Hungarian Academia in a Deep State

Right-wing populists have allegedly fueled increasing levels of distrust regarding expert knowledge and empirical evidence. Yet, we know little about how right-wing populist politicians and citizens use social media to construct and oppose truth claims. Using a qualitative analysis of Twitter and Facebook posts communicated by right-wing populists and citizens supporting populist ideas in the Netherlands, this article offers in-depth insights into processes of legitimization (confirming truth claims) and de-legitimization (opposing truth claims). The main conclusion is that right-wing populists and citizens supporting populism do not share a universal way of referring to reality. They use social media to communicate a confirmation-biased reality: Expert knowledge and evidence are de-contextualized or reinterpreted and aligned with right-wing populist agendas. References to the people’s experiences and worldviews, conspiracy theories and crisis sentiments are used to legitimize people’s opposition to expert knowledge and empirical evidence. Based on these findings, we coin the idea of an “adaptable construction of confirmation-biased truth claims” central in right-wing populist interpretations of reality. In times of increasing attacks on expert knowledge and empirical evidence, populist discourse may fuel an antagonism between the ordinary people’s experiences and the truth claims of established media channels and politicians in government. Social media offer a platform to members of the public to engage in discussions about (un)truthfulness, perceived deception, and populist oppositions—potentially amplifying divides between the ordinary people’s experiences and expert sources.

From COVID-19 Treatment to Miracle Cure

Due to the unpredictability of the COVID-19 pandemic situation, individuals felt uncertain and insecure. As a consequence, conspiracy theories flourished and quickly spread. In the current study, we examine the relationship between general and COVID-19-related conspiracy theories, cognitive reflection, psychopathological symptoms, and defense styles in a sample of Italian adults. A total of 450 participants (50.2% male; mean age = 40.89 years, SD = 12.15) took part in an online survey. Two linear regression models on the general (explained variance 22.6%) and COVID-19-related (explained variance 33.0%) conspiracy theories have been tested. Among the predictive factors, older age, mania symptoms, and immature defenses facilitate adherence to conspiracy theories; on the opposite side, higher education, cognitive reflection, and mature defenses protected from adherence to conspiracy theories. The study provides some novel findings about factors that are significantly associated with general and COVID-19-related conspiracy theories, and highlights the pivotal role of individuals’ psychological defenses in conspiracy theories.

Current estimates of the contribution of education to economic growth have been questioned because they ignore the interaction of education with ability. Whether the neglect of ability differences in the analyses of the income-education relationship results in estimates that are too high was considered in an earlier paper by one of the authors (Griliches 1970), and a negative answer was conjectured. In this paper, we pursue this question a bit further, using a new and larger body of data. Unfortunately, a definitive answer to this question is hampered both by the vagueness and elasticity of "education" and "ability" as analytical concepts and by the lack of data on early (preschooling) intelligence. The data examined in this paper are based on a 1964 sample of U.S. military veterans. The variables measured include scores on a mental ability test, indicators of parental status, region of residence while growing up, school years completed before service, and school years completed during or after service. These have allowed us to inquire into the separate effects of parental background, intelligence, and schooling. The basic problem and analytical framework can be set out very simply. Let income be a linear function of education and ability, or, Y a + P1E + P(2G + u, where Y is income, E is education, G is ability,

The ideological formation and modes of legitimisation of authoritarian regimes are a major factor in the employment and pervasiveness of conspiracy theories. Authoritarian ideologies are characterised by an unshakeable belief in their righteousness and a tendency to provide comprehensive explanations for complex events, which renders them prone to conspiracy theories. This chapter explores the uses and functions of conspiracy theories in authoritarian regimes, showing how conspiracy theories are used as propaganda, allowing regimes to identify and denounce perceived enemies and silence political opponents. In authoritarian contexts, conspiratorial rhetoric used by the regimes is expedient for mobilising masses, reinforcing incumbent structures of power and authority, and assuring the loyalty of the people. Conspiracy theories are used to reaffirm the dominant and established values of an ingroup while identifying and subsequently portraying outsiders in a negative light. Conspiracy theories express a reductionism that serves and contributes to uphold, promote and reinforce conventional behaviours, while discrediting or delegitimising inappropriate or marginal ones.

