University Curriculum Policy Processes in Chile: A Case Study

Authors: Victoria C. Valdebenito

Abstract:

Located within the context of accelerating globalization in the 21^st-century knowledge society, this paper focuses on one selected university in Chile at which radical curriculum policy changes have been taking place, diverging from the traditional curriculum in Chile at the undergraduate level as a section of a larger investigation. Using a ‘policy trajectory’ framework, and guided by the interpretivist approach to research, interview transcripts and institutional documents were analyzed in relation to the meso (university administration) and the micro (academics) level. Inside the case study, participants from the university administration and academic levels were selected both via snow-ball technique and purposive selection, thus they had different levels of seniority, with some participating actively in the curriculum reform processes. Guided by an interpretivist approach to research, documents and interview transcripts were analyzed to reveal major themes emerging from the data. A further ‘bigger picture’ analysis guided by critical theory was then undertaken, involving interrogation of underlying ideologies and how political and economic interests influence the cultural production of policy. The case-study university was selected because it represents a traditional and old case of university setting in the country, undergoing curriculum changes based on international trends such as the competency model and the liberal arts. Also, it is representative of a particular socioeconomic sector of the country. Access to the university was gained through email contact. Qualitative research methods were used, namely interviews and analysis of institutional documents. In all, 18 people were interviewed. The number was defined by when the saturation criterion was met. Semi-structured interview schedules were based on the four research questions about influences, policy texts, policy enactment and longer-term outcomes. Triangulation of information was used for the analysis. While there was no intention to generalize the specific findings of the case study, the results of the research were used as a focus for engagement with broader themes, often evident in global higher education policy developments. The research results were organized around major themes in three of the four contexts of the ‘policy trajectory’. Regarding the context of influences and the context of policy text production, themes relate to hegemony exercised by first world countries’ universities in the higher education field, its associated neoliberal ideology, with accountability and the discourse of continuous improvement, the local responses to those pressures, and the value of interdisciplinarity. Finally, regarding the context of policy practices and effects (enactment), themes emerged around the impacts of the curriculum changes on university staff, students, and resistance amongst academics. The research concluded with a few recommendations that potentially provide ‘food for thought’ beyond the localized settings of this study, as well as possibilities for further research.

Keywords: Curriculum, policy, higher education, global-local dynamics.

References:

