The Co-creative University

Evaluation, Expectations and Economic Policy Implications

Łukasz Mamica

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN: 9780367466954
• eBook ISBN: 9781000419009
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

The co-creative university has become the main driver of social and economic development stimulating internal (students and academics) and external creativity (companies and institutional environment) as well as cooperation in various areas (e.g. applied graduation theses, research projects, lifelong learning).

Intended as a contribution to a better understanding of how universities create value in numerous areas, this book discusses the determinants of creativity and ways of stimulating it with a special focus on approaches and practical solutions relevant to teaching. Examples include problem-oriented student theses, which represent a successful combination of creativity with practical knowledge. Based on the findings of international surveys of students, the author offers an in-depth analysis of the differences between what they expect from universities and the degree to which their expectations are met. Comparing students' opinions with those of employees of international corporations (working graduates) permitted the author to test the actual utility of selected aspects of university education. Regrettably, both groups of respondents gave low ratings to support for developing creativity, which should serve as a warning sign and inform future reforms at this level of education.

This book is primarily targeted to those involved in education, policy-making, and socio-economic development. It provides a rich source of information for university managers on how to better fulfil their missions based on the idea of co-creativity. It also suggests how to improve the effectiveness of research and education in order to ensure that both can better respond to current development challenges.

1 Introduction

The world is entering the third decade of the 21st century facing a series of growing problems, of which the consequences of man-made climate change, increasing social inequalities, and migratory pressures caused by these two factors appear to be particularly disturbing. At the same time, the automation of production, which has accelerated due to the COVID-19 pandemic, along with the disruption of global supply chains and a considerable drop in demand, further destabilises labour markets. In consequence, the latter offer increasingly unstable employment conditions, especially for young people. The dynamics of change demand greater flexibility on the part of workers to retrain, constantly improve their skills, and display creativity. Therefore, investment in human capital through university education should be treated as a fundamental condition for any effective, long-term economic policy.

Meeting the challenges outlined earlier requires universities to be involved in proposing solutions, to outline possible scenarios and their consequences as well as educate creative staff capable of self-improvement and developing original approaches in various areas of activity. The modern university can meet the expectations placed on it provided it takes advantage of the opportunities offered by multi-dimensional cooperation between its academic staff, students, and the broadly conceived external environment. At the same time, the forms of education must be modified, including a shift away from the transfer of encyclopaedic knowledge towards a joint search for its possible applications and modifications, wider use of group and project work, and above all, the development of students’ creativity. A university that meets these expectations can be described as co-creative. The co-creative university can be compared to a lighthouse – a beacon of light showing socially and economically important goals around which the available resources should be deployed. The credibility of such choices strengthens the social recognition of the role of universities – they have been present for centuries, which makes them one of the longest continuously operating institutions in the world. The co-creative university with stable public funding, or at least partly financed from public funds, should attract the most talented individuals even from remote locations, individuals who will be able to offer creative solutions to solve the challenges faced by the modern world. The concept of a co-creative university proposed in this monograph draws on the research conducted by the author in recent years on the cooperation of universities with their external environment, students’ expectations from universities and the degree to which they are met, and an evaluation of the utility of university curricula from the point of view of corporate employees.

A specific kind of co-creative activity initiated by the university, which involves students, academic staff, and external stakeholders, is the so-called problem-oriented student theses (POSTs). This concept, discussed in more detail in Chapter 5, was proposed based on the findings of 150 interviews conducted in Krakow’s academic centre in 2017–2018 with members of teams consisting of a university teacher, a student, and a representative of the firm for which a POST was prepared. In the process of writing such a thesis for a specific firm and in cooperation with its representatives, a special type of knowledge emerges, which can be called thesis knowledge. The opportunity to participate in POSTs was highly appreciated by all the parties involved.

In order to find out about the students’ expectations from universities and the degree to which they are met, in 2017–2018, the author conducted an international comparative study involving a group of 505 students of economics from ten different countries. Unfortunately, in the students’ opinion, creativity ranked the lowest in terms of university support in comparison with other curriculum areas. Moreover, research conducted by the author in 2019–2020 among 314 employees of firms representing the offshoring and outsourcing sector in the Krakow agglomeration revealed that the development of creativity was given a low overall priority by universities. The opinion of the latter group is important since it reflects the actual importance of creativity as tried and tested in the working environment. This is a clear warning signal that the modern university should make greater use of the available methods of developing creativity, taking into consideration, among other things, the opportunities that art brings into the process. Detailed findings of both studies are discussed in Chapter 8.

