Student-Conducted Research in the Mission of the American Universities versus the Universities in Ukraine
Keywords:Higher education, university, mission, student-conducted research, American Universities, Ukrainian Universities.
The purpose of the study was to analyse the mission statements of the universities from America and Ukraine to identify how student-conducted research is represented in the different types of higher education institutions’ missions. The study utilised the exploratory design and relied on qualitative data drawn from content analysis which were then transformed into quantitative data. The study analysed the content of the mission statements of 46 U.S. leading universities and 10 Ukrainian universities included in a feasible list. The content analysis of mission statements of classical (conventional) universities, corporate universities, public research universities, and ultimate digital learning universities was performed using Voyant Tools. The research occupies the leading position in the missions of corporate universities, public research universities in America, and classical and research universities in Ukraine. The university missions are formulated with regard to the social demand, and political and economic trends in the country and the world. The missions of the American Universities are more diverse than the missions of the Ukrainian universities which suggests that the American universities have more freedoms than the Ukrainian ones. The post-industrial stage of education is at its peak of development in America while in Ukraine it is emerging. The research in Ukraine is conducted by separate research institutions. This supposes that the university (student-performed) research does not get enough attention and support. The American higher education model has become a standard model in Ukraine. Further research is needed to address the legislation loopholes of supporting the research at the universities.
-20-10 Verses the 3-33 Pervasive Learning Model [Blog Post] (2013). The Performance Juxtaposition Website. Retrieved from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/media/70-20-10.html
Akker, W., Spaapen, J., et. al. (2017). Productive interactions: societal impact of academic research in the knowledge society. Publishing of the Frontiers of Innovative Research. Retrieved from https://www.leru.org/files/Productive-Interactions-Societal-Impact-of-Academic-Research-in-the-Knowledge-Society-Full-paper.pdf
Atkinson, R. C., & Blanpied, W. A. (2008). Research Universities: Core of the US science and technology system. Technology in Society, 30(1), 30–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.10.004
Axelrod, P. (2002). Values in Conflict: The University, the Marketplace, and the Trials of Liberal Education. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.
Boyle, M., & Hall, C. (2016). Teaching Don Quixote in the digital age: Page and screen, visual and tactile. Hispania, 99(4), 600-614. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpn.2016.0106
Calhoun, C. (2011). The Public Mission of the Research University. In Rhoten D., & Calhoun C. (Eds.), Knowledge Matters: The Public Mission of the Research University (pp. 1-33). New York: Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/rhot15114.6
Cole, J. R. (2010). The Great American University: Its Rise to Pre-Eminence, Its Indispensable National Role, Why It Must Be Protected. New York: Public Affairs.
Cole, J. R. (2016). The Triumph of America’s Research University [Blog post]. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/09/the-triumph-of-americas-research-university/500798/
Desjardins, R. (2015). Education and Social Transformation. European Journal of Education, 50 (3) (Special Issue), 239-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12140
Engwall, L. (Ed.) (2020). Missions of Universities: Past, Present, Future. Springer: Higher Education Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41834-2
Etzkowitz, H. (2004). The evolution of the Entrepreneurial University. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(1), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtg.2004.004551
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from the National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(99)00055-4
Firmin, M., & Gilson, K. (2010). Mission statement analysis of CCCU member institutions. Christian Higher Education, 9(1), 60-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15363750903181922
Gianiodis, P. T., & Meek, W. R. (2019). Entrepreneurial education for the entrepreneurial university: a stakeholder perspective. Journal of Technological Transfer, 45, 1167–1195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09742-z
GitHub (n.d.). Voyant. Retrieved from: https://goo.gl/WqUpFk
Grøtta, V. (2019). The Transformation of Humanities Education. Part III, The Case of Norway 1960-2000 from a Systems-Theoretical Perspective. Bielefeld. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839443071
Hannon, D. P. (2013). Why is the Entrepreneurial University Important? Journal of Innovation Management, 1(2), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_001.002_0003
Hladchenko, M. (2013). Mission statement - A component of the strategic management of university (on the example of German universities). New Educational Review, 31(1), 229-240.
