Access to this full-text is provided by MDPI.
Content available from Philosophies
This content is subject to copyright.
philosophies
Article
Searching for Practical Wisdom in Higher Education with Logos,
Pathos and Ethos. Case: Finnish Universities of Sciences
Maria Jakubik
Citation: Jakubik, M. Searching for
Practical Wisdom in Higher
Education with Logos,Pathos and
Ethos. Case: Finnish Universities of
Sciences. Philosophies 2021,6, 63.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
philosophies6030063
Academic Editor: Nicholas Maxwell
Received: 17 May 2021
Accepted: 19 July 2021
Published: 30 July 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Ronin Institute, Montclair, NJ 07043, USA; maria.jakubik@ronininstitute.org
Abstract:
In our complex and highly connected world, educating for life—that is, educating students
with knowledge, skills, and competences infused with practical wisdom (PW) and ethical and moral
values—is essential. The paper seeks to answer the question: how could university education facilitate
the progress to a wiser and better world? The methodology involves case study research (CSR) based
on both secondary and primary data. The missions, visions, and values of fourteen public Finnish
universities are analyzed for PW. The findings demonstrate that universities, by becoming more
open, unbounded, and enacting organizations, and by enhancing collaboration with businesses,
could foster the cultivation of PW in higher education (HE). The novelty of this paper is the creative
communication of the case study, where kairos,logos,pathos, and ethos are used to explore a new
reality for HE. The article contributes to the contemporary discourses in the literature on the future of
HE. Educators in HE need to transform from knowledge workers to wise leaders, wisdom workers,
creators, empathizers, pattern recognizers, and meaning makers. The context of the case study
research makes it difficult to generalize. Therefore, international, comparative research is used to
complement the findings. The eight-stage change process applied to universities and HE could help
in solving the urgent problems of society and facilitating progress to a wiser and better world.
Keywords:
practical wisdom (phronesis); higher education (HE); university of sciences (USC); knowl-
edge (episteme); skills (techne); case study research (CSR); kairos;logos;pathos;ethos
Non scholae sed vitae discimus.
(We do not learn for school, but for life.)
1. Introduction—Kairos—Defining an Affirmative Topic
This research paper focuses on searching for practical wisdom (PW) in higher educa-
tion (HE) and on the changing role of universities and HE. I seek to answer the question:
how could university education facilitate the progress to a wiser and better world? First, I
briefly explore the concepts of wisdom, PW, and the need for PW in HE.
1.1. What Is Wisdom?
Wisdom has always been vital throughout human history. Justice, fortitude, temper-
ance, and wisdom (prudence) are human virtues. It is commonly believed that the main
goal of wisdom is to contribute not only to individuals but to the community and society as
a whole. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary [
1
] defines wisdom as “(1) the ability to discern
inner qualities and relationships (insight, judgment, knowledge); (2) a wise attitude, belief,
or course of action; and (3) the teachings of the ancient wise men (sic)”.
Wisdom research in psychology began to flourishing again in the 1980s. Researchers
explored, for example: the three dimensions of wisdom, i.e., affective (e.g., sympathy
and compassion for others), reflective (e.g., overcoming subjectivity and reducing ego-
centeredness), and cognitive (e.g., seeing reality and understanding truth) [
2
]; the six
qualities of wisdom, i.e., reasoning, sagacity, learning, judgment, quick use of information,
and perspicacity [
3
]; three conceptualizations of wisdom, i.e., wisdom of life (sophia),
wisdom of knowledge (episteme), and wisdom of practice (phronesis) [
4
]; the meanings of
Philosophies 2021,6, 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6030063 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/philosophies
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 2 of 30
wisdom [
5
]; the features of wisdom [
6
–
8
]; the characteristics of a wise person [
9
,
10
]; cultural
context and wisdom [11]; and so on.
Wisdom has six features according to Baltes and Staudinger [
6
] (p. 132): (1) strategies
and goals involving the conduct and meaning of life; (2) the limits of knowledge and the
uncertainties of the world; (3) excellence of judgment and advice; (4) knowledge with
extraordinary scope, depth, and balance; (5) the search for a perfect synergy of mind and
character; and (6) balancing the good or well-being of oneself and that of others. The
researchers Bangen, Meeks, and Jeste [
8
] (p. 1257), in their extensive literature review of
wisdom definitions and their common subcomponents, categorized authors’ definitions
of wisdom as based on decision-making/knowledge (23), prosocial attitudes (21), self-
reflection (19), the acknowledgement of uncertainty (16), emotional homeostasis (13),
tolerance (7), openness (5), spirituality (5), and the sense of humor (3). The numerals
following each subcomponent of the definition of wisdom above indicate the frequency
of the specific subcomponent found in the reviewed studies. Bangen et al. concluded
that “the most commonly cited subcomponents, which appeared in at least half of the
definitions, relate to social decision-making/knowledge of life, prosocial values, reflection,
and acknowledgement of uncertainty” [8] (p. 1262).
According to the philosopher Maxwell [
12
], “Wisdom includes knowledge and under-
standing but goes beyond them by also including: the desire and active striving for what is
of value, the ability to see what is of value, actually and potentially, in the circumstances of
life, the ability to experience value, the capacity to use and develop knowledge, technology
and understanding as needed for the realization of value. Wisdom, like knowledge, can
be conceived of, not only in personal terms, but also in institutional or social terms. We
can thus interpret wisdom-inquiry as asserting: the basic task of rational inquiry is to help
us develop wiser ways of living, wiser institutions, customs and social relations, a wiser
world” [12] (p. 66).
Wisdom can also be understood as an ‘attitude’. Weick [
13
] (pp. 345–379) argues:
”Wisdom, can be defined conceptually as a balance between knowing and doubting,
or behaviorally as a balance between too much confidence and too much caution” or
doubt [
13
] (p. 366). He points out that, through perceptions, events and experiences (i.e.,
context) lead to reflections—that is, the content of wisdom—and then to judgment—that
is, about the process of wisdom. Weick reasons that “wisdom maybe an attitude rather
than a body of thought
. . .
because it implies that people can improve their capability
for wise actions” [
13
] (p. 367). In many organizations the attitude of overconfidence in
knowledge and knowing is very common and, consequently, an attitude of wisdom is rare;
furthermore, wisdom could even be discouraged as overconfidence grows. This could
be the case in universities, as they are organizations where overreliance on knowledge-
inquiry increases confidence and, as a consequence, diminishes wisdom-inquiry. Taking
the attitude of questioning, doubting what we already know (i.e., becoming less confident
in what we already know), embedding new learning and new ideas, and improvising
actions could move organizations toward wisdom.
1.2. What Is Practical Wisdom?
I argue that the three psychological dimensions of wisdom [
2
] (i.e., cognitive, affective,
and reflective) and the three philosophical views of wisdom [
4
], namely wisdom of life
(sophia), wisdom of knowledge (episteme), and wisdom of practice (phronesis), are highly
relevant to HE. My aim is to search for PW in HE; therefore, it is necessary to define what
kind of PW is most relevant. Since the 1990s, phronesis, as one dimension of prudence,
has experienced a revival and attracted growing attention in management and leadership
practices and research literature (e.g., [14–27]).
Recently, Bachmann, Habisch, and Dierksmeier [
28
], in an interdisciplinary literature
review, examined PW from philosophical, theological, psychological, and management
(i.e., leadership, decision making, strategy, organizational studies, and human resource
management) perspectives. Bachmann et al. [
28
] (p. 160) concluded that PW “guides
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 3 of 30
towards an organizational setting where excellence in judgment and in character, personal
development and interpersonal relations, economic success and social responsibility can
emerge”. Phronesis plays the role of guiding and synthesizing of skills (techne) and theo-
retical knowledge (episteme). However, to act upon PW there is a need “to pay attention
not only to instrumental knowledge and abstract techniques, but also to social, cultural,
moral aspects and to the students’ personal development” [
28
] (p. 160). Therefore, the role
of education is fundamental in cultivating future generations’ capacity for PW [29,30].
1.3. Why Is There a Need for Practical Wisdom in Higher Education?
Educating for life—that is, educating students with knowledge, skills, and competen-
cies infused with PW and ethical and moral values—has become of the utmost importance.
Therefore, there is a need for PW in ethical decision making, complex problem solving,
and in handling the challenges and unpredictability of life. The world is becoming ex-
tremely complex and highly interconnected, with wicked problems in need of wiser and
better solutions. More than ever before, the world needs wisdom. In a survey on world
challenges [
31
], experts identified fifty major problem areas for humanity in the 21st cen-
tury and among them were: artificial intelligence, cities and global development, health
and humanity, social inequality, global political instability, threats to democracy, wars,
genocides, terrorism, nuclear and biological weapons, climate change, waste disposal, and
species extinction. Maxwell [
32
] reasoned that the main cause of these global problems is
that we have failed to learn how to create a civilized world. In this paper, I argue that the
solution could be ‘educating for life’, which means enabling future generations through
wisdom, PW, knowledge, skills, and competencies not only to identify but to act, and
seeking to solve authentic and wicked life problems. Therefore, academia and education
should play an important role in cultivating the PW of future leaders, managers, experts,
and practitioners [29,33].
I strongly believe that universities and HE have a huge obligation in creating a better
and wiser world. However, the context of university education is becoming more complex
(Figure 1). Furthermore, the main dilemma ahead is how to integrate knowledge acquisition
with wisdom acquisition. In order to solve businesses’ problems [
34
,
35
] and the wicked
problems of our life [
31
], to manage complexity, we need to rethink what a university is
(mission, vision, and values) and what a university needs to become [
33
]. In addition, we
need to rethink what HE is and what it needs to become [
30
]. Therefore, this paper tackles
an affirmative and significant phenomenon, i.e., how university education could facilitate
the progress to a better and wiser world. More precisely, the issues are how to cultivate
wisdom in HE, how to unite knowledge and wisdom acquisition when educating future
generations for life, and how to prepare the next generation to solve complex problems,
not only based on their knowledge but guided by their ethical and moral values. Figure 1
shows the complex context of HE that is the focus of this paper.
My personal motivation in exploring this phenomenon is based on more than two
decades of experience as an HE practitioner. This paper is inspired by my passion about
learning, knowing, knowledge creation, knowledge sharing, and problem solving and by
my deep care for students’ future in a wiser and better world. Therefore, the main research
question of the paper is: how could university education facilitate the progress to a wiser and
better world? The methodology involved case study research (CSR), including secondary
research on fourteen Finnish universities’ missions, vision, and values, and online primary
research asking HE participants and practitioners about what university and HE are and
why and how they need to change.
The structure of this paper follows the five Ds (i.e., define, discover, dream, design,
and destiny) of appreciative inquiry (AI), which is a constructive organizational design
approach based on positive psychology. The paper has four sections. The introduction
defined an affirmative phenomenon that is the focus of this paper, i.e., how universities and
HE could facilitate the progress to a wiser and better world by integrating more wisdom
inquiry into knowledge inquiry and learning. Furthermore, the concepts of wisdom and
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 4 of 30
PW were presented, along with why PW is needed in HE and the complex context of this
phenomenon (Figure 1). In Section 2, in accordance with the research questions, I explain
why CSR is an appropriate research approach and I describe the data collection methods.
Section 3presents the case study and the findings of the secondary and primary, online,
qualitative research. This includes three processes: (1) discovering evidence about the
missions, visions, and values of fourteen Finnish universities of sciences and discovering the
views of HE participants; (2) dreaming about what university education could or might be
in the future; and (3) designing how universities and HE need to change. In the conclusion,
the main research question is answered, and the outline of a possible destiny for HE, the
implications for educators, the limitation of this research and an outline of the future along
with educational research needs are provided. Finally, I assess the quality of the case
study, highlight the novelty of its presentation, and point out the possible contributions of
my research.
Figure 1. Context of higher education.
