SEEU Review vol. 6 Nr. 2 (pdf) - South East European University

SEEU Review Volume 6, No. 2, 2010that globalization generally may be harmful to smaller states or toindividuals, so the profit motive may overtake the traditional desire ofacademics freely to communicate knowledge without thought of reward. 7 Itmay pose a related threat, which is that HEIs may be keen to employ staff inrelevant disciplines (for example, business, management, computingscience) with potential to maximize profit for the HEI rather than to pursueresearch and scholarship for its own sake. Likewise staff may be forced intocertain courses of action for commercial reasons. 8 Finally students may bepersuaded to follow a particular train of thought, or be directed to aparticular software product, directly or indirectly. 9Institutional autonomy is the degree of self-governance of an HEI, asdefined by the law of its domicile, and consistent with public accountability,to exercise the Sweezy freedoms, plus the freedom to offer its services onthe world market and increasingly HEIs are doing so. There is considerableliterature on the contrasting concepts of higher education as a ‘public good’and as a ‘traded service’ and resulting ‘boundary objects’. 10 The impact ofhigher education law is in general terms felt more on institutional autonomythan on academic freedom, since the state has a legitimate interest in a rangeof issues: securing the economic interests of the state through labourplanning, funding of public HEIs and student support, quality assurance,recognition and transferability of qualifications, and, in the era of increasingreliance on student fees by both public and private HEIs, consumerprotection. 11 The state may if not de jure, 12 then de facto impose somecontrols on non-public HEIs by recognizing or refusing to recognizediplomas for public purposes (‘attestation’). This is described by the leadingCouncil of Europe expert Sjur Bergan (2008) 13 as ‘the classical and perhaps78910111213what happens when alleged ‘hard marking’ leads to a review by the HEI and a subsequentsuccessful claim for constructive dismissal when the ‘hard marking’ is overruled. As inthe NTEIU case, U pleaded its concern for high academic standards.This and other related issues are discussed in D Marks, ‘Academic Standards as PublicGoods and Varieties of Free-Rider Behaviour’ (2002) 10(2) Education Economics 145.In Trimble v West Virginia 549 SE 2d 294 (WV SCt 2001), the West Virginia SupremeCourt upheld the right of a community college administration to order all faculty to use aparticular software program to create course syllabi.This is less likely to be a problem since the European Commission required Microsoft toadvertise access to a number of different internet browsers.See the discussion in L. Vlăsceanu, ‘Coping with Uncertainties in Higher Education: theClash between Academic Traditions, Markets and GATS’ First Global Forum onInternational Quality Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications inHigher Education (UNESCO) (2002).Consumer protection laws are sometimes used to close down ‘degree mills’ as was thefate of the on-line Monticello University in 2000.As in the new Law on Higher Education of Kosovo (2002).S. Bergan, n.1above.13