ProblemStatement: To Iranianpolicy makers, higher education plays a key role in realizing the country’sdevelopment visions. This has led to the mapping of visions of higher educationin upstream resources. In this regard, curriculum is an essential tool for higher educationto fulfil its functions optimally. However, despite its significance, the clarification of the missions offuture curricula is almost entirely neglected in Iran as the subject ofresearch. Purposeof Study: This studyaimed to clarify the missions of future curricula of Iranian highereducation based on the visions of the country’s higher education onthe horizon of 2025 (Iran’s 20-Year Vision Plan). Research Methods: The present research was developmental in terms of purpose, and wasconducted through a combined exploratory method in the academic year 2014-15.The qualitative method was used to analyse the qualitative content of theupstream resources (e.g., artefacts and policydocuments) as well as interviews with 14 experts from highereducation. In addition, the quantitative method was used to collect data from338 faculty members and PhD students. In this research, the data obtained fromqualitative content analysis of the interviews was used to build thequestionnaire. Findings: Findings indicated that the emphasis on research andtechnological functions, alongside that of education and service, pursues thegoal of translating the knowledge acquired in the country into product. Theresults also revealed that, the approach to future curricula issociety-oriented, and the accountability to the society should be at the centreof strategies of curriculum development. Implications for Research and Practice: The present study emphasized making Iranian universities more mission-orientedand aligned with the realization of higher education perspectives as well as therealization of sustainable development through following the establishedmissions for the curriculum. 

An update to a provocative manifesto intended to serve as a platform for debate and as a resource and inspiration for those teaching in online environments. In 2011, a group of scholars associated with the Centre for Research in Digital Education at the University of Edinburgh released “The Manifesto for Teaching Online,” a series of provocative statements intended to articulate their pedagogical philosophy. In the original manifesto and a 2016 update, the authors counter both the “impoverished” vision of education being advanced by corporate and governmental edtech and higher education's traditional view of online students and teachers as second-class citizens. The two versions of the manifesto were much discussed, shared, and debated. In this book, Siân Bayne, Peter Evans, Rory Ewins, Jeremy Knox, James Lamb, Hamish Macleod, Clara O'Shea, Jen Ross, Philippa Sheail and Christine Sinclair have expanded the text of the 2016 manifesto, revealing the sources and larger arguments behind the abbreviated provocations. The book groups the twenty-one statements (“Openness is neither neutral nor natural: it creates and depends on closures”; “Don't succumb to campus envy: we are the campus”) into five thematic sections examining place and identity, politics and instrumentality, the primacy of text and the ethics of remixing, the way algorithms and analytics “recode” educational intent, and how surveillance culture can be resisted. Much like the original manifestos, this book is intended as a platform for debate, as a resource and inspiration for those teaching in online environments, and as a challenge to the techno-instrumentalism of current edtech approaches. In a teaching environment shaped by COVID-19, individuals and institutions will need to do some bold thinking in relation to resilience, access, teaching quality, and inclusion.

This chapter presents recent changes in Japanese higher education policy and analyzes its impact on higher education institutions in the post-massification era. It can be assumed that in the twenty-first century, economic forces will increasingly demand the production of new knowledge and the development of personnel through universities. No governments will be able to continue meeting such social demands for higher education without relatively abundant financing. Without question, Japan faces the same challenge. Both the private and public sectors of higher education in Japan will continue to confront limited financing, and issues of accountability will continue to emerge. In such environment, government control becomes stronger every than before. The issue of university governance has become a matter of extreme importance. Then, IR (institutional research) has been regarded as the effective tool for assisting university governance. As a result, IR offices will most likely become charged with the concrete responsibilities of collecting, quantifying and visualizing various types of internal university information, as well as managing such data in order to help the decision-making process for university governance. We conducted the nationwide survey for IR function for all Japanese four-year universities in 2014. This study will show the results of the survey and analyze the new role of IR of JHE. Then, this paper explores whether or not IR functions to support university governance in Japanese university and what kind of challenges we face in the post-massification stage.

This paper focuses on Iranian propaganda and ideological indoctrination in Latin America, which contains a strong component of anti-Zionism and antisemitism. Iran has various interests in the region, and Latin America‘s geographical proximity to the United States could facilitate hostile retaliatory action by Iran against the US. Iran has capitalized on existing political trends in various countries by establishing solid ties with authoritarian populists, left-wing governments, and social movements. However, Iran has also seen the extreme right wing as an asset. The paper studies Iran’s ties and actions, particularly its propaganda campaigns, reviewing events in various locations – Venezuela, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile – and showing how in each country Iran has based its activity on local trends of new populist movements, regimes, and intellectual support for them across Latin America. This study indicates Iran ‘s allies in the region – governments, political parties, NGOs, and social movements hostile to Israel – and points out some worrisome challenges. The fact that some groups and parties are calling for the elimination of Zionism shows the extent to which Iranian and Palestinian propaganda has made headway, particularly on the left. Although the antisemitic right has less mass appeal in Latin America, it may gain strength in the future as conspiracy theories become more and more mainstream worldwide.