2. Research Methodology
This paper focuses on HE as a research phenomenon (Figure 1). I seek to answer the
main question: how could university education facilitate the progress to a wiser and better world?
Here, I present the sub-questions, discuss the CSR methodology, and describe the data
collection methods. The six sub-questions (Figure 2) are related to two themes: (1) the
university as an institution and as a context (i.e., place and space) of HE; and (2) education
as content, practice, and process.
My goal is to explore how HE could “educate for life not for school”, i.e., how
university education (HE) could facilitate the progress to a wiser and better world. For
this purpose, I selected the CSR methodology. This methodology is appropriate for my
purpose because with CSR I am able to present real examples of the current state of HE in
Finnish universities of sciences (USCs) and I am able to make contributions to the existing
body of knowledge about HE.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 5 of 30
The research questions are formulated as ”what”, ”why”, and ”how” questions (
Figure 2
).
This concurs with Yin’s [
36
] (p. 8) definition of CSR as seeking to understand the why and
the how of a real, current phenomenon. According to Myers, “the purpose of the case
study research is to use empirical evidence from real people in real organizations to make
an original contribution to knowledge” [
37
] (p. 73). There are four types of case study
design [
36
] (pp. 46–60): single-holistic, single-embedded, multiple-holistic, and multiple-
embedded. Stake [
38
] categorized case study types as: intrinsic—to better understand a
specific case; instrumental—to provide generalization; and multiple or collective—to jointly
research a phenomenon. The research approaches in CSR can be exploratory, explanatory,
or descriptive.
For this paper I collected data from multiple sources through secondary and primary
research to provide evidence from rich, multiple sources that demonstrates the complexity
and reality of HE as a real-life and contemporary phenomenon. In the secondary research,
I explored the mission, vision, and values of fourteen Finnish public USCs based on their
official websites, and in the online research I asked HE participants (university students)
and practitioners (university educators) to answer six research questions related to this
paper (Figure 2). The link to the questions of the online inquiry on Google Jamboard was
shared with over 200 LinkedIn connections (university students and educators), numerous
ResearchGate researchers, two universities, students, and educators. The online platform
was available for two months. Finally, I collected the anonymous answers, analyzed them
with color coding, and identified emerging key words, and themes.
In brief, this paper presents a multiple-embedded, explorative, and descriptive case
study. The goal is to demonstrate and better understand through examples what universi-
ties and HE are and why and how they need to change. Data were collected from secondary
and primary sources.
Figure 2. Research themes and questions.
3. The Case—Searching for Practical Wisdom in Higher Education
Here, I present the case and my findings from the secondary and primary, online,
qualitative research. This section includes three processes: (1) logos—discovering, i.e., explor-
ing the ”what” questions; (2) pathos—dreaming, i.e., bringing up arguments for the ”why”
questions; and (3) ethos—designing, i.e., contemplating the answers to the ”how” questions.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 6 of 30
Aristotle argued that convincing argumentation and effective delivery of a message is
based on ethos,pathos, and logos. Therefore, to present the case of “searching for wisdom in
HE”, I will apply the elements of persuasive communication (Figure 3), namely kairos (i.e.,
purpose, appropriateness, timeliness, right, critical moment), logos (i.e., content, message,
arguments, facts, evidence, logic, rationality), pathos (i.e., desire, imagination, feelings,
emotions), and ethos (i.e., reliability, credibility, trust, positive feelings). The affirmative
topic and its temporary character and critical timing were defined and discussed in the
introduction (Figure 1). Here the focus is on logos,pathos, and ethos.Destiny will be
presented in the conclusion.
Figure 3. Framework for presenting the case.
3.1. Logos—Discovering What University and Higher Education Are
The purpose here is to explore what universities and HE are by focusing on the
”what” research questions (Figure 2, Q1 and Q2). In this phase the approach is with logos,
discovering through rationality facts, evidence, and reasons for the existence of Finnish
USCs. The research methodology involved secondary and primary research. Before
presenting the findings, I discuss what universities and HE are.
“What is a university?” is an ontological question. First, based on a review of the
literature, I present what being a university means and what philosophical concepts help
us to understand universities. Next, after a brief introduction of the Finnish HE system,
I present the findings based on research on the missions, visions, and values of fourteen
Finnish public USCs (Tables 1and 2). Finally, I show the findings of my online survey
about the views of HE participants and practitioners on what a university is and the goals
of university education.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 7 of 30
Table 1. Keywords for missions, visions, and values of Finnish public universities.
Multidisciplinary Universities
Name
(Date of Establishment)
Mission
Why Does the University Exist?
Vision
What Does the University hope to Achieve?
Values
With What Guiding
Principles Does the University Act?
1. University of Helsinki (1640)
•Contribute to a fair and equal society
•Be a multidisciplinary, academic community
•Solve problems
•Impact on the world through education and research
•Results in solving the challenges of the world
(digitalization, ageing and health, globalization,
sustainable development)
•Truth
•Bildung (moral conscience, stability,
open-mindedness)
•Freedom, autonomy, and
responsibility
•Inclusivity
2. Åbo Akademi University (1918) •Contribute to society through general learning,
education, and new scientific knowledge
•Freedom of research and education
•Ethical responsibility
•Enhance diversity, inclusion, equality, and sustainability
•Diversity
•Openness
•Courage
•Participation
•Sustainability
3. University of Turku (1920)
•Conduct high quality multidisciplinary and
interdisciplinary research
•Education based on research, scientific knowledge, and
free science
•Be part of the international academic community
•Collaborate with businesses, society, and the region
•
Solve complicated problems, increase societal effectiveness
with basic research
•Responsible education, multidisciplinary, inspiring HEI
•Catalyst for social and community well-being
•Ethicality
•Criticality
•Creativity
•Openness
•Communality
4. University of Jyväskylä (1934)
•Wisdom and well-being university for people
and society
•Competence, well-being, and education in an
increasingly complex and polarized world
•Dialogue between research, education, and society
•Kindle the skills, knowledge, and passion required to
live wisely for the best of humanity
•Think big and experiment boldly in core fields
•
Be a global leader in the study of learning, well-being, and
basic natural phenomena
•Reshape competence to build a sustainable society
•Internationally renowned, multidisciplinary center
of research
•One of the world’s leading experts in learning
and teaching
•Conducting multidisciplinary research on learning
and teaching
•Developing the learning environments of the future
•Openness
•Trust
•Quality
•Integrity
5. University of Oulu (1958)
•Research—push the boundaries of the known and
produce new scientific information and science-based
solutions
•
Education—promote learning and train future pioneers
•Innovation for the future
•Knowledge
•Well-being in a more sustainable, intelligent, and humane
world
•Innovating and creating new
knowledge
•Taking responsibility
•Succeeding together
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 8 of 30
Table 1. Cont.
Multidisciplinary Universities
Name
(Date of Establishment)
Mission
Why Does the University Exist?
Vision
What Does the University hope to Achieve?
Values
With What Guiding
Principles Does the University Act?
6. University of Vaasa (1968)
•
Internationally competitive, productive, and specialized
•International community
•Multidisciplinary research
•Business-oriented
•Combat climate change
•Focus on responsible business
•Sustainable solutions for future needs
•Cultivate knowledge
•Inspiring and thriving community
•Courage
•Community
•Responsibility
•Quality
•Equality
7. University of Lapland (1979)
•Research-based higher education institution
•Research interactions between people and the
environment in the Arctic
•Produce new knowledge and competence
•Ensure prosperity and well-being
•Internationally recognized, cutting-edge research
•Support the local community, businesses, and society
•Creative forerunner
•Responsible Arctic university community
•Inspiring learning environment (digital solutions,
connections to working life and the economy)
•Participation in research and education networks
•Responsibility
•Sustainability, well-being
(operating in an ecologically,
socially, and economically
sustainable manner)
•Reachability, strong sense of
community
8. University of Eastern
Finland (2010)
•An international, participatory, and inclusive scientific
community
•Loosely collaborate with businesses and industry
•Conduct high level research
•Create novel business models
•Find interdisciplinary solutions to global challenges
•Find solutions for building a sustainable future
•Safeguard forest-related biodiversity livelihoods
•Open science and research
•Sustainable well-being (promote
forests as a source of health and
well-being)
9. Aalto University (2010)
•Shape a sustainable future (science and art, technology,
and business)
•Strengthen the innovative capacity of Finland through
first-class research, art, and education
•Creation of an entrepreneurial culture
•Production of tangible added value for society
•Excellence and multidisciplinarity (combining
knowledge from different disciplines)
•Collaboration, partnerships with the best universities,
industry, and the business world
•Innovative society
•Innovation, art and creative practices, and education
•Building a sustainable society driven by innovation and
entrepreneurship
•Offer solutions to the most pressing societal challenges
•
Research and innovation (research excellence for academic
and societal impact)
•Art and creative practices (renewing society through art,
creativity, and design)
•Education (educating game changers)
•Campus (transforming the campus into a unique
collaboration hub)
•
Enablers of the academic mission (excellence in advancing
and supporting core goals)
•Passion for exploration
•Courage to influence and excel
•Freedom to be creative and critical
•Responsibility to accept, care,
and inspire
•Integrity, openness, and equality
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 9 of 30
Table 1. Cont.
Multidisciplinary Universities
Name
(Date of Establishment)
Mission
Why Does the University Exist?
Vision
What Does the University hope to Achieve?
Values
With What Guiding
Principles Does the University Act?
10.
Tampere University (2019)
•A unique university of technology and social sciences
•Multidisciplinary university (technology, health,
and society)
•Internationally recognized
•Active and attractive partner
•Work together to build a sustainable world
•Develop solutions to tackle climate change
•Preserve the natural environment
•Improve the well-being and sustainability of societies
•Continuous pursuit of new knowledge and scientific
breakthroughs
•Courage to tackle the world’s most
vicious problems
•Critical thinking (engaging in an
appreciative and constructive
dialogue, freedom of thought, trust)
•Diversity (appreciation of different
people, fields, and traditions)
•Erudition, bildung (appreciation
for others)
•Learner-centeredness (promoting
learning and development
potential)
•Openness (communications,
decision making)
•Responsibility (in research,
education, and sustainable
development)
Specialized Universities
Name
(Date of Establishment)
Mission
Why Does the University Exist?
Vision
What Does the University Hope to Achieve?
Values
With What Guiding
Principles Does the University Act?
11.
Hanken School of
Economics (1909)
•Create new knowledge
•Responsibly educate professionals for the global
economy and changing society
•Academic excellence
•Research
•Form close ties to the business community
•Internationally highly regarded
•Research-driven
•Respond to global business and societal challenges
innovatively and responsibly
•Promote social responsibility in all its activities
•Strong and versatile connections to the business
community
•Actively participate in national and international
collaborations and networks
•Openness
•Equality
•Integrity
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 10 of 30
Table 1. Cont.
Specialized Universities
Name
(Date of Establishment)
Mission
Why Does the University Exist?
Vision
What Does the University Hope to Achieve?
Values
With What Guiding
Principles Does the University Act?
12.
Lappeenranta-Lahti University
of Technology (LUT) (1969)
•Bringing together the fields of science and business
(promoting business generated by scientific research)
•Seek new solutions
•
Help society and businesses in their sustainable renewal
•Be a forerunner in education
•Securing international-quality labels for degree programs
as a sign of the excellence of the teaching
•Scientific solutions in:
•Business—sustainable renewal of business and industry
•Energy—transition to a carbon neutral world
•Water—refining side streams into value
•Air—turning emissions into opportunities
•Courage to succeed
•Passion for innovation through
science
•Will to build well-being
13.
National Defense
University (1993)
•
Provide the future officers of the Finnish Defense Forces
and the Border Guard
•Combine knowledge with values and attitudes
•Facilitate the security and stability of all society with
research and knowledge
•Bring together academic and vocational education
•Research in military science is a top priority
•Maintain community relations
•Widely networked expertise in the military theory of the
future
•At the forefront of military sciences and the art of war
•Researched information
•Innovative teaching
•Patriotism
•Professionalism
•Justice
•Responsibility
•Reliability
•Cooperation
Specialized Universities
Name
(Date of Establishment)
Mission
Why Does the University Exist?
