Search

The present paper attempts to determine the National education policy 2020 and role of library and information centers. However, these prospects have not been revealed clearly in NEP. However, libraries with quality collection digital resources must communicate quality education. According to NEP 2020, several educational levels will be introduced, including fundamental education, preparatory education, middle education, secondary education, under-graduation, post-graduation education stage, Research Stage and Lifelong learning stage. NEP has emphasized the significance of libraries in a number of areas, including the preservation of national heritage and the promotion of reading culture. Additionally, through practicing fixed librarianship, library professionals must identify new areas in which they can improve and increase the effect of higher education scholars. The author of this review talked about how the government and universities are changing their roles in libraries for NEP. The paper states that the management libraries in the higher education sector must be established as centers for student and research support as well as play a custodial role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ‘independent learner’ is a key construct within discourses of educational policy and practice in the UK. Government policy statements stress the importance of developing learner independence, and higher education pedagogical practices tend to rest on the assumption that students are independent learners. This paper draws on research with undergraduate students in a post-1992 university to offer a critical appraisal of the discourse of the independent learner. The paper examines students’ perceptions of independence in both their first year of undergraduate study, and in the later years of their degree courses. Support for learning and issues related to asking for help are discussed. Whilst students tend to both expect and want to be independent, it is suggested that dominant constructions of the independent learner are gendered and culturally specific, and as such are inappropriate for the majority of students in a mass higher education system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conservative and Liberal Democrat policies for higher education funding in the 2010 general election campaign offered voters a stark choice -- with one party willing to consider raising the cap on undergraduate fees, while the other publicly committed to removing any student contribution. It is not surprising therefore that this was an area in which they found it impossible to agree a firm position as part of their coalition agreement (Cabinet Office, 2010). When parliament later voted on higher education funding, the view of the larger party prevailed and the cap on fees almost trebled to £9,000. The Liberal Democrat Deputy Prime Minister took responsibility for launching a National Scholarship Programme (NSP), providing financial support to undergraduates from lower-income backgrounds, to be introduced at the same time as the increase in fees. While this may have offered limited political credibility to his party, the structure of the scheme was criticized from the outset, and it ceased to operate after just three cohorts of students. This paper identifies the political and policy drivers behind the NSP. It explores the need for compromise in the context of the Coalition Government and the drive to embed a dimension of 'fairness' into policy change. From an analysis of the NSP's implementation, evolution, and ultimate closure, we consider the extent to which fairness can, and cannot, successfully be promoted through the design of undergraduate fees and financial support, an objective that was espoused by politicians responsible for the introduction of £1,000, £3,000 and, ultimately, £9,000 fees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In South Africa, 15 years into a new political order, higher education institutions are under pressure to create and sustain the conditions necessary for the consolidation of democracy. One of the more important of these conditions is the need to shift their academic staff profiles in ways that are more representative of a diverse democracy. This process is mediated by legislative and policy reforms that have as their aims the establishment of a more diverse community of academics (see, inter alia: White Paper, 1997; Employment Equity Act No. 55 of 1998; National Plan for Higher Education, 2001). While much current thinking is at the macro-level and focused on narrow human resource aspects related to “getting the numbers right,” there is limited research on what happens in the daily experiences of faculty. This article draws on a research project conducted at five universities in South Africa in order to explore how academics in their everyday micro-practices of governance, teaching, and research respond to this external systemic pressure. The findings are considered in terms of their implications for the democratization process, in relation to issues of governance, fairness, and trust, at the levels both of institutions and of society as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]