answer is that there probably is none at this stage. As to the governance model adopted by DWU, with a structure that places a Governing Council and executive managers at the apex of decision making and with practices epitomised in management practices such as by strategic planning, quality assurance and  market-driven rhetoric, DWU is located at the newer end of governance-models’ continuum. Decision-making centralized at executive management continues to ensure that DWU deals with the uncertainty in the external environment. However, tensions between managers and academics suggest that negotiating how to best accommodate academic freedom is an ongoing challenge.

One Developing World University’s Faith in Technology to Deliver

Adopting solar technology

In early November 2010, the President of Divine Word University (DWU), Papua New Guinea (PNG), Fr Jan Czuba, outlined the key challenges the university was likely to face in 2011 and asked how as a team the staff could face these going forward:

·         We need to explore ways in which we can contribute to the achievement of National Vision 2050.

·         How can we increase the enrolment at our university?

·         Do we have the necessary policy to ensure quality of research, teaching, learning and community service?

·         What is our progress to become a paperless and green university?

·         Are we incorporating ICT into our teaching, learning?

Contained in the challenges are competing realities that DWU must confront and manage. If it wants to be a reliable and leading national and regional higher education player, DWU has to increase access. It must do so whilst keeping costs down, assuring quality and being socially responsible. These are big calls for a university that is not financially well-endowed and one operating in a financially stringent environment. 

However, DWU management is leveraging technology including ICT, prudent financial management, and the policy mechanism to respond to the demands and manage risks. The technology and policy strategies adopted include:

• promoting e-learning as evidenced in the provision of laptops with Internet access to students; as well as the promotion amongst  staff to incorporate e-learning technologies in teaching and learning.
• the promotion and use of solar-technology and energy-saving devices.  The project to light up its campuses with solar lighting is being rolled out. (picture above)
• adopting energy efficient and paper minimisation policies

More information on DWU can be sought from: http://www.dwu.ac.pg

What Value do PNG Higher Education Providers see in their Students?

Recently, on my university’s intranet discussion forum, I posted the question: What value do we see in our students? I was prompted to ask the question of my organization having just read the Times Higher Education edition of 26 November, 2010 article by Simon Baker, Hefce head denounces likely loss of arts teaching funding, in which the chief executive of the Higher Education Funding Council for England, Sir Alan Langlands, is quoted to have had this caution for the Higher Education (HE) sector in his country:

If we value our students simply for what we get out of them or what they might earn in the future, be assured that they will in turn estimate our value by what they can get out of us and I think that would be a betrayal of our higher education system in the UK.

Such sentiments in the global HE arena are linked to a fundamental question being asked, heatedly debated on and even literally fought over. The question is:

 Is Higher Education a public good and therefore be funded as a public service, or is it a private good and as such the cost be borne by those who benefit most from it, the clients?

Many nations the world over, including England, Canada and Australia, for instance, have redefined HE as a private good rather than a public good. The changed perception of the purpose of HE has staunch supporters and detractors. In the news recently you would have read or seen the protests in England following announcements of more funding cuts to universities.  The protests, some elements of which have been responsible for the destruction of property, are but some of the immediate socially detrimental consequences of the changed perception of HE being played out. 

In Papua New Guinea, there are those within  its higher education sector who would like to see HE cast in a more vocational mold. This is yet another outcome of the changed view of the purpose of HE.

Many commentators on higher education see that the impact of the redefinition of the purpose of HE is being felt and will continue to be felt both in the short and long term at the personal, institutional and at the societal levels.   From the perspective of the paying student or client, the simple economic logic increasingly defines choice of program of study: If I am paying a high cost for HE, than it is an investment for which I expect high returns, the sooner the better. At the institutional level, HE providers facing financial shortfalls will focus provision on programs that are in high demand as these translate immediately to revenue generation.  The kinds of programs that are more likely to meet the provider and client expectations are programs mainly in the business and vocational fields. The providers view students as clients and value them for the money that can be made out of them. In my own institution, a whole organizational unit is set up to capitalise on the growing demand for vocational education or client-tailored HE.  For us, if we assure the quality of the  products/programs, this leads to a win-win situation for both, where the clients’ needs are met and the institution generates much needed income to support organizational functions.

However, there are dangers to society of having its higher education institutions pursue a primarily private or instrumental goal. In another Times Higher Education article, Roger Lister, a professor at Salford Business School, University of Salford, decries that such a narrow focus does a disservice not just to some of a nation’s best young minds but also to the greater good of society:

Today's disadvantaged are the graduates of degree courses that, with government encouragement, have imparted "marketable" education in the narrowest sense. Such faculties are operating as de-disciplined skills factories rather than universities.