Vision
What Does the University Hope to Achieve?
Values
With What Guiding
Principles Does the University Act?
14.
University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
•Cultivate a unique environment that helps artists to
grow and strengthens the power of art as a driver
of change
•Open meeting place for the arts
•Ambitious, critical university community
•Bold reformers
•Experts in tradition
•Art creates the future
•Art is part of a good life
•Art helps to build an equal and sustainable world
•Societal impacts:
Philosophies 2021, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 31
Bring together academic
and vocational educa-
tion
Research in military sci-
ence is a top priority
Maintain community re-
lations
14. University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
Cultivate a unique envi-
ronment that helps art-
ists to grow and
strengthens the power
of art as a driver of
change
Open meeting place for
the arts
Ambitious, critical uni-
versity community
Bold reformers
Experts in tradition
Art creates the future
Art is part of a good life
Art helps to build an
equal and sustainable
world
Societal impacts:
Students and learn-
ing—change the
world as artists, re-
searchers, and ex-
perts, discover own
potential, and do
not shy away from
responsibility
Art and research—
explore art and its
practices, impact in
research and devel-
opment activities,
interaction with
both the artistic and
scientific communi-
ties
Society—art is a
basic right, it con-
tributes to a mean-
ingful life; art, artis-
tic thinking, and
creativity are tools
that help us to
build an equal and
sustainable world
Skill (what it means to
be human, skillful,
knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware;
quality; expertise; inspi-
ration from traditions
and their reinterpreta-
tion).
Courage (trust, be sensi-
tive, be responsible, ex-
periment fearlessly, be
critical, have a bold atti-
tude)
Openness (transparent,
responsible, value diver-
sity, seek an active dia-
logue with the world)
source: university websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Bachmann et al. [28] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented, in-
tegrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality, re-
lated to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these eight
characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1 data and indicate the number of the univer-
sity in Table 2 below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW manifests
itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and sociality-
linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which shows all
eight characteristics of PW.
Students and learning—change the world as artists,
researchers, and experts, discover own potential,
and do not shy away from responsibility
Philosophies 2021, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 31
Bring together academic
and vocational educa-
tion
Research in military sci-
ence is a top priority
Maintain community re-
lations
14. University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
Cultivate a unique envi-
ronment that helps art-
ists to grow and
strengthens the power
of art as a driver of
change
Open meeting place for
the arts
Ambitious, critical uni-
versity community
Bold reformers
Experts in tradition
Art creates the future
Art is part of a good life
Art helps to build an
equal and sustainable
world
Societal impacts:
Students and learn-
ing—change the
world as artists, re-
searchers, and ex-
perts, discover own
potential, and do
not shy away from
responsibility
Art and research—
explore art and its
practices, impact in
research and devel-
opment activities,
interaction with
both the artistic and
scientific communi-
ties
Society—art is a
basic right, it con-
tributes to a mean-
ingful life; art, artis-
tic thinking, and
creativity are tools
that help us to
build an equal and
sustainable world
Skill (what it means to
be human, skillful,
knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware;
quality; expertise; inspi-
ration from traditions
and their reinterpreta-
tion).
Courage (trust, be sensi-
tive, be responsible, ex-
periment fearlessly, be
critical, have a bold atti-
tude)
Openness (transparent,
responsible, value diver-
sity, seek an active dia-
logue with the world)
source: university websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Bachmann et al. [28] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented, in-
tegrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality, re-
lated to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these eight
characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1 data and indicate the number of the univer-
sity in Table 2 below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW manifests
itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and sociality-
linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which shows all
eight characteristics of PW.
Art and research—explore art and its practices,
impact in research and development activities,
interaction with both the artistic and scientific
communities
Philosophies 2021, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 31
Bring together academic
and vocational educa-
tion
Research in military sci-
ence is a top priority
Maintain community re-
lations
14. University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
Cultivate a unique envi-
ronment that helps art-
ists to grow and
strengthens the power
of art as a driver of
change
Open meeting place for
the arts
Ambitious, critical uni-
versity community
Bold reformers
Experts in tradition
Art creates the future
Art is part of a good life
Art helps to build an
equal and sustainable
world
Societal impacts:
Students and learn-
ing—change the
world as artists, re-
searchers, and ex-
perts, discover own
potential, and do
not shy away from
responsibility
Art and research—
explore art and its
practices, impact in
research and devel-
opment activities,
interaction with
both the artistic and
scientific communi-
ties
Society—art is a
basic right, it con-
tributes to a mean-
ingful life; art, artis-
tic thinking, and
creativity are tools
that help us to
build an equal and
sustainable world
Skill (what it means to
be human, skillful,
knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware;
quality; expertise; inspi-
ration from traditions
and their reinterpreta-
tion).
Courage (trust, be sensi-
tive, be responsible, ex-
periment fearlessly, be
critical, have a bold atti-
tude)
Openness (transparent,
responsible, value diver-
sity, seek an active dia-
logue with the world)
source: university websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Bachmann et al. [28] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented, in-
tegrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality, re-
lated to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these eight
characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1 data and indicate the number of the univer-
sity in Table 2 below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW manifests
itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and sociality-
linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which shows all
eight characteristics of PW.
Society—art is a basic right, it contributes to a
meaningful life; art, artistic thinking, and creativity
are tools that help us to build an equal and
sustainable world
Philosophies 2021, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 31
Bring together academic
and vocational educa-
tion
Research in military sci-
ence is a top priority
Maintain community re-
lations
14. University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
Cultivate a unique envi-
ronment that helps art-
ists to grow and
strengthens the power
of art as a driver of
change
Open meeting place for
the arts
Ambitious, critical uni-
versity community
Bold reformers
Experts in tradition
Art creates the future
Art is part of a good life
Art helps to build an
equal and sustainable
world
Societal impacts:
Students and learn-
ing—change the
world as artists, re-
searchers, and ex-
perts, discover own
potential, and do
not shy away from
responsibility
Art and research—
explore art and its
practices, impact in
research and devel-
opment activities,
interaction with
both the artistic and
scientific communi-
ties
Society—art is a
basic right, it con-
tributes to a mean-
ingful life; art, artis-
tic thinking, and
creativity are tools
that help us to
build an equal and
sustainable world
Skill (what it means to
be human, skillful,
knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware;
quality; expertise; inspi-
ration from traditions
and their reinterpreta-
tion).
Courage (trust, be sensi-
tive, be responsible, ex-
periment fearlessly, be
critical, have a bold atti-
tude)
Openness (transparent,
responsible, value diver-
sity, seek an active dia-
logue with the world)
source: university websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Bachmann et al. [28] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented, in-
tegrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality, re-
lated to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these eight
characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1 data and indicate the number of the univer-
sity in Table 2 below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW manifests
itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and sociality-
linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which shows all
eight characteristics of PW.
Skill (what it means to be human,
skillful, knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware; quality;
expertise; inspiration from
traditions and their
reinterpretation).
Philosophies 2021, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 31
Bring together academic
and vocational educa-
tion
Research in military sci-
ence is a top priority
Maintain community re-
lations
14. University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
Cultivate a unique envi-
ronment that helps art-
ists to grow and
strengthens the power
of art as a driver of
change
Open meeting place for
the arts
Ambitious, critical uni-
versity community
Bold reformers
Experts in tradition
Art creates the future
Art is part of a good life
Art helps to build an
equal and sustainable
world
Societal impacts:
Students and learn-
ing—change the
world as artists, re-
searchers, and ex-
perts, discover own
potential, and do
not shy away from
responsibility
Art and research—
explore art and its
practices, impact in
research and devel-
opment activities,
interaction with
both the artistic and
scientific communi-
ties
Society—art is a
basic right, it con-
tributes to a mean-
ingful life; art, artis-
tic thinking, and
creativity are tools
that help us to
build an equal and
sustainable world
Skill (what it means to
be human, skillful,
knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware;
quality; expertise; inspi-
ration from traditions
and their reinterpreta-
tion).
Courage (trust, be sensi-
tive, be responsible, ex-
periment fearlessly, be
critical, have a bold atti-
tude)
Openness (transparent,
responsible, value diver-
sity, seek an active dia-
logue with the world)
source: university websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Bachmann et al. [28] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented, in-
tegrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality, re-
lated to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these eight
characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1 data and indicate the number of the univer-
sity in Table 2 below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW manifests
itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and sociality-
linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which shows all
eight characteristics of PW.
Courage (trust, be sensitive, be
responsible, experiment fearlessly,
be critical, have a bold attitude)
Philosophies 2021, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 31
Bring together academic
and vocational educa-
tion
Research in military sci-
ence is a top priority
Maintain community re-
lations
14. University of the Arts
Helsinki (2013)
Cultivate a unique envi-
ronment that helps art-
ists to grow and
strengthens the power
of art as a driver of
change
Open meeting place for
the arts
Ambitious, critical uni-
versity community
Bold reformers
Experts in tradition
Art creates the future
Art is part of a good life
Art helps to build an
equal and sustainable
world
Societal impacts:
Students and learn-
ing—change the
world as artists, re-
searchers, and ex-
perts, discover own
potential, and do
not shy away from
responsibility
Art and research—
explore art and its
practices, impact in
research and devel-
opment activities,
interaction with
both the artistic and
scientific communi-
ties
Society—art is a
basic right, it con-
tributes to a mean-
ingful life; art, artis-
tic thinking, and
creativity are tools
that help us to
build an equal and
sustainable world
Skill (what it means to
be human, skillful,
knowledgeable, and
emotionally aware;
quality; expertise; inspi-
ration from traditions
and their reinterpreta-
tion).
Courage (trust, be sensi-
tive, be responsible, ex-
periment fearlessly, be
critical, have a bold atti-
tude)
Openness (transparent,
responsible, value diver-
sity, seek an active dia-
logue with the world)
source: university websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Bachmann et al. [28] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented, in-
tegrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality, re-
lated to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these eight
characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1 data and indicate the number of the univer-
sity in Table 2 below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW manifests
itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and sociality-
linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which shows all
eight characteristics of PW.
Openness (transparent, responsible,
value diversity, seek an active
dialogue with the world)
source: University websites; the university website links are indicated in Appendix A.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 11 of 30
Table 2. Eight features of practical wisdom at Finnish USCs.
Eight Features of Practical
Wisdom
Description
Source: [28] (Table 5, p. 157)
Practical Wisdom at Universities of Sciences (Numbers Here
Correspond with the Numbers of Universities in Table 1)
1. Action-oriented Realization in practice; transforms knowledge, beliefs, and decisions into action 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
2. Integrative Complex realities; passing of judgment; balancing of tensions; critical reflection;
integrating and balancing several often competing interests, rationalities, emotions,
challenges, and contexts; critical reflection toward practice 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 11, 14
3. Normative Different kinds of knowledge; guidance of good life for oneself and for one’s
community; orientating towards normative guidance of human flourishing 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14
4. Sociality
Considering the indispensable sociality of every human being; intertwining one’s own
actions, interests, and goals with those of others 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14
5. Pluralism Considering today’s multi-layered diversity in different parts of life and society 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11
6. Personality Acting appropriately and authentically in a self-aware manner in seeking right,
credible, inspiring, and convincing goals 14
7. Cultural heritage
Rediscovering transmitted cultural and spiritual heritage; openness; ability to adapt to
new contexts 9, 14
8. Limitation
Being aware of the incompleteness of human existence and being humble in the face of
one’s own achievements and capabilities 3, 7, 8, 14
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 12 of 30
Barnett [
39
] asked very similar questions to this paper: “what is it to be a university?
