entire lives in a world of electronic and linked technologies that open opportunities to learn about the relation among ‘ecological, cultural, economic, political and technological’ systems” (Sorensen, 2008, p.94). The way in which we learn is changing the very representation of our college and university hierarchies, operation, and management. How universities, as anchor institutions in their communities—institutions that, by reason of mission or invested capital are geographically tied to a certain location—shape and engage within their social, political and economic space is central to the ability to be responsible to society’s changing needs.
Universities as Anchors: The Local/Global Context “Conceptions of university-community partnership are informed largely by the prominent role of universities and community colleges as anchor institutions in the economic, social, and cultural lives of cities” (Schwieger, 2008). Anchor institutions, usually large nonprofit entities such as hospital and universities, influence the capacity for greater shared community knowledge and learning within a community. It is well documented the many benefits to which anchors imbue in their communities including: (1) neighborhood identity, (2) centers of employment, (3) education and cultural opportunities for citizenry, (4) new company incubation and formation, (5) real estate development, (6) community safety, and (7) recruitment of high-quality and multi-faceted human capital (Webber and Karlstrom, 2009, 9-10). University anchors and the manifestation of their governance are increasingly driven both by this local geography and their responsibilities thereto and the aspects of a globalizing university paradigm. The University of Pennsylvania and its Penn Compact, signed by Penn President Amy Gutmann in 2004, makes clear one of its three principles is to engage locally and globally. Locally, Penn describes its mission as “…collaborating with local communities on many bold initiatives to improve public education, public health, economic development, employment opportunities, the quality of life, and the physical
landscape of West Philadelphia and Philadelphia as well as to promote sustainable and equitable economic growth throughout the region.” This is contrasted with Penn’s global engagement efforts to launch, “several initiatives that leverage our global network to enhance opportunities for students to study abroad and to bring additional outstanding international faculty and students to campus” (Penn Compact, 2004). Many colleges and universities have embraced the notion that “a great 21st century American university engages dynamically with communities all over the world to advance the central values of democracy and to exchange knowledge that improves quality of life for all” (Penn Compact, 2004). One tactic that educational institutions have employed is the idea of university-community partnerships, broadly defined as the art of “connecting the rich resources of the university to our most pressing social, civic and ethical problems,” (Schwieger, 2008, 3) in both institutionalizing and replicating organizational governance and mission. To examine this recognition by American colleges and universities of shifting global patterns and their influence on the very nature of the conception and practice of learning, I will discuss three specific cases of institutions in this regard. These institutions—New York University, Tufts University, and Macalester College—all offer differing embodiments to a similar goal of inclusivity and reciprocity in globally-driven education. My intention in providing these examples is to create a more broadly defined debate on the various manners in which higher education can involve and engage globally based on common goals and academic values.
New York University: A Global Network University New York University (NYU) was “founded in 1831, [and] is now one of the largest private universities in the United States” boasting an enrollment that “has grown to more than 40,000 students attending 14 schools and colleges at five major centers in Manhattan and in more than 25 countries around the world” (About NYU, 2009). As self-described, “Since its origins, NYU has been a university ‘in and of the city;’ as NYU has expanded its international presence in recent years, it has become a university ‘in and of the
world,’ ” (NYU Abu Dhabi, 2009) thereby creating meaningful connection and praxis between thought and action. Responding to today’s demands of a global vision and identity, NYU has ventured towards a model that one might label as spatial-centered network building. This model based on creating “a new paradigm for the university as a dynamic global network” (NYU Abu Dhabi, 2009) is captured in the construction of NYU Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). NYU Abu Dhabi is described as a research university that fully integrates a liberal arts and sciences undergraduate college with its major parent university in the United States. Further, the institution’s vision is justified through a set of shared educational goals and beliefs, “NYU’s agreement with the Emirate of Abu Dhabi to create NYU Abu Dhabi is the outcome of a shared understanding of the essential roles and challenges of higher education in the 21st century: a common belief in the value of a liberal arts education, concurrence on the benefits a research university brings to the society that sustains it, a conviction that interaction with new ideas and people who are different is valuable and necessary, and a commitment to educating students who are true citizens of the world.” (NYU Abu Dhabi, 2009) Interconnectedness is an archetypical theme used by NYU to portray its efforts in that, “NYU Abu Dhabi together with NYU New York will form the backbone of a Global Network University, creating a unique and unprecedented capacity for faculty and students to access all the resources of a research university system across five continents” (NYU Abu Dhabi, 2009). Whether educational empire-making and/or simply strategic advancement of institutional mission is debatable; certainly one of the primary drawing points to attract students, faculty, and investment into the university in Abu Dhabi is that it is located in “a new global crossroads” (NYU Abu Dhabi, 2009). Here we find the localized place aspect of anchor institutions to be critical, as NYU Abu Dhabi exists in Abu Dhabi primarily because of the city’s place in the world as a center of extreme oil wealth, and, also, paradoxically as a place of global information commerce and thought in relation to its local assets. Further, the
79