The Deep State: An Emerging Concept in Comparative Politics

This article focuses on the gradual development and reform of Higher Education (HE) system throughout the last 40 years or so in Bangladesh. To properly show the scenario of the educational development a discussion on various education commissions is done and some recommendations are given to conclude. The Qudrat-E-Khoda Commission (1974) basically highlights the colonial deprivation of two hundred years and some other problems in the HE system like traditional memorizing system and lack of research and empirical studies. Secondly, Jatiya Shikhah Upadeshta Parishad (1979) finds out some problems like HE having no relation with the country and the state and lack of sufficient facilities in the newly established colleges. The other commissions focus on quota problem, the teachers’ fascination to private coaching, lack of professional knowledge of teachers etc. Besides, the recommendations of these commissions are: HE should be related to the demand of the nation, expansion of practical education, introduction of new academic disciplines, introduction of four years’ Bachelor of Honours and one year Masters, involvement of private sector in HE, more funds and facilities for research, the syllabus and curriculums to be modern and international standard etc. Our HE system actually came from the British and from time to time it is used politically. Not only in the colonial days but also after independence HE system was influenced by the ruling party. Finally, HE should function properly for sustainable development in the country and so reform is inevitable. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n9p423

Within the last decade, Taiwan’s higher education system has experienced transformation along the lines of decentralization and marketization (Mok, 2000). The pressure to compete internationally and to attain global recognition has become one of the major benchmarks in evaluating university performance (Mok, 2003; Song & Tai, 2007). Together with rising concerns about the value of money, public accountability has already changed the way higher education is governed (Welch, 2004). Advanced nations, such as the UK (with its University Appropriations Committee) and the US (with its Higher Education Project Funds in the Department of Education), along with Japan and Germany, have all allocated funds to assist in the development of key universities. In Taiwan, the government has realized that globalization has accelerated competition among universities around the world (Lo & Weng, 2005; Lu, 2004; MOE, 2006). A series of large-scale projects were launched in order to catch up with the rest of the world’s higher education systems amid the powerful trend of globalization (Song & Tai, 2007). With the revision of the University Act in 1994, which prompted the restructuring of state owned higher education institutions (HEIs) into independent legal entities (Mok, 2006), thereby reducing the control of the Ministry of Education (MOE) over HEIs and making campus operations more flexible. In the following years, Taiwan’s government, acknowledging that the state alone can never satisfy the pressing demand for higher education, decided to revise its education ordinances and create room for the expansion of private higher education (Mok, 2000; Mok & James, 2005). This sparked a growth in the number of HEIs over the decades. Currently, the number of HEIs has increased dramatically from 7 in 1950 to 164 in 2008, among which are 100 universities, 49 colleges, and 15 junior colleges (MOE, 2008). This sudden increased in numbers of HEIs did not only inflame the competition among HEIs, but also hasten the internationalization of Taiwan’s HEIs. Among the major projects Taiwan’s MOE organized the Plan to Develop First-class Universities and Top-level Research Centers is the project with largest competitive fund. The empirical part of this paper analyzes the outcome of this project, adopted by the Taiwan Ministry of Education, in creating world-class universities and research centers. The prospective performances of the funded universities were evaluated with official data from the Department of Higher Education in Taiwan. The following section shall discuss the definition of globalization and internationalization of Taiwan’s higher education, which is

The expansion and massification of the higher education made the sector a large and complex organization requiring professional expertise and specialized knowledge for managing it. This resulted in many countries in the emergence of higher education as a separate field of study producing new knowledge and developing academic study programmes leading to award of degrees in higher education. Although India has the second largest higher education system in the world, research and study programmes on higher education are not very common. The education departments of universities in India offer a large number of study programmes in education which are essentially oriented to prepare students to teach at post-primary levels of education. The university departments rarely address issues related to higher education in their teaching and research programmes. Research on higher education is carried out mostly by social science departments in the universities and research institutions. In the absence of study programmes and research on higher education, the paper argues that higher education has not yet emerged as a separate field of study in India.