Jacob, W. J., Sutin, S. E., Weidman, J. C., & Yeager, J. L. (Eds.) (2015). Community Engagement in Higher Education: Policy Reforms and Practice. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-007-9_1
Johnston, B., MacNeill, Sh., & Smyth, K. (2018). Conceptualising the digital university: The intersection of policy, pedagogy, and practice. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99160-3
Kniazian, M. (2020). Research activities as a factor to form the future specialists’ competence of professional self-development. Humanities science current issues, 27(6), 84-87. https://doi.org/10.24919/2308-4863.6/27.204647
Kosmützky, A., & Krücken, G. (2015). Sameness and difference: Analyzing institutional and organizational specificities of universities through mission statements. International Studies of Management and Organization, 45(2), 137-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2015.1006013
Laukkanen, M. (2000). Exploring Alternative Approaches in High-level Entrepreneurship Education: Creating Micro-mechanisms for Endogenous Regional Growth. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12(1), 25-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/089856200283072
LeMahieu, P., & Palka, S. (2020). Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching. In M. David & M. Amey (Eds.), The SAGE encyclopedia of higher education (Vol. 1, pp. 222-226). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714395.n85
Lewis, D., Hendel, D., and Kallsen, L. (2007). Performance Indicators as a Foundation of Institutional Autonomy: Implications for Higher Education Institutions in Europe. Tertiary Education and Management, 13(3), 203-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880701502158
Loo, B. (2018). Education in the United States of America. World Education News & Reviews. Retrieved from https://wenr.wes.org/2018/06/education-in-the-united-states-of-america
Meyer, H. (2002). Universal, Entrepreneurial, and Soulless? The New University as a Contested Institution. Comparative Education Review, 46(3), 339-347. https://doi.org/10.1086/341161
Mitchell, T. D. (2016). Revisiting the Civic Mission of the American Public Research University. In: K. Soria, T. Mitchell (Eds.) Civic Engagement and Community Service at Research Universities. Palgrave Studies in Global Citizenship Education and Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55312-6_14
Pasque, P. A. (2010). Higher Education for the Public Good: A Typology. In: American Higher Education, Leadership, and Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230107755_2
Peris-Ortiz, M., Gomez, J. A., Merigó-Lindahl, J. M., & Rueda-Armengot, C. (Eds.) (2017). Entrepreneurial Universities: Exploring the Academic and Innovative Dimensions of Entrepreneurship in Higher Education. Springer; 1st Ed. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0197-y
Poggi, G. (2017). The nation-state. Chapter 4. In: D. Caramani (Ed.) Comparative Politics (4th ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198737421.003.0006
Rury, J. L., & Tamura, E. H. (Eds.) (2019). From Nationalisation to Enlightenment: Higher Education in the Early Modern Period. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Education. Oxford University Press.
Sbruieva, A. (2015). Strategies for integration of educational and scientific activities of the university: analysis of international best practices. Studies in Comparative Education: Theory, History, Innovative technologies, 3, 25–39.
Sbruieva, A. (2015). Trends of the transformation of the University mission: comparative pedagogical analysis. Studies in Comparative Education: Theory, History, Innovative technologies, 6(50), 448-461.
Schmitz A., Urbano D., Guerrero M., & Dandolini G. A. (2017). Activities Related to Innovation and Entrepreneurship in the Academic Setting: A Literature Review. In: M. Peris-Ortiz, J. Gómez, J. Merigó-Lindahl, C. Rueda-Armengot (Eds), Entrepreneurial Universities. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, Cham. http://doi-org-443.webvpn.fjmu.edu.cn/10.1007/978-3-319-47949-1_1
Schulte, P. (2004). The Entrepreneurial University: A Strategy for Institutional Development. Higher Education in Europe, 29(2), 187-191 https://doi.org/10.1080/0379772042000234811
Schulz, C. B. (1990). The Unfinished Revolution: Education and Politics in the Thought of Thomas Jefferson. By Harold Hellenbrand. (Newark: University of Delaware Press), Journal of American History, 77 (4), 1991, 1338–1339. https://doi.org/10.2307/2078288
Sinclair, S., & Rockwell, G. (2015). Text Analysis and Visualisation: Making meaning count. In: S. Schreibman, R. Siemens & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A New Companion to Digital Humanities (pp. 274–290). Wiley Blackwell; Malden, MA. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118680605.ch19
Sitnicki, M. W. (2020). The International Competitive Potential of Ukrainian Research Universities. Business Inform, 3, 170–181. https://doi.org/10.32983/2222-4459-2020-3-170-181
Stefani, L. (2009). Planning teaching and learning: Curriculum design and development. In: H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, & S. Marshal (Eds.) A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Enhancing Academic Practice, (3rd ed.). New York & London: Routledge.
The QS World University Rankings 2019 (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2019
Voyant Tools (n.d.). https://voyant-tools.org/
Wasser, H. (2001). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities. The European Legacy, 6(4), 509-511. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770120069250
Zajda, J. (2015). Nation-Building and History Education in a Global Culture. In: Zajda J. (Ed.) Nation-Building and History Education in a Global Culture. Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research,13. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9729-0_12
How to Cite
LicenseAll papers licensed under Creative Commons 4.0 CC-BY.
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Under the following terms:
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.