How might we understand the ‘being’ of a university?” [
39
] (pp. 59–60). He approached
the understanding of universities with philosophical concepts of being, becoming, un-
derstanding, space (i.e., intellectual and discursive, epistemological, pedagogical and
curricular, ontological space) and time, culture and anarchy, and authenticity and respon-
sibility. Barnett discussed the metaphysical, scientific, entrepreneurial, and bureaucratic
universities as being. Then, he classified research universities according to their possible
epistemological positions, i.e., knowledge orientations, by applying two dimensions, namely
knowledge-for-itself/knowledge-for-the-world (i.e., the interest structure at work) and
knowledge-in-itself/knowledge-in-the-world (i.e., the location of knowledge production).
Based on his framework, the university types identified were the ”ivory tower” university,
the ”professional university”, the ”entrepreneurial university”, and the ”developmental
university” [
39
] (pp. 31–32, Figure 2.1). The developmental university is the most rel-
evant to this paper because its knowledge orientation is knowledge-for-the-world and
knowledge-in-the-world. “This university is both active in the world and is generating
knowledge through those activities in the world. It is intent on helping to improve the
world—its knowledges are put to work for-the-world” [39] (pp. 31–32).
What is the goal of university education? According to Barnett, “it is the task of univer-
sities to help bring potential believers into valid knowing relationships with the world,
wherever those potential believers may be in the world.
. . .
advancing public understanding
in the world” [
39
] (p. 65, emphases original). He adds that “’understanding’ applies
both to research and teaching. ‘Understanding’ is, therefore, a much larger concept than
either research or teaching” [
39
] (p. 65). A university “endeavours to help the growth
of understanding. Those endeavours may be direct efforts, in helping individuals or
groups to advance their understandings; or they may be indirect efforts, putting ideas and
knowledge into the public domain across the world to help in widening the conceptual
resources and primary knowledge that might in turn further those individuals’ and groups’
understandings” [39] (p. 65).
Knowing and understanding develops through critical dialogue, which is another
task of universities. New insights, new knowledge and knowing, emerge through critique,
arguments and counter-arguments, debates, and dialogue. “The university in which
such critical dialogue was not present would be no university” [
39
] (p. 31). Similarly to
Barnett, Auxier [
40
] (pp. 247–255) sees the purpose of HE as lying in inspiring, motivating,
encouraging, and supporting learners to explore, experience, and interpret the world and
develop their own perceptions and judgments about the world.
However, there is a challenge for HE pedagogy: how learning can be fostered for
an unknown future, for a complex, highly connected world that faces many global prob-
lems [
31
] (see Figure 1). Barnett argues that pedagogical challenges are not epistemological
but ontological challenges. He proposes that “
. . .
the way forward lies in construing
and enacting a pedagogy for human being. In other words, learning for an unknown
future has to be a learning understood neither in terms of knowledge nor skills but of
human qualities and dispositions. Learning for an unknown future calls, in short, for an
ontological turn” [
41
] (p. 219). The task of HE pedagogy is enabling learners to flourish,
to grow, to make effective and right interventions in the world. The educational tasks are:
“first, bringing students to a sense that all descriptions of the world are contestable and,
then, second, to a position of being able to prosper in such a world in which our categories
even for understanding the situations in which we are placed, including understanding
ourselves, are themselves contested” [41] (p. 225).
In brief, I have presented how a university as an institution and HE pedagogy are seen
from a philosophical perspective. However, it is important to show how an organization is
defined in the organizational studies and organizational psychology literature.
According to Haslam, the main characteristics of an organization are purpose; shared
meaning, in the form of the interactions of roles, norms, and values; power; and status [
42
]
(pp. 1–3). Furthermore, organizations are influenced by their environment and they in-
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 13 of 30
fluence their environment (see Figure 1). Morgan [
43
,
44
] (pp. 208–213) presented eight
different metaphors of organizations: as machines, living organisms, brains, cultures, polit-
ical systems, psychic prisons, flux and transformation, and as instruments of domination.
Haslam [
42
] (pp. 3–13) described the four existing paradigms for studying organizations
and their psychology as the economic, individual differences, human relations, and social
cognition paradigms. He argues that there is a need for a social identity paradigm for
studying organizations. Organizations could be studied at three levels, namely social-
psychological (e.g., professional identities, values, sense making, meaning negotiation,
learning), structural, and ecological (e.g., interactions, practices, relationships, networks,
communities) levels [
45
] (p. 107). The human relations, social identity, and ecological level
approaches to the study of universities as organizations are relevant to this paper.
I assume that an organization emerges through social interactions of
people [34,35,46,47]
and that it is a jointly constructed reality (i.e., the human relations paradigm). An organization
is a complex, socially constructed system, not a static, solid thing or an objective or pre-
given reality. Wenger [
48
] (pp. 241–262) distinguished two views of an organization: the
designed organization (i.e., the institution or formal organization) and the constellation
of practices (i.e., the living organization or informal organization). He argues that “the
organization itself could be defined as the interaction of these two aspects” [
48
] (p. 241,
emphasis added). An organization is constructed by people and therefore it can be viewed
as the ”patterns of relating” [
49
] (p. 265) of humans interacting with each other in constructing
the organization. Indeed, organizations are natural, evolving systems rather than formal,
technically designed machines to achieve predetermined goals. People are the organization
because they participate in it and they form it at the same time.
Defining the main characteristics of a university as an organization is important here
because it confirms the research approach taken and explains why context, mission, vision,
values, participants, and practitioners (see Figure 1) were selected to analyze Finnish USCs
in this paper.
3.1.1. The Finnish Higher Education System
There are fourteen USCs in the HE system of Finland, of which ten are multidisci-
plinary and four are specialized universities. “A total of 13 universities and 22 universities
of applied sciences operate in the Ministry of Education and Culture’s administrative
branch” [
50
]. The fourteenth USC is the National Defense University, which operates under
the defense administration. As of August 2005, both USCs and universities of applied
sciences (UASs) provide master’s degrees. “Universities of sciences are multidisciplinary
and regional higher education institutions with strong connections to business and indus-
tries as well as to regional development” [
51
] (p. 16). According to the Finnish Ministry
of Education and Culture, “to guarantee the freedom of science, the arts and higher ed-
ucation, universities are autonomous actors. Universities are independent legal entities
that have the right to make independent decisions on matters related to their internal
administration” [50].
3.1.2. Empirical Findings of the ”What” Questions
To study Finnish universities as organizations, I focused on their missions, visions,
and values because these best indicate why they exist, what they want to achieve, and
what values guide them. The findings of my secondary research are presented in Table 1.
Bachmann et al. [
28
] (p. 157) identified eight features of PW: it is action-oriented,
integrative, normative, linked to sociality, related to pluralism, related to personality,
related to cultural heritage, and related to limitation. Based on the descriptions of these
eight characteristics of PW, I examined the Table 1data and indicate the number of the
university in Table 2below. The findings show that the action-oriented feature of PW
manifests itself in eleven universities, while the normative feature manifests in nine and
sociality-linked characteristics in eight universities. There is only one university which
shows all eight characteristics of PW.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 14 of 30
Next, based on primary data collected through my online research, I present the
findings on how university practitioners and participants identified what a university
is. These primary data could complement the secondary data in Table 1. In Figure 4,
the findings of the online research show that the answers to what a university is formed
four groups: (1) the roles of the university; (2) the university as a place, institution, and
organization; (3) the university as a knowledge provider through research; and (4) the
university as a partner, as part of the society. The following quotations are selected from
the 24 responses received for Q1:
•
Universities have three roles: educate the next generation (develop knowledge, skill,
competence); do research and development in science; be a partner and contributor locally.
•
A university is more than just an educational and research institution; it is a social
community with special values.
•
It is the basic starting place for education, motivation, and learning which, in an
optimal case, are based on shared values and dreams. Here, students build their
networks for life, they learn, grow and get inspired.
•
A place for attaining academic and research skills for implementation of knowledge
to serve the needs of the society and humanity. A place for personal growth into a
responsible proactive citizen.
Figure 4.
Main characteristics of a university based on the primary research (numbers indicate the
frequency of keywords in answers).
The findings for the question about the goals of university education (Q2) are pre-
sented in Figure 5. The goals of HE, according to the 17 answers from practitioners of and
participants in HE, form three clusters (Figure 5): (1) providing knowledge, skills, and
learning; (2) preparing students for the world of work; (3) cooperating and collaborating
with others. These answers concur with the tasks of HE indicated by Barnett [
39
,
41
] and
Auxier [
40
]. Furthermore, there are similarities between these answers and the Finnish
Ministry of Education and Culture’s declaration: “the basic task of the universities is to
engage in scientific research and provide the highest level of education based on it. Univer-
sities promote lifelong learning, interact with society and promote the societal impact of
research results and artistic activities” [50]. Below are several selected responses to Q2:
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 15 of 30
•
The goal of university education is to give more understanding and bigger pictures
about connections and real-life processes. It should promote wisdom and critical
thinking.
•
Teach the value of the knowledge and provide a toolset for self-management of the
knowledge, including acquiring new knowledge.
•
Higher education sets the basis for future jobs and job opportunities, it develops a
broader understanding of context and inspires future leaders.
•
To create a more civilized world through knowledge and competences and hence
increase well-being in the world. Create better and sustainable solutions together
with companies.
Figure 5.
Three main goals of HE according to the primary research (numbers indicate the frequency
of keywords in answers).
Summing up, in this part of the paper, the research findings based on the secondary
(see Tables 1and 2) and primary (Figures 4and 5) data related to questions Q1—what is
a university?—and Q2—what is the goal of university education?—were presented. A
surprising finding was that all eight features of PW manifested themselves in the missions,
visions, and values of the fourteen Finnish public USCs (see Table 2). Furthermore, the
online research indicated that a university is not only an institution, a place, but also a
social community with special values. The goal of HE is not only to provide knowledge,
skills, and tools for students but, most importantly, to develop identities, inspire, and
achieve societal impacts by applying knowledge to create a civilized world [41].
3.2. Pathos—Dreaming about the Future
In this section, I discuss why universities and HE need to change and then I present
the findings of the primary research relating to the “why” questions (Figure 2, Q3 and Q4).
This is the phase where responders dreamed with pathos, imagination, desire, emotion,
and feeling about why universities as organizations and HE need to change.
Authors [
33
,
39
–
41
] have argued that universities as professional organizations and
HE need to change. I concur with Weick and Barnett that universities, like any other
organizations, are in fact in continuous change: they are in a process of evolving (cf. [
52
],
p. 366) and becoming. Barnett argues that: “Being a university is always a matter of
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 16 of 30
becoming a university. To put it cryptically, being a university is always unfinished
business” [
39
] (p. 62). This process of becoming a university has empirical, ideological,
imaginative, and value conditions [39] (pp. 60–62).
Therefore, the question is how universities can survive in the future, in an environment
that is unstable, complex, and highly interconnected. Concurring with Maxwell [
33
], I strongly
believe that traditional, bureaucratic universities should fundamentally
change [30,53]
; they
need to become more proactive and innovative [
54
]. Universities as professional organizations
need to become more organic, open, natural, and innovative organizations. Universities need
to be both horizontally and vertically decentralized and employ highly skilled, highly trained,
specialized professionals, experts working in creative project teams. Daft and Weick [
55
]
(p. 288) call a proactive and innovative organization an enacting organization. These organiza-
tions take risks, are ready to experiment, undertake simulations and tests, and tend to ignore
traditional norms and rules. Enacting organizations are created by their environment and, at
the same time, create their own realities. They are involved in becoming and in interpretive
sensemaking because they continuously discover and interpret the environment by acting
with it, reacting to it, and enacting it. The external context of universities and HE is highly
complex (see Figure 1), full of global problems and crises. Weick [
56
] (pp. 399–415) argues that
enacted sensemaking in crisis situations is beneficial. “Enactment affects crisis management
through several means such as the psychology of control, effects of action on stress levels,
speed of interactions, and ideology” [
56
] (p. 411). Furthermore, taking the enactment perspec-
tive “urges people to include their own actions more prominently in the mental experiments
they run to discover potential crises of which they may be the chief agents” [
56
] (p. 413). The
question is whether we could today call universities enacting organizations.