Reviewed by: Civic Engagement in Higher Education: Concepts and Practices Jennifer Gilbride-Brown Civic Engagement in Higher Education: Concepts and Practices. Barbara Jacoby and Associates. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Publishing, 2009, 265 pages, $40.00 (hardcover) Ambiguity abounds when conceptualizing the term, “civic engagement.” Higher education finds itself in a moment where parameters and definitions are needed in order to move its civic initiatives forward. Institutions are asking the question, “What do we mean by civic engagement?” The latest book from Barbara Jacoby and Associates, Civic Engagement in Higher Education: Concepts and Practices, offers a response and provides insight into what educating students for civic engagement might entail. Jacoby (2009) argues: If civic engagement is to gain real traction in today’s higher education, it must be clearly defined, and civic learning outcomes must be established. Opportunities to learn about and practice civic engagement must be embedded throughout the curriculum and the co-curriculum. This book shows how all this can be done, and is being done, at higher education institutions around the country. (p. 2) Drawing from expertise around the country, the contributing authors in this book offer a wide range of perspectives and examples while drawing from the rich base of research upon which civic engagement work can and must rest. The intended audience is broad and ranges from entry and midlevel professionals on the forefront of civic engagement initiatives to assistant/associate deans/directors who supervise them. This book has clear implications for policymakers, foundations, and associations. Fundamentally, this is a book for anyone who is charged with enacting the civic mission of higher education and is an important resource for determining what might be accomplished. This edited book is divided into two sections. The first section provides a structure for conceptualizing civic engagement grounded in its historical context and includes an exploration of the dimensions of civic learning. The second section investigates a wide range of civic engagement initiatives, both curricular and co-curricular, happening across the country in diverse institutional contexts. The book flows like a conversation among the authors with many of the contributors referring to the important conceptual and historical mapping offered in the opening chapters. In the introductory chapter, Barbara Jacoby takes on the challenge at hand, getting one’s mind around what is civic engagement and what do we mean by “educating students for civic engagement.” In many ways, the work of civic engagement has pushed ahead with fragmented and loose understandings of what it is in the first place. She cites a review of research done by Lester and Salle (2006) that listed thirty-three recent studies on service-learning of which only three included any definition of civic engagement. Drawing heavily from the work of CIRCLE (Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement) and the Coalition for Civic Engagement and Leadership at the University of Maryland-College Park (2005), Jacoby [End Page 567] defines civic engagement as: acting upon a sense of responsibility to one’s communities. This includes a wide range of activities, including developing civic sensitivity, participating in building civic society, and benefiting the common good . . . Through civic engagement, individuals-as citizens of their communities, their nations, and the world-are empowered as agents of positive social change for a more democratic world. (p. 9) She concludes with a thorough overview of leadership in this area that can easily double as a quick reference guide to the many higher education associations and initiatives working to drive civic engagement today. This opening chapter lays important groundwork and captures the current state of affairs in civic engagement across the country. The first section also contains a chapter reviewing civic engagement research over the last 10 years written by Mark Hugo Lopez and Abby Kiesa, both of whom provide leadership on research through CIRCLE. Caryn McTighe Musil of AAC&U completes this opening section by offering a creative and useful conceptualization of what we mean by “educating students for personal and social responsibility.” The second section builds from these definitions and frameworks by examining current practices that shed light on strategies and pitfalls of integrating civic engagement across an institution. Other movements in higher education such as...