This monograph focuses on those characteristics of universities that allow them to be treated as entities generating public goods, which justifies their funding (or co-funding) from public sources. In this context, it addresses the issue of equitable distribution of the values created by universities and the risk of exclusion of certain underprivileged social groups, which leads to the reconstitution of human capital mainly in more affluent families.

The author goes on to characterise the determinants of creativity, which include the impact of contacts within networks, the activity of collaborative groups, engaging in practical activities, and participating in interdisciplinary teams. Problems associated with measuring and comparing creative behaviours and outputs are also discussed, as well as several methods used for this purpose, such as assessing the creative potential manifested in a sample task, the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (with several modifications), or expert-based methods, of which the best known is the Consensual Assessment Technique. The issue of creative destruction brought on by the implementation of creative solutions is also addressed, especially in terms of undermining the job security of less qualified employees. The importance of creativity from the perspective of economic policy is discussed with a particular emphasis on the role of creative industries.

Despite the widespread recognition of the significance of helping young people to develop their creativity, teachers tend to lack appropriate qualifications in this area; overloaded curricula do not encourage it either. Creativity, despite the fact that all its definitions imply utility, should, in the case of education, place a greater emphasis on the very process of creative search for solutions to the problem posed, even though they may ultimately appear to be impracticable. This book discusses a variety of methods of developing creative attitudes, including probably the best known Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving Process (CPS), working in small groups, stimulating high levels of interaction, setting non-standard tasks, as well as the use of humour by the tutors, provided that it is related to the subject matter of the class. In the author’s view, art also opens up great opportunities for strengthening creativity not only due to regular exposure to artwork but also those associated with adapting techniques from the world of art and applying them to the teaching process in order to encourage individuals to express their personal opinions about the problems at hand.

Chapter 6 addresses the problem of marketisation of higher education and its ensuing negative consequences, especially decreasing access for individuals with fewer resources or from less affluent families as a result of ever-increasing tuition fees. From the societal point of view, it represents an inefficient use of the most valuable resource imaginable, namely human capital. The discussion takes into account issues related to the dwindling numbers of full-time academic staff, students viewed as consumers who purchase educational services, or the negative consequences of competition in university rankings and the attendant diminishing interest of scholars in their immediate social and economic environment or in teaching.

Chapter 9 outlines the concept of the co-creative university whose distinguishing feature is the capacity for multi-level cooperation involving regular contacts not only between academics and students, but also between them as a group and a wide range of external stakeholders. As long as such a university remains accessible to every talented young person regardless of the material status of his/her family, it will undoubtedly contribute to reducing social inequality. The co-creative university should offer comprehensive lifelong learning programmes to individuals at various stages of their professional careers. It should encourage the formation of interdisciplinary teams and its staff should have the opportunity to train up in methods and techniques of creativity development. Classes held in small groups and acceptance of unsuccessful attempts should become the hallmarks of such an institution.

The book ends with a summary and recommendations for both economic and educational policy, which should promote the idea of co-creativity among the institutions of higher education. All universities operating under this formula should be assisted by decision-makers responsible for these two public policy areas.

2 University as a source of values

Introduction

This chapter discusses those characteristics of universities which justify their treatment as institutions generating public goods, which, in turn, provides a rationale for their funding (or co-funding) from a variety of public sources. A strong popular consensus on this perception is evidenced by the fact that universities dominate in the group of longest continually operating institutions in the world. The problem of distribution of value created by universities is discussed in the context of exclusion of other groups and the risk of human capital reconstituting itself within more affluent families, which both have the requisite financial resources and are aware of the role of education in furthering one’s professional career. One of the most blatant cases of exclusion involved women’s lack of access to education offered by top universities until the late 1960s and, in some cases, well into the 1970s. The symbolic value of the university, which, in some cases constitutes the main brand for its geographical location, is also analysed. The value of the university, when viewed from the educational perspective of a given country, depends to a significant extent on where its graduates eventually decide to settle and take up professional careers, and as such, it can become a factor in the brain drain. This chapter concludes with a discussion of how the value generated by universities is perceived by students and how ready they are to pay tuition fees.

The university as a source of public goods and socio-economic development

Among the 85 global institutions which have operated without interr...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: University as a source of values
• Chapter 3: Determinants and conditions of creativity
• Chapter 4: Fostering creativity as the main challenge to university education
• Chapter 5: Problem-oriented student theses (POSTs) as a successful combination of creativity with practical knowledge
• Chapter 6: The impact of marketisation of higher education on its capacity to foster creativity
• Chapter 7: University cooperation with the environment as a stimulus for creativity
• Chapter 8: The expectations of students and corporate employees vs. the degree to which they are met by universities
• Chapter 9: The co-creative university
• Chapter 10: Summary and policy implications
• Index