According to previous studies from the literature, one reason why universities need to
change is the increase of the influence of bureaucracy and power on the administrative staff.
Bousquet argues that “the administration of higher education has changed considerably.
Campus administrations have steadily diverged from the ideals of faculty governance,
collegiality, and professional self-determination. Instead, they have embraced the values
and practices of corporate management” [
57
] (p. 1). Similarly, Ginsberg [
58
] claims that
the bureaucracy at schools and universities has been growing steadily and it reduces the
power of faculty to influence the future of the university. “The existence of large numbers
of deanlets gives ambitious senior administrators the tools with which to manage the
university with minimal faculty involvement and to impose their own programs and priorities
on the campus” [
58
] (p. 206, emphasis added). Ginsberg suggests “trimming administrative
fat” and reducing the size of bureaucracy. He recommends “that boards truly concerned
with maintaining the quality of their schools compel university administrators to shift
spending priorities from management into the real business of the university—teaching
and research” [58] (p. 205).
One main role of universities is education (see Figure 4). The future success of a
society depends on both science and education. The physicist Kaku anticipates four trends
in the future: (1) science will continue to be the engine of prosperity; (2) the economy
will shift from commodity capitalism to intellectual capitalism; (3) the job market will
favor non-repetitive workers; and (4) education will be absolutely essential [
59
]. Kaku
argues that products of the mind cannot be mass produced; creativity and artistic skills will
be valued and demand for intellectual workers with specialized skillsets in construction,
design, and computing will increase. Regarding academia and HE, Kaku calls for more
focus on developing students’ high-level skills, emphasizing scientific education, and
embracing new technology. However, in my view, Kaku’s high emphasis on developing
skills contradicts Barnett’s view on the role of education in a supercomplex world. Barnett
distinguishes two forms of uncertainty and argues that learners need to cope with the
uncertainty of the environment (information overload, unpredictability in environmental
response) and with personal uncertainty (anxiety, fragility, chaos) [
41
] (p. 222). He points
out that education has a primarily ontological and not epistemological task, i.e., enabling
individuals to prosper [
41
] (p. 224), because “one goes forward not because one has either
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 17 of 30
knowledge or skills but because one has a self that is adequate to such an uncertain
world” [
41
] (p. 227). Auxier [
40
] (pp. 247–255) argues for changes in HE. In his view, the
idea of having a physical campus, the level of academic freedom, the role of professors
as transmitters of knowledge, the traditional ways of learning and lecturing, evaluation
criteria, and old-fashioned tests need to change. Maxwell does not deny the need for
knowledge inquiry and scientific education; however, he expresses the need for wisdom
in HE and writes that “as an urgent matter, we need to put wisdom-inquiry into practice in
schools and universities around the world. We need a change of paradigm, an academic
revolution.
. . .
We urgently need a high-profile campaign to bring wisdom-inquiry to our
universities” [60] (p. 130, emphases added).
Empirical Findings of “Why” Questions
The findings of my primary research regarding the question about why universities as
institutions need to change (Q3) are presented in Figure 6. There were 11 answers to Q3.
The arguments clearly indicated external and internal factors of change, for example:
•
Because the world changes, and the learning tools change and develop. The university
should nonetheless be true to science. For example, the university must not be affected
by pressures from ‘political correctness’.
•
Because the rest of the world is changing too (i.e., climate change, politics, gender
equality, LGBTQ).
•
Those universities that have a strong hierarchical system should change and they need
to be more flexible and resilient.
•
If they have a strong hierarchical system, they cannot adapt to the fast-changing
environment as quickly as necessary, cannot take the opportunities, do not give
enough space for new ideas.
Figure 6.
External and internal drivers of change based on the primary research (numbers indicate
the frequency of keywords in answers).
The 15 answers to the question about why university education needs to change
(Q4) clearly indicate that HE needs to change because of the changes in the world (see
Figure 1) and in the world of work. Respondents’ arguments were that HE needs to
become up-to-date in a context where there are fast and rapid changes in the world, notably
environmental changes, and where digitalization and new technology have changed the
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 18 of 30
world of work. Higher education needs to help society to drive changes; it needs to provide
solutions to problems in the world. Furthermore, the HE changes are driven by needs for
different competencies and skills, continuous learning, emotional intelligence, intuitiveness,
flexibility, creativity, teamwork, new and advanced knowledge, argumentation, and new
ways of communication. Importantly, the answers highlighted that there are needs for
quality pedagogy, changes in outdated pedagogical approaches, new criteria for teachers,
different learning tools, new approaches to learning, and for a reassessment of the costs
and benefits of a university degree. A few selected answers to Q4 are presented below:
•
The world changes, companies develop, and universities need to keep up to date—
they should be ahead of things, providing top knowledge and solutions to the world.
•
The complex world needs different skills than before, emotional and intuitive intelli-
gence are at the core of successful teamwork. Teamwork is at the core of all work.
•
Because the way we work has also changed. The pace is much faster and digital.
Creativity plays also a much bigger role.
•
Too many unhappy people are out there: students, employers, parents, profes-
sors...There are a lot of places for self-criticism. Maybe the criteria for teachers are
outdated, the number of publications does not guarantee quality pedagogy.
In brief, the findings concerning the ”why” questions (Figure 2, Q3 and Q4) were
presented in this section. Next, the focus is on the ”how” questions.
3.3. Ethos—Designing How to Change
In this section, I present the findings of the primary research for the ”how” questions
(Figure 2, Q5 and Q6). This is the phase of ethos, where responders designed, with credi-
bility, reliability, character, integrity, credibility, trustworthiness, honesty, and trust, how
universities as organizations and HE need to change.
In the literature, I found an idea presented by Vasconcelos [
61
] to be relevant to this
research. Vasconcelos argues that building wisdom capital (WC) “may help individuals
and organizations to keep the right path
. . .
to contribute to something greater than
themselves through their potentialities, skills and capabilities.” His two-level model of
WC demonstrates how individuals and organizations could contribute to building WC.
According to him, on the one hand, individual WC (i.e., wise people) aims to do good, do
right, achieve excellence, improve society, and serve others and themselves by engaging
in meaningful projects and challenges. On the other hand, organizational WC (i.e., wise
organizations) aims to create a greater common and human good and to create well-being.
It raises the question whether building the WC of universities and HE practitioners could
be the way to build a better and wiser world.
Empirical Findings of “How” Questions
There were 22 responses to Q5. I illustrate the findings with selected answers below
and with Figure 7:
•
Universities need to be more open to collaboration with the other role players in the
business and social environment.
•
They should be more flexible: if they have a strong hierarchical system, they can-
not adapt to the fast-changing environment as quickly as necessary, cannot take
the opportunities, do not give enough space for new ideas; They should optimize
their processes.
•
Stop thinking traditionally and increase collaboration with other institutions—grow to-
gether to a real ecosystem. Decrease hierarchy and appreciate talents in all educational
levels (not just doctors).
•
Open up! More international cooperation. The employer/employee market is global.
More exchange of the teaching staff as well as of students.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 19 of 30
Figure 7.
Directions of needed university changes based on the primary research (numbers indicate
the frequency of keywords in answers).
Samples from 14 responses to the question about how university education needs to
change (see Figure 8) are given below:
•
It should change a lot in many areas (e.g., collaboration, using new technologies, new
educational and research methods, adaptability, openness, etc.).
•
By encouraging the use of new and different research methods and by spreading seeds
of curiosity and willingness to challenge current facts.
•
Fewer lectures and more practical assignments. Also, cooperate with companies and
institutions to produce knowledge.
•
There is too much theoretical knowledge and too little real understanding about life
and society. Studying is too slow and unambitious. Students are not committed to
getting ready for greater purposes. There are a lot of complaints as to the enthusiasm
and devotion of the teaching staff.
In summary, this case study sought to answer three types of research questions, ”what”,
”why”, and ”how” questions (see Figure 2), by exploring and describing the characteristics
of universities and HE. The research methodology involved a case study. The findings
of the research based on the secondary data showed that all eight features of PW were
present (see Table 2) in the fourteen Finnish public universities (see Table 1). Furthermore,
the findings of the online research based on primary data complemented the case study
with rich data (see Figures 4–8). In the following section, I will suggest more specific steps
for universities and HE.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 20 of 30
Figure 8.
Directions of needed university education changes based on the primary research (numbers
indicate the frequency of keywords in answers).
4. Conclusions—Destiny
In this last section of the paper, first, I answer the main research question. Then,
I present the implications for educators, indicate the limitations of this case study, and
propose future educational research areas. Next, as additional research opportunities based
on topics in the literature, I discuss the ideas about “the university of the future and the
future of the university”. Finally, I assess the quality of the case study, highlight the novelty
of its presentation, and point out the possible contributions of my research.
4.1. Answering the Main Research Question
This case involved searching for PW in HE with logos, pathos, and ethos (see Figure 3)
and with the aim of finding answers to the main question: how could university education
facilitate progress to a wiser and better world? For this purpose, six questions were
proposed (see Figure 2), the findings of the research based on secondary and primary data
were presented, the missions, visions, and values of fourteen Finnish public USCs were
explored, along with the eight features [
28
] of PW practices (see Tables 1and 2), and the
answers of HE practitioners were analyzed and presented.
In his numerous publications, Maxwell [
12
,
32
,
33
,
60
] claims that to build a civilized
world we would need to integrate wisdom and science and “that requires that we bring
about a radical transformation in universities all over the world. At present universities are
devoted to the pursuit of specialized knowledge and technology. However, they need to
be transformed so that the basic task becomes to help humanity tackle problems of living,
including global problems, in increasingly cooperatively rational ways” [
32
] (Preface). How
academia could be revolutionized, transformed, and changed is an urgent challenge that
has been investigated by Barnett [39,41], Auxier [40], and other educational researchers.
I argue that the literature on management could help in designing the process of
change process for universities. In the literature on management, there are numerous
studies on change management, the forces of change, types of change, the process of
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 21 of 30
change, the conditions of successful change, and so on. The eight phases of change
(e.g., [
62
–
65
]), the transformation of an organization through reframing, restructuring,
revitalization, and renewal (e.g., [
66
] (pp. 6–8)), episodic and continuous change (e.g., [
52
]),
and dealing with change (e.g., [
67
]) are relevant to designing changes for universities and
HE. However, here I focus only on the process and the phases of change as described in a
few selected sources.
My goal is to relate the eight-stage process of change (see [
62
] (p. 21) and [
63
] (p. 7))
in order to design changes for universities and HE and facilitate progress to a wiser and
better world for all.
1.
Establishing a sense of urgency—The complex, highly interconnected environment of
universities and education (Figure 1), involving global crises and problems of the
world that need wise solutions [
31
,
32
], are external indicators of the need for urgency.
However, there are internal urgencies as well. Bousquet [
57
] and Ginsberg [
58
]
worry about the low influence of faculty on the future of the university and they
are concerned about the growth of bureaucracy at universities. Ginsberg provides
specific recommendations “to board members, the media, faculty members, alumni,
students and parents, and, lastly, administrators themselves” that include “trimming
administrative fat” [
58
] (p. 206). Furthermore, an attitude involving too much reliance
on knowledge inquiry could lead to overconfidence in knowledge, and it could
diminish attitudes of wisdom [13].
2.
Creating the guiding coalition—Universities are living organisms formed by interactions
of people [
46
,
48
,
49
]. If universities want to contribute to creating a wiser and better
world and to solving global problems, they need to become enacting and open
organizations [
55
,
56
]. To form a team, a coalition that understands the urgency and is
capable of leading the change, it is necessary that university practitioners, educators,
students, and leaders closely network and collaborate with businesses, influencers,
and politicians.