[1] Ball, Stephen. 1994. Education reform: A critical and poststructural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.
[2] Vidovich, L. (2013a). “Balancing quality and equity in higher education policy agendas? Global to local tensions.” In Making Policy in Turbulent Times. Challenges and Prospects for Higher Education, ed. P. Axelrod, T. Shanahan, and R. Wellen. Montreal and Kingstone: McGill-Queen's University Press.
[3] Adams, T., & Demaiter, E. (2008). Skill, education and credentials in the new economy. Work, Employment & Society, 22(2), 351-362.
[4] Vidovich, L., & O’Donoghue, T. (2011). Transforming university curriculum policy in a global knowledge era: mapping a global case study research agenda. Educational Studies, 1: 1-13.
[5] Marginson, S. (2013). Tertiary education policy in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.
[6] Knight, J. (2013). The changing landscape of higher education internationalisation – for better or worse? Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 17(3), 84-90.
[7] Connell, R. (2013). The neoliberal cascade and education: An essay on the market agenda and its consequences. Critical Studies in Education, 54(2), 99-112.
[8] Gregorutti, G., Espinoza, O., González, L., & Loyola, J. (2016). What if privatising higher education becomes an issue? The case of Chile and Mexico. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 46(1), 136-158.
[9] Salter, P. 2014. “Towards a multilateral analysis of ‘knowing Asia’: a policy trajectory approach”. Historical Encounters: A Journal of Historical Consciousness, Historical Cultures, and History Education 1 (1): 111-112.
[10] Muhammad, Y. 2016. “Pakistani national identity, cultural diversity, and global perspectives: a policy trajectory study of the national curriculum for secondary school Pakistan studies in Punjab”. PhD Thesis, University of Tasmania, Australia.
[11] Sanny, S. R. 2019. “An introduction to Stephen J. Ball’s ideas and contributions on the theme of education policy implementation”. Revista de estudios teóricos y epistemológicos en política educativa, 4: 1-17
[12] Tromp, R. 2016. “The politics of competencies: Policy trajectory study of the re-contextualisation of 2009-2011 competency-based curricular reform of Mexican primary education”. PhD thesis, University of East Anglia.
[13] Dixon-Woods, M., Agarwal, S., Jones, D., Young, B., & Sutton, A. (2005). Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(1), 45-53.
[14] Ingram, David. 2014. “Pluralizing constitutional review in international law: a critical theory approach”. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 70 (July): 261-286.
[15] Kaba, Amadu. 2012. “Analyzing the Anglo-American hegemony in the Times Higher Education Rankings”. Education Policy Analysis Archives 20 (May): 1-9.
[16] Marginson, S., & Ordorika, I. (2011). Global hegemony in higher education. In D. Rothen, & C. Calhoun (Eds.), Knowledge matter. The public mission of the research university (pp. 67-129). NY: Columbia University Press.
[17] Gramsci, A. (2005). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. New York, NY: International Publishers.
[18] Bourdieu, P., and L. Wacquant. 1999. “On the Cunning of Imperialist Reason.” Theory, Culture and Society 16 (1): 41–58
[19] Ordorika, Imanol; & Lloyd, Marion (2015). International rankings and the contest for university hegemony. Journal of Education Policy: Governing by Numbers, Vol.30 (3), p.385-405.
[20] Jarpa-Arriagada, C. G., & Rodriguez-Garces, C. (2017). Segmentación y exclusión en Chile: El caso de los jóvenes primera generación en educación superior. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 15(1), 327-343.
[21] Braun, A., Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Taking context seriously: Towards explaining policy enactments in the secondary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 585-596.
[22] Savoiu, Gheorghe; Vasile, Dinu; & Tachiciu, Laurentiu (2014). An inter-, trans-, cross- and multidisciplinary approach to higher education in the field of business studies. Bucharest: Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, Faculty of Commerce Amfiteatru Economic, 16 (37), p.707-725
[23] Blair, Bernadette (2011). Elastic minds? Is the interdisciplinary/ multidisciplinary curriculum equipping our students for the future: A case study. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 10 Number 1, pp. 33-50.
[24] Hero, Laura-Maija & Lindfors, Eila (2019). Students’ learning experience in a multidisciplinary innovation project. Education + Training Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 500-522
[25] Sherren, Kate (2005). Balancing the Disciplines: A Multidisciplinary Perspective on Sustainability Curriculum Content. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 21 (2005), pp. 97-106
[26] Arruda, Gisele (2020). Sustainable Energy Education in the Arctic. The Role of Higher Education. London and New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
[27] Jordan, Trace (2002). A Multidisciplinary Core Curriculum. New Directions for Higher Education.
[28] Lafarge, David, Morge, Ludovic, & Méheut, Martine (2014). A New Higher Education Curriculum in Organic Chemistry: What Questions Should Be Asked? Journal of Chemical Education, 91, pp. 173−178
[29] Kolmos, Anette, Hadgraft, Roger, & Holgaard, Jette Egelund (2016). Response strategies for curriculum change in engineering. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, Vol.26 (3), pp.391-411
[30] Wolff, Karin, & Lucket, Kathy (2013). Integrating multidisciplinary engineering knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 78-92, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.694105
[31] Klein, Julie (1999). Mapping Interdisciplinary Studies. The Academy in Transition. Association of American Colleges and Universities, Washington, DC.
[32] Goroshnikova, Tatiana A; & Smakhtin, Evgeniy S. (2018) Interdisciplinary Curriculum Approach as a University Component for Large-scale Education Projects. IEEE. Eleventh International Conference "Management of large-scale system development" (MLSD, 2018-10, p.1-4
[33] Graff, Harvey (2015). Undisciplining Knowledge: Interdisciplinarity in the Twentieth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
[34] Moran, Joe (2010). Interdisciplinarity. London and New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
[35] Yegros-Yegros, Alfredo; Rafols, Ismael; D'Este, Pablo; & Glanzel, Wolfgang (2015). Does Interdisciplinary Research Lead to Higher Citation Impact? The Different Effect of Proximal and Distal Interdisciplinarity. United States: Public Library of Science PloS one, Vol.10 (8), p.e0135095
[36] Howlett, Cathy; Ferreira, Jo-Anne; & Blomfield, Jessica. “Teaching Sustainable Development in Higher Education: Building Critical, Reflective Thinkers through an Interdisciplinary Approach”. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 2016, Vol.17 (3), p.305-321
[37] Parker, Jenneth; & Fadeeva, Zinaida. “Competencies for interdisciplinarity in higher education”. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 2010-09-21, Vol.11 (4), p.325-338
[38] Hartmann, Eva. 2008. “Bologna goes global.” Globalization, Societies and Education 6 (October): 207-220.
[39] Marginson, Simon, and Gary Rhodes. 2002. “Beyond national states, markets and systems of higher education: a glonacal agency heuristic”. Higher Education 43 (March): 281-309.
[40] L. Vidovich. 2013b. “Policy research in higher education: Theories and methods for globalising times.” In Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (International perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 9), ed. J. H. M. Tight, 21-39. England: Emerald Insight.
[41] Vidovich, L. (2008). Research assessment in Singaporean higher education: Changing educational accountabilities in a context of globalisation. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 9(1), 41-52.
[42] Vidovich, L. (2018). Institutional accountability in higher education. In J.C. Shin, & P. Teixeira (Eds.), Encyclopedia of international higher Education Systems and Institutions (pp. 47-68). Dordrecht: Springer.
[43] Vidovich, L., & Slee, R. (2001). Bringing universities to account? Exploring some global and local policy tensions. Journal of Education Policy, 16(5), 431-453.
[44] Rezende, M. (2010). The effects of accountability on higher education. Economics of Education Review, 29, 842-856.
[45] Mitchell, Cat (2019). 'Continuous improvement' in higher education: Response to 'neoliberalism and new public management in an Australian university: The invisibility of our take-over' by Margaret Sims (2019). National Tertiary Education Union. Australian Universities' Review, The, 2019, Vol.61 (2), pp.57-58
[46] Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
[47] Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university. Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge, UK: Cambirdge University Press.
[48] Wood, Margaret; & Su, Feng What makes an excellent lecturer? Academics' perspectives on the discourse of 'teaching excellence' in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education: 'Teaching Excellence' in Higher Education: Critical Perspectives, 2017-05-19, Vol.22 (4), pp.451-466
[49] Roberts, J. (2018). Professional staff contributions to student retention and success in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 40(2), 140-153.
[50] Jing, L., & Zhang, D. (2014). Does organizational commitment help to promote university faculty’s performance and effectiveness? Asia Pacific Education Research, 23(2), 201-212.
[51] Oliver, S., & Hyun, E. (2011). Comprehensive curriculum reform in higher education: Collaborative engagement of faculty and administrators. Journal of Case Studies in Education, 2, 1-20.
[52] Mayo, P. (2015). Hegemony and education under neoliberalism: Insights from Gramsci. Florence, Italy: Taylor and Francis.
[53] Dirk, W. P., & Gelderblom, D. (2017). Higher education policy change and the hysteresis effect: Bourdieusian analysis of transformation at the site of a post-apartheid university. Higher Education, 74(2), 341-355.