The impact of higher education institutions on society has become the focus of significant policy attention in recent years, most prominently as part of research evaluation. This paper presents a theoretical exploration of the notion, identifying the key dimensions as source, form, trajectory, intensity, timescale and destination. While acknowledging the importance of porosity between universities and society, and the need to address critical contemporary challenges, five dangers of the impact agenda are highlighted: the normative dimension; the linear relationship; unpredictability; measurement; and instrumentalization. As a response to dominant conceptualizations, the paper proposes the notion of the generative intrinsic as a more robust basis on which to base the work of universities.ResumoO impacto das instituições de ensino superior na sociedade tem se tornado o foco de atenção política significativa nos últimos anos, mais proeminentemente como parte da avaliação da pesquisa. Este artigo apresenta uma exploração teórica da categoria noção, identificando as dimensões-chave como fonte, forma, trajetória, intensidade, escala de tempo e destino. Embora reconhecendo a importância da porosidade entre as universidades e a sociedade, e a necessidade de abordar desafios contemporâneos críticos, cinco perigos da agenda de impacto são destacados: a dimensão normativa; o relacionamento linear; imprevisibilidade; medição; e instrumentalização. Como resposta às conceituações dominantes, o artigo propõe a noção do intrínseco generativo como uma base mais robusta sobre a qual basear o trabalho das universidades.Keywords: Higher education policy, Impact, Instrumentalization, Public engagement, Research evaluation, Universities.Palavras-chave: Políticas de educação superior, Impacto, Instrumentalização, Engajamento público, Avaliação da pesquisa, Universidades.ReferencesASHWIN, P. (2016) ‘From a teaching perspective, “impact” looks very different’. Times Higher Education, 21 March. Online. www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/teaching-perspectiveimpact-looks-very-different (accessed 3 May 2018).BARNETT, R. (2004) ‘The purposes of higher education and the changing face of academia’. London Review of Education, 2 (1), 61–73.BELFIORE, E. (2014) ‘”Impact”, “value” and “bad economics”: Making sense of the problem of value in the arts and humanities’. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14 (1), 95–110.BRENNAN, J., KING, R. AND LEBEAU, Y. (2004) The Role of Universities in the Transformation of Societies: Synthesis report. London: Association of Commonwealth Universities and the Open UniversityBYNNER, J. AND EGERTON, M. (2001) The Wider Benefits of Higher Education. Report by the Wider Benefits of Learning Research Centre, Institute of Education, University of London.CHUBB, J. AND WATERMEYER, R. (2017) ‘Artifice or integrity in the marketization of research impact? Investigating the moral economy of (pathways to) impact statements within research funding proposals in the UK and Australia’. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (12), 2,360–72.COLEMAN, J.S. (1986) ‘The idea of the developmental university’. Minerva: A Review of Science, Learning and Policy, 24 (4), 476–94.COLLINI, S. (2012) What are Universities For? London: Penguin. Dewey, J. (1967) ‘The continuum of ends-means’. In Archambault, R. (ed.) John Dewey on Education: Selected writings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 97–107. ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council) (n.d.) ‘What is impact?’. Online. www.esrc.ac.uk/ research/impact-toolkit/what-is-impact/ (accessed 22 April 2018).FIELDING, M. (2003) ‘The impact of impact’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33 (2), 289–95.FRANCIS, B. (2011) ‘Increasing impact? An analysis of issues raised by the impact agenda in educational research’. Scottish Educational Review, 43 (2), 4–16.GIBBONS, M., LIMOGES, C., NOWOTNY, H., SCHWARTZMAN, S., SCOTT, P. AND TROW, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE Publications.GUNN, A. AND MINTROM, M. (2016) ‘Higher education policy change in Europe: Academic research funding and the impact agenda’. European Education, 48 (4), 241–57.GUNN, A. AND MINTROM, M. (2017) ‘Five things to consider when designing a policy to measure research impact’. The Conversation, 12 January. Online. http://theconversation.com/fivethings-to-consider-when-designing-a-policy-to-measure-research-impact-71078 (accessed 22 April 2017).ILIE, S. AND ROSE, P. (2016) ‘Is equal access to higher education in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa achievable by 2030?’