Last week, SFS's vice chairman Johan Alvfors visited the Swedish University and College Association's (SUHF) ban conference in Gothenburg and the University of Gothenburg's pedagogical conference. Here he tells more about the visit!
Tuesday 20 October
On Tuesday, the Swedish Association of Universities and University Colleges (SUHF) began its annual union conference. The conference was attended by almost all the principals and heads of administration of the higher education institutions, as well as key people from the higher education sector. The theme of the conference, which celebrated SUHF's 20th anniversary, was the higher education of the future. It was fun to see how many of the universities' managements placed great emphasis on the development of the education. Of course it may seem, but our experience tells us that themes such as research or administration often dominate conversations at a central level.
It quickly became clear that there was a broad consensus on where the challenges of the future lie. Although all participants were affiliated with higher education institutions or represented other interests, it was clear that we had more in common than what differed us. Many of the speakers concluded that we need more knowledge. A typical answer in the academic environment, but it still indicates that higher education institutions take the issues seriously. Here is a list of things that were repeatedly raised during the conference:
-
Need for higher efficiency and focus on learning to meet the declining funding for higher education and ever higher quality requirements,
-
Need for a better balance between research and education, to promote collaboration and quality in both activities,
-
Need for holistic thinking and renewal of learning environments from a pedagogical perspective,
-
Clarification of the university teaching career, better career support and broader merit evaluation,
-
Need for more discussion, exchange of knowledge and research on the role of teachers and learning,
-
Development of the university's management and control with a focus on creating conditions for the mentioned changes.
The Minister for Higher Education, Helene Hellmark Knutsson, spoke about goal conflicts. She said that there does not have to be contradictions between many getting a place and quality in the business, between research and education, or between education for different purposes. The problematization of these myths was a theme for all the days in Gothenburg. It is clear that the quality of higher education will be strengthened if more people are included in the discussion. For example, it can be about educating brilliant theorists by creating learning with practical and labor market theoretical elements, or making progress in research by involving students who at the same time get closer to their learning goals. In other words, knowledge is there to be shared, as the Minister also said.
But all that is only true if we succeed in keeping the conditions for the academy good. When resources and patience run out, different interests begin to separate the academy's mission. Research is set against education, students' will against the needs of working life. But breaking apart does not make it better. Instead, we must strive to consistently question and develop the academy together!
Wednesday 21 October
On Wednesday, SUHF held its annual meeting. SFS was the only outside organization that was invited to the meeting when the higher education institutions' co-operation organization would decide how they should co-operate, which projects should be run and which issues should be prioritized. The fact that the student movement is invited is a sign that the cooperation between students and higher education institutions is alive, and that the Higher Education Act's writing that quality work is a common concern for students and teachers is not just empty words. I informed about SFS's activities during the coming year, and told among other things about our campaign Everyone understands except me which is about taking pedagogical development, education and skill seriously in all higher education.
In addition, I took the opportunity to invite SUHF to collaborate on two issues: the conditions for student influence and a new resource system for higher education. The higher education institutions expressed a strong concern about the conditions of student influence, both issues of funding and the unions' ability to attract members and when it comes to getting more students to actively engage in and in their education.
Thursday 22 October
On Thursday, I participated in a university pedagogical conference at the University of Gothenburg. The higher education institution has recently decided on a new pedagogical policy with an associated pedagogical idea program. Together, the documents create a basis for how universities should work to develop their educations. The program describes important directions for development and focuses on student-centered learning, learning environments and academic teaching. (Academic teaching means that university teachers use the same critical, developing approach to their own and each other's teaching as in research.)
It is smart that the university has stuck to scientifically grounded methods, without locking itself in simplifications, such as that certain teaching methods are always better. Nevertheless, the idea program is something that can bring together the pedagogical development and hopefully enough to make joint decisions from the outside. One of the best things about the program is that the teachers' responsibility to pay attention to structural deficiencies that hinder development, and that the university management commits itself to react and give the teachers the right conditions.
At the conference, I had the opportunity to talk to many committed teachers and students, who took the opportunity to question and discuss most things in their educations. Many ideas and recognizable nods were exchanged, and it became clear forum for discussion is one of the best tools we have to change. Being able to have such conversations with people who acknowledge and relate to, but are not locked in, the great difficulties we face is liberating.
Gothenburg's work will be one of many good examples that we highlight in the campaign Everyone understands except me. But we will not be content with stating that good things happen here and there - but always link to a national perspective. Does this compare to other universities? Does this create an understandable and accessible university landscape? Does it mean that we can guarantee all students, regardless of subject and place, an equal education?
The week has given a lot back to my work for education quality. I believe that university management as well as teachers and students are ready for great things!