Amsterdam Conference On Diversity - Chris Brink

Quality and Equality in Higher Education

Keynote Address

“Diversity 2010: Making a Difference”

Amsterdam, 23 March 2010

Chris Brink

What I want to say:

The more we pursue diversity ...

... the more we raise issues of equality.

And the more we pursue equality ...

... the more we hear fears about quality.

So: The diversity and equality agenda cannot afford to ignore the quality question

What is the equality agenda, and what has it got to do with diversity?

• The equality agenda is not based on any belief that nature has endowed us all with equal gifts ...

• ... but starts from the premise that natural ability is an individual trait, not a group characteristic

• Our understanding of diversity is based on our recognition of groups, but our understanding of education is based on individual talent

• If there were no diversity there would be no need for an equality agenda

• But since there is, there is.

“The equality agenda is to decouple origins from destiny.”

Why would (or should) a university take up the agenda of diversity and equality ? (1)

The moral argument – Under-representation or underperformance of any societal group

may be a sign of systemic denial of natural rights or social justice, in which case society has a moral obligation to rectify it.

E.g. INHolland University – “Diversity is about putting ‘the standard’ in perspective, about

emancipation of underrepresented groups, about justice and integrity, and about enjoying difference.”

A weakness of the moral argument – It is about how the world ought to be, not about how the world is – Easily ignored, bypassed or subverted


The historical argument – Applicable when there has been an injustice in the past,

which can now be identified as having disadvantaged a particular group or groups

E.g. South Africa in 1954 – “What is the use of teaching a Bantu child mathematics?”

Dr HF Verwoerd, speech in Parliament on

introducing the Bantu Education Act

The historical argument is good when applicable, but is not applicable everywhere


The pragmatic argument – There is a good business case for diversity and equality – Both for the institution and for society – We can turn diversity to advantage, as a source of creativity and

innovation

This is a strong argument, because – It appeals to self-interest first – It is rooted in how the world is, rather than how it ought to be– It refers not to the past but to the future

The main weakness of the pragmatic argument– The charge that diversity and equality erode quality and

standards

Main Case Study: Stellenbosch 2002-2007

• The town: Beautiful setting, wonderful climate, wine route, rugby, ...

• The University, as seen by itself: “The Athens of the South”

• The University, as seen by others: “The maternity ward of apartheid”

The pragmatic argument at Stellenbosch

“Diversity has an inherent educational value. That is why we need more of it. The university is an educational institution. Our business is about knowledge. That means that we all have to learn, all the time. … And we will learn more from those people, those ideas, and those phenomena that we do not know, than from those we know only too well. ...

Whatever the advantages may be of a mono-cultural institution, they do not include the opportunity to meet and engage with many different viewpoints, and to learn about many different environments. One reason why our engagement with diversity of colour is so urgent for us in South Africa is that engagement between black and white people is such a powerful training ground for engagement with different ideas.”

“True diversity, in the educational sphere, is not the diversity of people, but

the diversity of ideas.”

10

Diversiteit: Studente 2001-2006 STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY CONTACT EDUCATION STUDENTS

BY LEVEL OF STUDY AND RACE FOR 2001 TO 2006 1)

STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITEIT KONTAKONDERRIGSTUDENTE VOLGENS VLAK VAN STUDIE EN RAS VIR 2001 TOT 2006 1)

JAAR / YEAR 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

VOORGRAADS / UNDERGRADUATE

Aantal / Number 12228 12698 13416 13446 13863 14173Ras / Race Wit / White 10525 10704 10947 10909 11088 11167 Bruin / Coloured 1346 1518 1776 1890 2036 2195 Swart / Black 234 336 504 471 550 617 Indiër / Indian 123 140 189 176 189 194

Persentasie Bruin, Swart en Indiër / Percentage Coloured, Black and Indian 13.9% 15.7% 18.4% 18.9% 20.0% 21.2%

NAGRAADS / POSTGRADUATE


Persentasie Bruin, Swart en Indiër / Percentage Coloured, Black and Indian 31.5% 33.6% 35.0% 39.2% 41.8% 41.8%

ALLE STUDENTE / ALL STUDENTS


Persentasie Bruin, Swart en Indiër / Percentage Coloured, Black and Indian 19.7% 21.5% 23.7% 25.7% 27.5% 28.3%1) Spesiale studente uitgesluit / Special studens excluded

Overview of transformation at Stellenbosch

The most common reaction / fear / accusation:

“Yes, but what about standards?”

And I have found this elsewhere as well …

• In the UK, regarding an Extended Medical Degree at Kings College London: – “Is it worth our while to widen participation, particularly if this

risks reducing standards? Political ideology says yes, but the evidence is pending and costs are rising fast.”

Editorial in the British Medical Journal

Vol. 336 No. 7653 (2008), pp.1082-1083.