3.
Developing a vision and strategy—Universities have missions, visions, values, and
strategies that are announced on their websites (e.g., [
50
,
68
] and see Table 1). The
problem could be that these nicely formulated visions and strategies are not enacted,
not put into practice, or not implemented in the intended ways. Developing univer-
sities’ visions and strategies for change should be a bottom-up, participative, and
collaborative approach in order to gain commitment from all participants who will
implement them. If they are formulated only by the administration, then they could
show a very rosy picture about the university, they might not reflect the reality, and
they might not address the problems that need urgent solutions.
4.
Communicating the vision and strategies of change—There needs to be broad, multichan-
nel, continuous communication with simple and consistent messages underlining the
urgency of change, the societal impacts at stake, the importance of ethical and moral
values, the need for wisdom inquiry as well as knowledge inquiry, and the need for
PW in HE.
5.
Empowering broad-based action—The change should not destroy what is good and
working at universities and in HE; rather, it needs to find and eliminate the existing
obstacles to realizing the vision of change. For instance, appreciative inquiry could be
applied for organization development, focusing on existing strengths and reinforcing
the life-giving forces of the university [47].
6.
Generating short-term wins—In their change strategies, universities could have mile-
stones to celebrate, reward, and communicate their achievements together with their
stakeholders. This would generate a sense of progress toward the vision and it would
motivate and energize participants. Small wins could simplify the crises, help sense-
making through actions, and motivate people to take the role of active agents of
change [56].
7.
Consolidating gains and producing more change—Using ethos, credibility, trust, honesty,
reliability, and character help to continue the change process. Supporting university
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 22 of 30
staff, students, faculty members, educators, and partners with training, involving
them in meaningful projects, and asking them to initiate new projects that would
support the vision of change would all be useful. The societal impacts of universities
and HE could be fostered by solving real-life business problems (cf. [
34
,
35
,
53
]) and
developing business organizations.
8.
Anchoring new approaches in the culture—It is important to train university practitioners
to become wise leaders [
18
], intelligent workers, wisdom workers [
69
], and phronetic
leaders [
21
] of the 21st century. In the conceptual age, not only knowledge rules
but wisdom and PW guide actions [
12
,
41
,
70
]. Furthermore, it is vital to build indi-
vidual and organizational wisdom capital [
61
] by strengthening HE practitioners’
knowledge, skills, expertise, capabilities, and ethical orientation and by encourag-
ing PW in universities’ strategies, policies, teaching, research, relationships, and
decision making.
4.2. Implications for Educators
Educators have a key role in creating the future. I concur with Pink [
70
] (pp. 49–50)
who argues that in the 21st century we are entering a new age, the ”conceptual age”, where
instead of knowledge workers we will need creators, empathizers, pattern recognizers,
and meaning makers. In the conceptual age we will need a different thinking and a new
approach to life; specifically, we will need ”high concept” and “high touch”.
“High concept involves the capacity to detect patterns and opportunities, to create
artistic and emotional beauty, to craft a satisfying narrative, and to combine seemingly
unrelated ideas into something new. High touch involves the ability to empathize with
others, to understand the subtleties of human interaction, to find joy in one’s self and to elicit
it in others, and to stretch beyond the quotidian in pursuit of purpose and meaning” [
70
]
(pp. 2–3, emphases added).
Pink clearly describes the knowledge, skills, and competences we will need in the
21st century to create a better, wiser, and a meaningful world. I argue that these should be
the main missions, visions, and values of universities too. To achieve this we would need
educators to become “wisdom workers”, intelligent workers, instead of being just knowledge
workers [
69
]. Bousquet [
57
] starts his book with a quotation from Albert Einstein (1949)
about the importance of intellectual workers: “An organization of intellectual workers can
have the greatest significance for society as a whole by influencing public opinion through
publicity and education. Indeed, it is its proper task to defend academic freedom, without
which a healthy development of democracy is impossible” [57].
Educators should become ”wise leaders” who: (1) use reason and careful observations;
(2) allow for non-rational and subjective elements when making decisions; (3) value humane
and virtuous outcomes; (4) have practical actions oriented towards everyday life, including
work, and (5) are articulate, understand the aesthetic dimension of their work, and seek
the intrinsic personal and social rewards of contributing to a good life [
18
] (pp. 178–
180). Similarly, Nonaka and Takeuchi [
21
] argue for the need for phronetic leadership, i.e.,
leadership guided by practical wisdom. According to them, wise leaders can (1) judge
goodness, (2) grasp the essence of matters, (3) create shared contexts, (4) communicate the
essence of matters, (5) exercise political power, and (6) foster practical wisdom in others. I
suggest that universities with phronetic leadership—that is, education with educators as
”wisdom workers” and ”wise leaders”—will be able to facilitate progress to a wiser and better
world and only then will wisdom, practical wisdom, be cultivated in the feelings, minds,
and actions of future generations [29,53].
4.3. Limitations and Further Educational Research
This case study focused on fourteen public universities of the Finnish HE
system [50,68]
(see Tables 1and 2). Therefore, an international comparison would provide a new area
of research to complement the findings of this case. As the data about the Finnish USCs
were collected through secondary research, it would be useful to conduct interviews with
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 23 of 30
university practitioners, educators, students, and partners (organizations) to validate the
findings of the case study. In addition, it would be useful to explore whether and how
the eight characteristics of PW (see Table 2) manifest themselves in the strategies, projects,
curricula, and pedagogy of universities.
It is natural that HE focuses on performance, success, function, argumentation, spe-
cialization, logic, and seriousness, and on accumulating knowledge and developing skills
and competencies. However, to create a meaningful, wise, and better world for human-
ity, we need more than these. According to Barnett, “there is the educational task of
preparing students for a complex world, for a world in which incomplete judgements
or decisions have to be made; incomplete either because of the press of time or because
insufficient evidence is to hand fully to warrant any particular decision or because the
outcomes are unpredictable” [
41
] (p. 223). Concurring with Pink, I believe that, in the
21st century, we will need to enhance six senses: “Design. Story. Symphony. Empathy.
Play. Meaning. These six senses increasingly will guide our lives and shape our world.
. . .
These abilities have always comprised part of what it means to be human” [
70
] (p. 67).
Educational research could focus on exploring how these six senses, together with PW,
could be cultivated at universities. Furthermore, research could look at what changes
would be required in the curricula, pedagogy, leadership, collaborations, missions, visions,
values, and organizational structures of universities.
Furthermore, Hussey and Smith [
71
] provide a critique of HE in the UK and indicate
several problems: “chronic under-funding, the replacement of student grants with loans
and the introduction of tuition fees; the growth of managerialism; the emphasis on account-
ability and decline of trust; the growth of a competitive, market ethos; modular degrees,
knowledge treated as a commodity and students seen as customers; the drift towards a
two-tiered system, with teaching colleges and research universities; and casualization of the
academic profession” [
71
] (pp. 1–7). Similar to Auxier [
40
], Hussey and Smith also suggest
several educational research areas, such as: “ways of managing universities; proper inspec-
tion; better ways of organizing students’ learning; improving teaching and learning; better
approaches to assessment, and the proper use of ideas such as learning outcomes” [
71
]
(pp. 129–135). As a vast research area, the future of the university is discussed next.
4.4. The University of the Future and the Future of the University As Research Areas
The ”university of the future” offers vast opportunities for researchers. If we concur
with Barnett that “Being a university is always a matter of becoming a university” [
39
]
(p. 62), then exploring the features of the future university and its process of becoming can
offer rich opportunities for researchers. Barnett outlines four conditions of a university’s
being, specifically empirical, ideological, imaginative, and value conditions [
39
] (pp. 60–62).
These conditions could be researched based on the questions Barnett contemplates:
•
Empirical conditions—“What is the extent of its funding? To what degree can it raise
additional income? How is it perceived in the world—or even by its own students
and its own staff?”;
•Ideological conditions—“What is the dominant sense of a university in this society? To
what degree is it expected to be entrepreneurial? To what degree is it expected to
‘serve’ society?”;
•
Imaginative conditions—“What are the visions that the university entertains for itself?
What are the possibilities that it imagines for itself
. . .
its own ‘imaginaries’? Are those
imaginative possibilities merely an extension of what it has been and is now; or is a
quite different future envisaged for it?”;
•
Value conditions—“Is a university mainly concerned to live within itself, a university
in-itself (the research university); or to profit from the world—a university for-itself
(the entrepreneurial university); or to attend to the wider society—a university for-
the-Other? Does it believe that inquiry as such is valuable, is its ‘own end’
. . .
or does
it believe that inquiry is only valuable insofar as it is demonstrably put to use in the
world, or can it identify a new relationship for itself with the world?” [
39
] (pp. 60–62).
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 24 of 30
This paper sought to contribute to the value conditions of being and becoming a uni-
versity through the search for practical wisdom in HE. Researchers should be encouraged
to explore the characteristics of the possible forms of the future university, such as liquid,
therapeutic, authentic, and ecological universities (see [
39
] (pp. 109–151), [
72
] (pp. 62–73),
and [73] (pp. 74–90)).
The imaginary concepts of the university, however, need to satisfy five criteria of ade-
quacy as follows: range, depth, feasibility, ethics, and emergence [72] (p. 71). Researching
these criteria and testing an imaginary future form of the university is another interesting
research area. The emerging ecological university [
73
] (pp. 87–89) of the 21st century
could be both authentic (inward pointing) and responsible (outward pointing). “This is a
university that takes seriously both the world’s interconnectedness and the university’s
interconnectedness with the world.
. . .
This is a university neither in-itself (the research
university) nor for-itself (the entrepreneurial university) but for-others” [
73
] (pp. 87–88). This
paper contributes to the concept of the ecological university through the search for answers
to the question: how could university education facilitate progress to a wiser and better world?
Further exploring the concept of the ecological university is another exciting research
topic. The idea of the ecological university is important, especially now when the world
faces several global challenges [
31
]: “disease, illiteracy and unduly limited education,
climate change, dire poverty, lack of capability and basic resource, misunderstandings
across communities, excessive use of the earth’s resources, energy depletion and so on and
so on—requires the coming of the ecological university” [73] (p. 89).
Researchers (e.g., Rothblatt, Morley, Standaert, and Nixon [
74
–
77
]) are actively search-
ing for ideas and possibilities for the future university. Rothblatt argues that “the multiver-
sity of the twenty-first century, by definition, is a house of many mansions. No single idea
prevails, but many exist” [
74
] (p. 24). Morley has set up a research agenda for the univer-
sity of the future and argues that gender, academic values and standards, environmental
sustainability, critical knowledge, and opportunity and wealth distribution topics will need
to be addressed [
75
] (pp. 26–35). Standaert argues that the network society brings a funda-
mental paradigm shift in HE [
76
] by shifting learning from place to space. He argues that
“universities in the future will not only be places of knowledge “production” or of “virtual
communication” but also spaces of encounters. One challenge for networked universities
is to become in new ways such privileged spaces of encounters. This supposes an ethos
of a renewed attention to “in-betweenness,” to concrete places where the actors (teachers,
students, researchers) encounter each other by treating each other as subjects” [
76
] (p. 93).
This paradigm shift from place to space and its consequences for the networked university
are fascinating research areas too. Nixon worries about the responsibilities of universities:
“Universities of the future will continue to have multiple responsibilities and academics
will continue to be involved in a wide variety of practices relating to research, teaching and
scholarship. Central to those responsibilities and practices, however, will be a commitment
to providing all students with a space within which to develop capabilities necessary to
flourish as receptive and critical learners” [
77
] (p. 147). “Universities of the future, then,
have a vital part to play not only in sustaining and developing modes of practical reasoning
or deliberation, but in ensuring that these are not distorted through the imposition of
wholly inappropriate bureaucratic requirements” [
77
] (p. 148). Therefore, future research
could focus on areas such as modes of reasoning (phronesis), the role of future universities
in sustaining and developing modes of practical reasoning or deliberation, and universities’
commitment to the common good.