. Higher Education 72 (4), 435–55.JUMP, P. (2015) ‘The impact of impact’. Times Higher Education, 19 February. Online. www.timeshighereducation.com/features/the-impact-of-impact/2018540.article (accessed 3 May 2018).LEE, S.T. (2017) ‘The Structure of a University: A Karatanian interrogation into instrumentalism, idealism and community in postwar British higher education, 1945–2015’. Unpublished PhD thesis, Birkbeck University.MACFARLANE, B. (2011) ‘The morphing of academic practice: Unbundling and the rise of the paraacademic’. Higher Education Quarterly, 65 (1), 59–73. Marginson, S. (2011) ‘Higher education and public good’. Higher Education Quarterly, 65 (4), 411–33.MARGINSON, S. (2016) ‘The worldwide trend to high participation higher education: Dynamics of social stratification in inclusive systems’. Higher Education, 72 (4), 413–34.MARTIN, B. (2011) ‘The Research Excellence Framework and the ‘impact agenda’: Are we creating a Frankenstein monster?’. Research Evaluation, 20 (3), 247–54.MARTIN, C. (2011) ‘Philosophy of education in the public sphere: The case of “relevance”’. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30, 615–29. McCowan, T. (2009) Rethinking Citizenship Education: A curriculum for participatory democracy. London: Continuum.MCCOWAN, T. (2015) ‘Should universities promote employability?’. Theory and Research in Education, 13 (3), 267–85.MCCOWAN, T. (2016a) ‘Three dimensions of equity of access to higher education’. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 46 (4), 645–65.MCCOWAN, T. (2016b) ‘Universities and the post-2015 development agenda: An analytical framework’. Higher Education, 72 (4), 505–23.MCCOWAN, T. (2017) ‘Higher education, unbundling and the end of the university as we know it’. Oxford Review of Education, 43 (6), 733–48.McDowell, G. (2003) ‘Engaged universities: Lessons from the land-grant universities and extension’. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 585 (1), 31–50.MCMAHON, W. (2009) Higher Learning, Greater Good: The private and social benefits of higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.NIXON, J. (2004) ‘Education for the good society: The integrity of academic practice’. London Review of Education, 2 (3), 245–52.OANCEA, A. (2013a) ‘Buzzwords and values: The prominence of “impact” in UK research policy and governance’. Research Trends, 33, 6–8.OANCEA, A. (2013b) ‘Interpretations of research impact in seven disciplines’. European Educational Research Journal, 12 (2), 242–50.OKETCH, M., MCCOWAN, T. AND SCHENDEL, R. (2014) The Impact of Tertiary Education on Development: A rigorous literature review. London: Department for International Development.OVSEIKO, P., OANCEA, A. AND BUCHAN, A. (2012) ‘Assessing research impact in academic clinical medicine: A study using Research Excellence Framework pilot impact indicators’. BMC Health Services Research, 12 (478), 1–23.PARKER, J. AND VAN TEIJLINGEN, E. (2012) ‘The Research Excellence Framework (REF): Assessing the impact of social work research on society’. Practice: Social Work in Action, 24 (1), 41–52.PENFIELD, T., BAKER, M.J., SCOBLE, R. AND WYKES, M.C. (2014) ‘Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: A review’. Research Evaluation, 23 (1), 21–32.PERKIN, H. (2007) ‘History of universities’. In Forest, J.J.F. and Altbach, P.G. (eds) International Handbook of Higher Education. Dordrecht: Springer, 159–206.PHIPPS, A. (2014) ‘The dark side of the impact agenda’. Times Higher Education, 4 December. Online. www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/opinion/the-dark-side-of-the-impactagenda/2017299.article (accessed 3 May 3018).READINGS, B. (1996) The University in Ruins. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.REF (Research Excellence Framework) (2011) Assessment Framework and Guidance on Submissions: Research excellence framework 02.2011. Online. www.ref.ac.uk/2014/pubs/2011-02/ (accessed 22 April 2018).RESEARCH COUNCIL ECONOMIC IMPACT GROUP (2006) Increasing the Economic Impact of Research Councils. London: Department of Trade and Industry.Research Councils UK (2017) Excellence with Impact. Online. www.ukri.org/innovation/excellencewith-impact/ (accessed 15 July 2017).SALL, E., LEBEAU, Y. AND KASSIMIR, R. (2003) ‘The public dimensions of the university in Africa’. Journal of Higher Education in Africa, 1 (1), 126–48.SANTOS, B.S. (2004) A universidade do século XXI: Para uma reforma democratica e emancipatória da universidade. São Paulo: Cortez.Siegfried, J., Sanderson, A. and McHenry, P. (2007) ‘The economic impact of colleges and universities’. Economics of Education Review, 26 (5), 546–58.SMITH, S., WARD, V. AND HOUSE, A. (2011) ‘”Impact” in the proposals for the UK’s Research Excellence Framework: Shifting the boundaries of academic autonomy’. Research Policy, 40 (10), 1,369–79.UNIVERSITIES UK (2014) The Impact of Universities on the UK Economy. London: Universities UK.UPTON, S., VALLANCE, P. AND GODDARD, J. (2014) ‘From outcome to process: Evidence for a new approach to research impact assessment’. Research Evaluation, 23 (4), 352–65.WALTER, I., NUTLEY, S.M. AND DAVIES, H.T.O. (2003) Research Impact: A cross-sector review. Research Unit for Research Utilisation, University of St Andrews. Online. www.ruru.ac.uk/pdf/LSDA%20 literature%20review%20final.pdf (accessed 22 April 2016).WATERMEYER, R. (2016) ‘Impact in the R