• INHolland University: – “At the same time, higher education will have to learn to deal with

practical hindrances and, sometimes urgent, socio-economic problems brought into the institutions by the [diversity of] students. Being unfamiliar with the Dutch educational system, lack of financial means (more jobs on the side) and a worse command of the Dutch language are some of the causes that result in lower study results and higher drop-our rates among non-western migrant students.”

Let us consider the notion of Quality …

Quality as the answer to the question “Is it good?” In various versions: • “Is it outstanding?” [Quality as excellence] • “Is it good at what it does?” [Fitness for purpose] • “What is it good for?” [Fitness of purpose] • “Is it beneficial?” [Quality as impact] • “Is it good value?” [Quality as value / value for money] • “Does it add value?” [Quality as value-add] • “Is it efficient?” [Quality of process] • “Is it effective?” [Quality of outcomes]

15

… and Standards

If quality is the answer to the question “Is it good?”, then standards give the answer to the question “Is it good enough?” (for some particular purpose)

- i.e. a threshold of accomplishment

So: quality is about the effectiveness of the educational process, and one of the effective outcomes being sought is high standards.

16

The notion of quality as excellence

• It is this notion of quality which is assumed when the charge is made that equality erodes quality

• “Excellence” is a perfectly legitimate notion of quality • But more subtle than might appear, and therefore prone

to oversimplification. E.g: – Reputation becomes a proxy for excellence – “Elite” turns into “elitist”

• The real danger: – “Is it good?” turns into “Is it better than the others?” – Quality turns into ranking. (That is, a position on a list.)

“We have an unfortunate talent for turning diversity into hierarchy.”

The influence of League Tables

• Once the idea has taken root that quality is manifested as a position on a list, that list becomes a reputational factor

• “Slipping in the league tables” can impact on student recruitment, staff appointments and donor activity

• Then league tables influence institutional behaviour • And even national policy

How “quality as ranking” affects the agenda of diversity and equality

• Exactly the kind of measures that are needed in the agenda of diversity and equality, such as – Alternative admissions programs (lower entry standards) – Academic support programs (higher drop-out rates) – Extended degree programs (longer times to completion)

• … are examples of parameters that feature in league table rankings

• and can make your university “slip in the league tables”

Example: Partners Program, Newcastle Univ Medical School

This is the brick wall that the pragmatic argument runs into

A first response to the charge that “Standards will drop”

Typically, groups under-represented in HE do not meet normal entry requirements to the same extent as standard cohorts – hence the fear that admitting them (even under Special Admissions Programs) will cause standards to drop.

• Question: Which should concern us more: input standards, or output standards?

• Claim: Output standards can be maintained provided sufficient value-added measures are instituted for those who enter under special-admissions programs.

• Examples: Cape Town, Newcastle, Kings College

“Flexible on access, firm on success.”

A broader point

“In line with our Vision Statement, Stellenbosch University strives to be an academic institution of excellence, with a national profile and an international reputation. Quality must be our benchmark. If so, we have to ask a simple but profound question: how do you judge quality relative to context? Some of us take for granted an environment, which for others is only a dream. If so, is it not the case that our performance, no matter how well merited on the basis of our own efforts, also owes something to the environment within which we live and work? Consider two hypothetical cases. One is a student whose parents are well-educated professional people, reasonably affluent, and who comes to us from one of the so-called “good schools”, where she enjoyed every possible facility for sharpening the mind. The other is a student whose parents have had little formal education and who live in poverty, who comes to us from a historically disadvantaged school in a gang-infested area. If the former student comes to Stellenbosch with a school-leaving mark of 90%, and the latter comes with a school-leaving mark of 70%, is it possible for us to say that the former is a better student than the latter? And if we do, would that be right?”

“Performance is relative to context.”

Which brings us to reconsider the notion of quality

“I have said that we wish to be a top-class university, and we certainly do. But so do most other universities. We have to be more specific: what does quality mean for us? Certainly it means good research and innovation. Certainly it also means turning out top-quality graduates, well-educated intellectually and well-prepared for the world of work. But I would argue that there is more. For Stellenbosch to be a top-quality university, in the realities of the here and now, must mean also that we are an active participant and role-player in the exciting process of creating a new South African society. Our activity as a university, I would argue, is also judged on the quality of our contribution to society. And that, in the end, is what it is all about. We wish to be a top-quality university for a reason: to make a contribution to the development of this country, and the development of Africa. We wish to be participants, not spectators, in the new democratic dispensation. We wish to go to work. If this university grew strong during the days of apartheid, let that strength now be put to work for the benefit of all.”

“Quality needs diversity.”

What the diversity agenda needs to do:

• Confront the charge that equality erodes quality • Challenge the simplistic notion of quality as ranking • Articulate a broader notion of quality • Which:

– Reinterprets (but does not contradict) the notion of quality as excellence

– Recognises that performance is relative to context – Supports the mission of the institution – And contributes to the good society.

Thank you

Documents

Amsterdam Conference On Diversity - Chris Brink