There are also research areas relating to philosophical proposals for the “future of
the university” and HE (e.g., Stoller and Kramer, Allan, and Barnett [
78
–
80
], as well as
Auxier [
40
]). Stoller and Kramer focus on the philosophy of HE and develop its future
directions as follows [78] (pp. 15–18, emphases original):
•
“A philosophy must view higher education as an institutional type, accounting both for its
distinctive elements and its organizational complexities.”
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 25 of 30
•
“A philosophy of higher education must build on the complex network of actors and cultures
in the system.”
•
“A philosophy of higher education advances a cohesive and critical imaginary for higher educa-
tion in relationship to various, social, political, economic, and ethical contexts and concerns.”
•
“A philosophy of higher education must develop a robust account of teaching, learning,
and knowing.”
•
“A philosophy of higher education must advance a theoretical discourse that appropriately
denotes its practices and its aims.”
Stoller and Kramer’s guidelines for philosophy as a discipline and as a practice offer
new educational research opportunities. Allan [
79
] discusses education and training and
argues that “Educating students, as opposed to only training them, is creating conditions
that make it possible for them to learn how to become both effective leaders and good
citizens” [
79
] (p. 112). Allan’s arguments support the message of this paper because
they emphasize the need for practical wisdom (i.e., phronesis, good sense) in educational
practices: “Wisdom and skilfulness are prudential practices since they provide advisories
on how best to gain verified knowledge or to create valuable objects, whereas good sense is
a practice advising persons on how best to interact with others in determining and affecting
those or any other purposes” [
79
] (p. 112). Allan is correct in saying that “Practices, both
prudential and moral, can be learned but they cannot be taught. They are not information
to be found in books or on the internet or noted down during a lecture. They are not
instructions to be followed or hypotheses to test” [
79
] (p. 112). Future research could
explore the role of educators in developing effective leaders and good citizens. Barnett
defines culture as “a supremely value-laden human achievement. It is a way of sustaining
society through those symbols and meanings and activities to which is attached the highest
value” [
80
] (p. 136). He argues that “such a value-laden and value-oriented function for
the university has now been put in question and even been extinguished” [
80
] (p. 136).
Therefore, it would be important to research the idea of culture as the essence of the
ecological university, culture as an ecosystem (i.e., the cultural ecosystem, ecological
culture), and explore how “the different manifestations of culture, in particular the (a)
cognitive, (b) practical, (c) communicative, (d) expressive and (e) material domains” [
80
] (p. 140)
express themselves in the context of the university.
To sum up, this paper, along with the literature on educational research and its
philosophy, can provide novel research opportunities for HE researchers for many decades
to come.
4.5. Quality, Novelty, and Contributions
In this research paper, I presented an explorative and descriptive case study. According
to Myers [
37
] (pp. 82–85), the quality of a case study in general can be assessed based on
six criteria: (1) it must be considered “interesting”; (2) it must display sufficient evidence;
(3) it should be in some way ”complete”; (4) it must consider alternative perspectives;
(5) it should be written in an engaging manner; (6) it should somehow contribute to
knowledge [37] (p. 83).
Drawing on Myers’ work, I conclude that the case study presented in this paper met
the six quality criteria in the following ways (1) it was not only “interesting” to university
educators and leaders but, with its contemporary character, provides insights for university
students and business partners as well; (2) it was based on multiple sources (i.e., books,
articles, online sources) and on secondary (see Table 1) and primary (Google Jamboard)
data as evidence; (3) it was ”complete”, as it used all relevant and current data available,
i.e., the data about the fourteen Finnish public USCs; (4) it has implications for educators
and outlined future research possibilities; (5) it was written in a clear, simple, and logical
way, and it deployed an effective communication framework (see Figure 3) as a creative
guiding principle for communication; and (6) it contributes to knowledge and to a better
understanding of the role of wisdom, specifically PW, in HE.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 26 of 30
The quality of a case study depends on its objectivity and generalizability as well.
It could be difficult to generalize this case study because the secondary data (Table 1)
represent Finnish USCs. I admit that using multiple sources in CSR is both an advantage
and disadvantage at the same time. It is beneficial because it shows the complexity of the
situation but the abundance of data and documents can cause difficulties when trying to
focus on essentials and when trying to clearly present the case. I concur with Gray [
81
]
(pp. 273–274) that the large volumes of data can make writing case study reports difficult.
He suggests that the case study report should have a clear “chain of evidence” referring to
the documents when arguing and making conclusions. This increases case study reliability.
However, it requires that the researcher consistently follow this practice and conduct
the CSR in a very disciplined, rigorous way. I created a communication framework (see
Figure 3
) as a “chain of evidence” to present this case. This framework helped me to focus
on the essentials and it strongly supported the logic involved in presenting the case.
The novelty of the case study was in the application of an effective communication
framework (see Figure 3). My objective was to provide readers with a clear structure and a
logical flow for the case study through steps that involved deciding on an affirmative and
contemporary topic (kairos) (Figures 1and 2); discovering and presenting facts, evidence,
and reasons (logos) (Tables 1and 2); dreaming with imagination, desire, and emotion
(pathos); and designing with credibility, reliability, and trust (ethos), and then concluding by
addressing the intentions (destiny) of the case study.
With this case study research, I sought to contribute to a better understanding of
the ”practical wisdom in HE” phenomenon. I argued that HE needs to consider all three
psychological dimensions of wisdom, i.e., the affective (e.g., sympathy and compassion
for others), reflective (e.g., overcoming subjectivity and reducing ego-centeredness), and
cognitive (e.g., seeing reality and understanding truth) dimensions. In a complex and
highly connected world, it is not enough to foster only knowledge inquiry in education.
There is an urgent need for wisdom inquiry in HE. When educators become wise leaders,
phronetic leaders, they will cultivate not only the wisdom of knowledge, but the wisdom of
practice and the wisdom of life in future generations. Only then will we achieve a better
and wiser world. I hope that this case study inspires actors in HE and draws their attention
to wisdom, specifically practical wisdom, in their everyday practices. I admit that this
contribution is only a small step toward solving the wicked and complex problems of our
lives, but it is a necessary step toward a wiser and better world for all.
Funding: There was no external funding provided for this research.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement:
Participation in the primary online research has been entirely volun-
tary and by clicking the provided link participants gave their consent to participate in this research.
Data were anonymously analysed and cannot be linked to individuals in any way.
Data Availability Statement:
Secondary data are available freely on the websites of the fourteen
public Finnish universities of sciences (Appendix A). Answers to the research questions were col-
lected through a primary online inquiry where participation was voluntary and contributions were
anonymous. The author declares that participants cannot be identified in any way. Data are available
upon request.
Acknowledgments:
I acknowledge with appreciation the contributions of the anonymous practi-
tioners, university students, staff, and colleagues to the online survey. I thank Gerard Danford for
proofreading my paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
Appendix A. Links to University Websites (According to Table 1)
1.
University of Helsinki, https://www.helsinki.fi/en/about-us/basic-information (ac-
cessed on 4 June 2021).
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 27 of 30
2.
Åbo Akademi University, https://www.abo.fi/en/about-abo-akademi-university/
(accessed on 4 June 2021).
3.
University of Turku, https://www.utu.fi/en/university/university-strategy-2030
(accessed on 4 June 2021).
4.
University of Jyväskylä, https://www.jyu.fi/en/university/strategy-2030 (accessed
on 4 June 2021).
5.
University of Oulu, Strategy of the University of Oulu | University of Oulu, https:
//www.oulu.fi/en/university-values (accessed on 4 June 2021).
6.
University of Vaasa, https://www.uwasa.fi/en/university/strategy-and-values (ac-
cessed on 4 June 2021).
7.
University of Lapland, https://www.ulapland.fi/EN/About-us/Strategy (accessed
on 4 June 2021).
8.
University of Eastern Finland, https://www.uef.fi/en/strategy-2030 (accessed on 4
June 2021).
9.
Aalto University, https://act.aalto.fi/en/strategy,https://act.aalto.fi/en/our-strategy/
our-purpose-values-and-way-of-working (accessed on 4 June 2021).
10. Tampere University, https://www.tuni.fi/en/about-us/tampere-university/strategy-
and-key-information?navref=liftup-links-link (accessed on 4 June 2021).
11.
Hanken School of Economics, https://www.hanken.fi/en/about-hanken/hanken/
mission-and-vision,https://www.hanken.fi/en/about-hanken/hanken/strategies
(accessed on 4 June 2021), https://www.hanken.fi/system/files/2021-01/hanken_
in_a_nutshell_2020_eng_0.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2021).
12.
Lappenranta-Lahti University of Technology (LUT), https://www.lut.fi/web/en/
get-to-know-us/introducing-the-university/strategy (accessed on 4 June 2021).
13.
National Defense University, https://www.ndu.edu/About/Vision-Mission/ (ac-
cessed on 4 June 2021).
14.
University of the Arts of Helsinki, https://www.uniarts.fi/en/general-info/vision-
mission-and-values/ (accessed on 4 June 2021).
References
1.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Available online: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wisdom (accessed on 23 April 2021).
2.
Clayton, V. Erikson’s theory of human development as it applies to the aged: Wisdom as contradictory cognition. Hum. Dev.
1975,18, 119–128. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Sternberg, R.J. Implicit Theories of Intelligence, Creativity, and Wisdom. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1985,49, 607–627. [CrossRef]
4.
Robinson, D.N. Wisdom through the ages. In Wisdom: Its Nature, Origins, and Development; Sternberg, R.J., Ed.; Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990.
5. Baltes, P.B. The aging mind: Potential and limits. Gerontologist 1993,33, 580–594. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6.
Baltes, P.B.; Staudinger, U. Wisdom: A metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence. Am. Psychol.
2000,55, 122–136. [CrossRef]
7.
Jeste, D.V.; Ardelt, M.; Blazer, D.; Kraemer, H.C.; Vaillant, G.; Meeks, T.W. Expert consensus on characteristics of wisdom:
A Delphi method study. Gerontologist 2010,50, 668–680. [CrossRef]
8.
Bangen, K.J.; Meeks, T.W.; Jeste, D.V. Defining and assessing wisdom: A review of the literature. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry
2013
,
21, 1254–1266. [CrossRef]
9.
Ardelt, M. Wisdom as expert knowledge system: A critical review of a contemporary operationalization of an ancient concept.
Hum. Dev. 2004,47, 257–285. [CrossRef]
10.
Glück, J.; Bischof, B.; Siebenhüner, L. Knows what is good and bad. Can teach you things. Does lots of crosswords: Children’s
knowledge about wisdom. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2012,9, 582–598. [CrossRef]
11.
Sternberg, R.J. Intelligence in its cultural context. In Advances in Culture and Psychology; Gelfand, M.J., Ciu, C., Hong, Y., Eds.;
Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 205–248.
12. Maxwell, N. From Knowledge to Wisdom; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 1984.
13.
Weick, K.E. Chapter 16: The attitude of wisdom: Ambivalence as the optimal compromise. In Making Sense of the Organization;
Weick, K.E., Ed.; Blackwell Publishing Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2004; pp. 361–379.
14.
McKenna, B.; Rooney, D. Wisdom Management: Tension between Theory and Practice in Practice. 2005. Available online: https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/37618441_Wisdom_Management_Tensions_Between_Theory_And_Practice_In_Practice (ac-
cessed on 10 May 2021).
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 28 of 30
15.
Nonaka, I.; Toyama, R. A firm as a dialectic being: Towards a dynamic theory of a firm. Ind. Corp. Chang.
2002
,11, 995–1009.
[CrossRef]
16.
Nonaka, I.; Toyama, R. Strategic management as distributed practical wisdom (phronesis). Ind. Corp. Chang.