As to what purpose PNGHE should serve, one of my colleagues who contributed to the discussion in response to the question I posted expressed this view:

Putting it simply,… our institutions of Higher Learning or Higher Education for that matter, must take on board both enterprises, the vocational and the academic disciplines; i.e. the enterprise of feeding the labour market with skilled labourers whilst at the same time engaging in the more intellectual pursuits in view of instilling well-roundedness in our students for general life.
My own view is that this is an important issue for the PNGHE sector, particularly universities, to be engaged in by critiquing public policy. In so doing they will help shape national HE policy for the short and long-term good of the nation, the users of HE service and the providers of Higher Education.  This is an opportune time to be actively engaged as the sector deliberates on and develops  its Higher Education Development Plan III.

A Case for public funding support for ‘private’ higher education in PNG

The incumbent National Alliance Party led government in Papua New Guinea (PNG) handed down its 2011 budget recently. All up, the projected spending is to the tune of just over 9 billion PNG Kina, approximately 4 billion Australian dollars.

This is the budget that we hope begins to underwrite the implementation of the Vision 2050 national development plan.  In my blog entry of 18 October, 2010, I wrote that the higher education sector is being called upon to increase by tens of thousands its output of trained workforce required in both the public and private sectors to carry PNG forward. 

PNG will need all of its six universities, four public and two private, to expand to increase access and output. However, when additional funding is necessary across the sector, the public universities receive budgetary allocations, and the two ‘private’ universities on the face of it seem to miss out altogether.

In the case of Divine Word University (DWU), this seems to be against the spirit of the current partnership relationship that the institution has with the state.  Since 21st August 1996 (National Executive Council Decision No: 134/96) DWU is recognized as a partner university in the development of higher education in PNG. As of 15th of October 2003 (National Executive Council Decision No: 187/03), it is recognized as an agency of higher education in PNG. Its programs are accredited by the Commission for Higher Education.  Its students are drawn from all levels of PNG society many from disadvantaged regions.  Many of its students have parents in formal employment who contribute to the state in paying taxes. DWU’s increasing numbers of alumni are and will contribute to the nation in numerous capacities both in the public and private sectors.

With such benefits flowing to the nation from private universities, the question is why there is again no budgetary support?  Perhaps this is due to how the word ‘private’ is defined and applied to the two non-state universities. What the term ‘private’ translates to as applied to universities, varies in terms of the goals and contexts. In mainly wealthy nations, a private university is a corporate entity engaged in the delivery of the higher education product as a commercial venture. The primary motive for engagement in higher education is therefore the bottom line for the provider and the promise of high returns in employment and salaries for the student customer. Any benefits to the common good that may flow are happy coincidences.

In the developing world contexts such as PNG, universities which are purely commercial in interests are not likely to be going concerns any time soon. The two universities currently labeled as ‘private’ are established and run by either a religious organization, as the case with DWU, or a Church denomination in the case of Pacific Adventist University (PAU).

DWU’s involvement in higher education is driven by a sense of altruism or a commitment to serving the common good in a context of need.  This is the basis of the partnership relationship that it has with the state of PNG, an understanding that the state alone is not able meet the needs of its people.  

At a time when the nation needs all its tertiary institutions to massively increase the training of the its human resource, and there is more money to spend, it is time perhaps to consider extending  a helping hand to the ‘private’ universities in order to enable them to further support national development needs.  In doing so, the state also tangibly supports the PNG students both pre and in service who are enrolled in these institutions who otherwise may be denied access to higher education for lack of capacity at public universities. DWU’s graduate output is increasing by the year. DWU’s current enrollment figure stands at 3050 with a projected enrollment at 5000 by 2016. It can do more and some level of state support will help it go a long way.

A Higher Education Teaching and Learning Philosophy

Helping students swallow seeds from which beautiful tomorrows will grow

In the revised application form for promotions, staff in my university now are required to outline their teaching and learning philosophies. As I completed  mine, I reflected, for the first time really, on what my teaching and learning philosophy is. As it just happened, I had been processing the final portfolio assignments of one of my literature classes. Through this activity that I came upon an appropriate analogy, the analogy of swallowing water melon seeds. The analogy captures well what teaching is about for me. The student wrote [with some modification from me] in concluding the portfolio:

Studying literature is like eating water-melon. Your first action will be to carefully remove the seeds before every bite. But seeds are the most significant things from which beautiful tomorrows will grow.

Reflecting on the philosophical insight of this analogy makes me see how meaningful this is for me as a lecturer. The act of teaching and learning to me becomes an art often times of making knowledge (the seeds) palatable to help students comprehend (swallow) it, and then observe the students’ growing appreciation for it (the sprouting and rooting of seeds).

Considered in the context of current questions about the purpose of universities, to me, the analogy underscores the view held by many students and indeed by other groups both inside and outside the university that not all programs or units or components of knowledge in a program are useful or relevant.  They treat these programs or units, mainly in the social sciences, as ‘the watermelon seeds’ that on first instinct are to be dug up and flicked off or in the least unwillingly tolerated as having little utility.