2007
,16, 371–394.
[CrossRef]
17.
Nonaka, I.; Toyama, R.; Hirata, T. Managing Flow. A Process. Theory of the Knowledge-Based Firm; Palgrave Macmillan: New York,
NY, USA, 2008.
18.
McKenna, B.; Rooney, D.; Boal, K.B. Wisdom principles as a meta-theoretical basis for evaluating leadership. Leadersh. Q.
2009
,20,
177–190. [CrossRef]
19.
Dobson, J. From a Knowledge Economy to a Wisdom Economy. 2010. Available online: https://www.thersa.org/discover/
publications-and-articles/rsa-comment/2010/03/from-a-knowledge-economy-to-a-wisdom-economy (accessed on 22 April 2021).
20.
Rooney, D.; McKenna, B.; Liesch, P. Wisdom and Management in the Knowledge Economy; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2010.
[CrossRef]
21.
Nonaka, I.; Takeuchi, H. The Big Idea: The Wise Leader. Harvard Business Review, May 2019. Available online: https://hbr.org/20
11/05/the-big-idea-the-wise-leader(accessed on 14 May 2021).
22.
Banerjee, A. Knowledge and Wisdom Management. 2014. Available online: http://www.delhibusinessreview.org/v_2n2/dbrv2
n2p.pdf (accessed on 25 April 2021).
23.
Ekmek
ҫ
i, A.K.; Teraman, S.B.S.; Acar, P. Wisdom and management: A conceptual study on wisdom management. 10th
International Strategic Management. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014,150, 1199–1204. [CrossRef]
24.
Nonaka, I.; Chia, R.; Holt, R.; Peltokorpi, V. Wisdom, management and organization. Manag. Learn.
2014
,45, 365–376. [CrossRef]
25.
Amaladas, S. Chapter 5: Leadership 2050—The call to shift from private to social reason: Wake up, sober up, and inquire. In
Leadership 2050. Challenges, Key Contexts, and Emerging Trends; Sowcik, M., Andenoro, A.C., McNutt, M., Murphy, S.E., Eds.;
Emerald Group Publishing Limited: London, UK, 2015; pp. 75–90.
26.
Solé, J.B. Wisdom management: ECKM 2017 review. In Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Knowledge Management
(ECKM 2017), Barcelona, Spain, 7–8 September 2017; Volume 1, pp. 53–61. Available online: https://books.google.fi/books?hl=
en&lr=&id=9k88DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA55&dq=%22wisdom+management%22+source:%22Knowledge+Management%
22&ots=slzxV9WtFB&sig=4lXUNA1WaRhG6vEhXz4A4yoFK3M&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on 30 April 2021).
27.
Jakubik, M. How can practical wisdom manifest itself in five fundamental management and leadership practices? VILAKSHAN-
XIMB J. Manag. 2020,18, 3–25. [CrossRef]
28.
Bachmann, C.; Habisch, A.; Dierksmeier, C. Practical wisdom: Management’s no longer forgotten virtue. J. Bus. Ethics
2018
,153,
147–165. [CrossRef]
29. Jakubik, M. Educating for the future—Cultivating practical wisdom in education, J.Syst. Cybern. Inform. 2020,18, 50–54.
30. Jakubik, M. Quo vadis educatio? Emergence of a new educational paradigm. J. Syst. Cybern. Inform. 2020,18, 7–15.
31.
Lufkin, B. 50 Grand Challenges for the 21st Century. 2017. Available online: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170331-50-
grand-challenges-for-the-21st-century (accessed on 9 July 2021).
32. Maxwell, N. The World Crisis—And What to Do About It: A Revolution for Thought and Action; World Scientific: London, UK, 2021.
33.
Maxwell, N. How universities have betrayed reason and humanity—And what’s to be done about it. Front. Sustain.
2021
,2, 1–11.
[CrossRef]
34.
Jakubik, M. Solving business problems together case: A master’s degree programme in Finland. J. Syst. Cybern. Inform.
2017
,15,
53–57.
35. Jakubik, M. Masters bring business benefits—Proved by Finnish managers. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2018,2, 65–77.
36. Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods; SAGE Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 2009.
37. Myers, M.D. Qualitative Research in Business & Management; SAGE Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 2009; pp. 70–91.
38. Stake, R.E. Multiple Case Study Analysis; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005.
39. Barnett, R. Being a University; Foundations and Futures of Education Series; Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK, 2011.
40.
Auxier, R. The coming revolution in (higher) education: Process, time, and singularity. In Contemporary Philosophical Proposals for
the University: Toward a Philosophy of Higher Education; Part V: Future Inquiry: Higher Education in the Coming Century; Stoller, A.,
Kramer, E., Eds.; Palgrave: London, UK; MacMillan: New York, NY, USA; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Chapter 11;
pp. 217–260.
41.
Barnett, R. Learning for an unknown future. In Thinking and Rethinking of University, The Selected Works of Ronald Barnett; Barnett,
R., Ed.; World Library of Educationalists; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK, 2015; Chapter 14; pp. 219–234.
42. Haslam, S.A. Sociology in Organizations. The Social Identity Approach, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications: London, UK, 2007; pp. 1–16.
43. Morgan, G. Images of Organization, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 1997.
44. Pugh, D.S.; Hickson, D.J. (Eds.) Gareth Morgan. In Writers on Organizations; Penguin Books: London, UK, 2007; pp. 208–213.
45. Scott, R.W. ORGANIZATIONS. Rational, Natural, and Open Systems; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1998.
46.
Jakubik, M. The human factor of organizational development. In Proceedings of the European Institute for Advanced Studies in
Management (EIASM), Larnaca, Cyprus, 11–12 September 2015; Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/28
1439146_The_human_factor_of_organizational_development (accessed on 15 April 2021).
47. Jakubik, M. Flourishing organizations. J. Syst. Cybern. Inform. 2017,15, 61–72.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 29 of 30
48. Wenger, E. Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2005.
49.
Stacey, R.D. Strategic Management and Organisational Dynamics. The Challenge of Complexity, 5th ed.; Prentice Hall Financial Times:
London, UK, 2007.
50.
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). Ministry of Education and Culture. Available online: https://minedu.fi/en/heis-and-
science-agencies (accessed on 18 April 2021).
51.
Laakso-Manninen, R.; Tuomi, L. Professional Higher Education Management—Best Practices from Finland; Professional Publishing
Finland Oy: Helsinki, Finland, 2020.
52. Weick, K.E.; Quinn, R.E. Organizational change and development. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1999,50, 361–386. [CrossRef]
53.
Jakubik, M. Enhancing human capital beyond university boundaries. High. Educ. Ski. Work-Based Learn.
2019
,10, 434–446.
[CrossRef]
54.
Birch, C. Quo Vadis Universitas. The Role of Business Education in a Chaotic World. In Proceedings of the 19th EDINEB
Conference, Haarlem, The Netherlands, 2–4 May 2012; pp. 56–60. Available online: https://openresearch.surrey.ac.uk/esploro/
outputs/book/Proceedings-of-the-19th-EDINEB-Conference-The-Role-of-Business-Education-in-a-Chaotic-World/99516740
902346#file-0 (accessed on 20 July 2021).
55.
Daft, R.L.; Weick, K.E. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Acad. Manag. Rev.
1984
,9, 284–295. [CrossRef]
56. Weick, K.E. Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. J. Manag. Stud. 1988,25, 305–317. [CrossRef]
57.
Bousquet, M. Introduction: Your Problem is My Problem. In How the University Works. Higher Education and the Low-Wage Nation;
Bousquet, M., Ed.; New York University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 1–54.
58. Ginsberg, B. The Fall of the Faculty. The Rise of the All-Administrative University and Why It Matters; Oxford University Press: New
York, NY, USA, 2011.
59.
Woodling, L. Michio Kaku’s Four Predictions of the Future. 2013. Available online: https://360.rollins.edu/arts-and-culture/
michio-kakus-four-predictions-of-the-future (accessed on 9 May 2021).
60.
Maxwell, N. How Universities Can Help Create a Wiser World: The Urgent Need for an Academic Revolution; Imprint Academic: Exeter,
UK, 2014.
61. Vasconcelos, A.F. Wisdom capital: Definitions, meaning and a two-level model. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 2021. [CrossRef]
62. Kotter, J.P. Leading Change; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1996.
63.
Kotter, J.P.; Cohen, D.S. The Heart of Change. Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations; Harvard Business School
Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2002.
64. Kotter, J.P.; Rathgeber, H. Our Iceberg Is Melting. Changing and Succeeding Under Any Conditions; Macmillan: London, UK, 2006.
65.
Govindarajan, V.; Trimble, C. How Stella Saved the Farm. A Tale about Making Innovation Happen; St. Martin’s Press: New York, NY,
USA, 2013.
66.
Gouillart, F.J.; Kelly, J.N. Transforming the Organization. Reframing Corporate Direction, Restructuring the Company, Revitalizing the
Enterprise, Renewing People; McGraw-Hill, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
67.
Johnson, S. Who Moved My Cheese? An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and In Your Life; Vermilion: London, UK, 1999.
68.
Universities in Finland. Ministry of Education and Culture. Available online: https://minedu.fi/en/universities (accessed on 18
April 2021).
69. Jakubik, M. Rise of intellectual workers and intellectual work. Int. J. Manag. Knowl. Learn. 2020,9, 59–73.
70. Pink, D.H. A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future; Riverhead Books: New York, NY, USA, 2006.
71.
Hussey, T.; Smith, P. The Trouble with Higher Education. A Critical Examination of our Universities; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2010.
72.
Barnett, R. (Ed.) The idea of the university in the 21st century: Where’s is the imagination? In Thinking and Rethinking of University,
The Selected Works of Ronald Barnett; World Library of Educationalists; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK, 2015;
Chapter 4; pp. 62–73.
73.
Barnett, R. (Ed.) The coming of the ecological university. In Thinking and Rethinking of University, The Selected Works of Ronald
Barnett; World Library of Educationalists; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK, 2015; Chapter 5; pp. 74–90.
74.
Rothblatt, S. The future isn’t waiting. In The Future University: Ideas and Possibilities; Barnett, R., Ed.; Routledge Taylor & Francis
Group: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Chapter 1; pp. 15–25.
75.
Morley, L. Imagining the university of the future. In The Future University: Ideas and Possibilities; Barnett, R., Ed.; Routledge Taylor
& Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Chapter 2; pp. 26–35.
76.
Standaert, N. Towards a networked university. In The Future University: Ideas and Possibilities; Barnett, R., Ed.; Routledge Taylor &
Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Chapter 7; pp. 87–100.
77.
Nixon, J. Universities and the common good. In The Future University: Ideas and Possibilities; Barnett, R., Ed.; Routledge Taylor &
Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Chapter 11; pp. 141–151.
78.
Stoller, A.; Kramer, E. (Eds.) Introduction: Toward a philosophy of higher education. In Contemporary Philosophical Proposals for the
University: Toward a Philosophy of Higher Education; Palgrave MacMillan—Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Chapter 1;
pp. 1–23.
79.
Allan, G. The conversation of a university. In Contemporary Philosophical Proposals for the University: Toward a Philosophy of Higher
Education; Stoller, A., Kramer, E., Eds.; Palgrave MacMillan—Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Chapter 6; pp. 103–121.
Philosophies 2021,6, 63 30 of 30
80.
Barnett, R. Culture and the university: An ecological approach. In Contemporary Philosophical Proposals for the University: Toward a
Philosophy of Higher Education; Stoller, A., Kramer, E., Eds.; Palgrave MacMillan—Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2018;
Chapter 7; pp. 125–144.
81.
Gray, D.E. Chapter 11: Designing case studies. In Doing Research in the Real World; Gray, D.E., Ed.; SAGE Publications Ltd.:
London, UK, 2014; pp. 265–294.
Content uploaded by Maria Jakubik
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Maria Jakubik on Aug 02, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