The challenge for the lecturer, and indeed the university at large, is to make these ‘seeds’ palatable for the students and others to swallow now with the certain knowledge that they will come to enjoy the sweetness of their fruit later in life. These ‘seeds’ have value not just for the individual but for the society at large.

Higher Educating A Nation: Why?

An unlikely comparison but two nations Papua New Guinea (PNG) and the US face the need to increase numbers of their citizens’ completing higher education. As reported in the 13 October edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education, President Obama wants to higher education completion rates of US citizens to hoist the US to the top of countries world wide by 2020 of nations whose citizens complete higher education. At the minimum he would like every American to finish a year or more of higher education.

The PNG national government is also promoting higher education as the key enabler for the achievement of the nation’s recently launched 2050 vision. Higher education providers are thus entreated to response to the national demand to graduate increasing numbers of well qualified graduates for effective economic and social participation to drive PNG towards the 2050 vision of a Middle Income Economy. But here the comparison ends.

President Obama is putting money where his mouth is by channelling huge sums of dollars to schools and colleges so numbers of US citizens completing higher education are increased. Again as reported in the Chronicle of Higher Education, at issue for US are the low retention rates of college enrolments. By stemming the outflow of students from schools and colleges before completing their programs of study, the US hopes to be able to increase its higher educated manpower levels. President Obama is further matching his demands on college education with more promises of money to states conditional on set of 4 accountability and quality assurances.

 In contrast, PNG’s workforce capacity demand can not be met without institutional capacity expansion.  But, I would argue that there seems little prospect of that happening in any meaningful way without the government increasing its current levels of funding to Higher Education Institutions (HEI). The best advice going to the HEIs is to adopt managerial strategies and knowhow to generate funding to supplement the shortfalls and perhaps maintain current provision and have extra for expansion initiatives.  A number of institutions such as the University of Papua New Guinea and Divine Word University are innovating and supplementing funding levels through entrepreneurial initiatives. But the mantra to be innovative and entrepreneurial is not enough to meet the human resource capacity needs of PNG. Without serious money going to HEIs to expand and increase access, vision 2050 would be just a dream.

The Question of University Legitimacy in Papua New Guinea

Two seemingly unrelated events took place in early October 2010 in the higher education sector in Papua New Guinea, of which one was reported in the daily newspapers, and one did not. The event reported was that the leader of the opposition in government, Sir Mekere Morauta, had visited Jubilee University (JU) during which he had presided over the commissioning of the institution’s new security fence.  The event that went unreported, though not by design, was that a team from Divine Word University (DWU), of which I was a member, conducted an audit of the  neighbouring nursing school, the Lutheran School of Nursing (LSON), which was seeking to renew its affiliation with DWU for a third term.

Had both been reported in the news, to the casual observer it would not have been obvious that the unrelated events were connected to the current larger subsurface narrative at play in the sphere of PNG higher education. The narrative is on the question of university or higher education institution legitimacy. Just when and how does an organization aspiring to become an institution of higher learning in PNG become validated as one and what are the tangible indicators of its legitimacy? And who are the key payers that bestow legitimacy?

During the audit of LSON, both staff including the head of the school expressed satisfaction at the benefits that flowed from affiliation in terms of the school’s increased collaboration with key partners in both the health and higher educations sectors which had increased the school’s public visibility and translated into improved standards of their academic awards. Predictably, they wished to see the relationship with DWU continue.

The terms of reference of the LSON audit were developed from process and protocol set by the national higher education regulatory bodies of the Commission for Higher Education (CHE), its service arm the Office of Higher Education (OHE) and DWU whose programs are accredited by CHE and thus it could act as an accrediting agency.

The fact that JU had invited the leader of the opposition in government and he had accepted the invitation could be interpreted as a show of endorsement of the institution at this level of government. Given the authority vested in the leader of the opposition, would the visit have translated into greater acceptance and visibility of JU amongst the public and the key constituency of HEIs?

Well, not quite, in my view. A public notice placed in the newspapers earlier this year outlined the required process and protocol to be adhered to by institutions seeking accreditation and subsequently acceptance as HEIs. JU had apparently not complied with these requirements and its claim to university status was and remains contested. Also in February of this year, it was reported in the National newspaper that Dr Tagis, the Director General of the OHE, had written to the National Superintendent of the Assemblies of God Church, the sponsor of Jubilee College (the specific use of term ‘college’), that the institution had not satisfied the requirements to be conducting itself as an HEI and it was misleading for it to be publicly calling itself a university.

And so the message in this is that even if there is support from the highest levels of politics, until such time as JU or any other aspiring organizations comply with the stipulated requirements, they will remain ostracized from the community of accredited institutions as illegitimate. The acceptance by this community will greatly increase JU's profile as an institution of higher learning. LSON demonstrates on the other hand that an institution will continue to reap the rewards that flow from being accepted as a higher learning institution as long as it is prepared to periodically subject itself to an audit process.