Conference

Keynotes Speakers

A. Lin GOODWIN is Dean and Professor of the Faculty of Education at the University of Hong Kong (HKU). Prior to joining HKU in 2017, she was Vice Dean at Teachers College, Columbia University (TCCU) in New York City, and the Evenden Foundation Chair Professor of Education. She is a past Vice President of the American Educational Research Association (AERA)—Division K: Teaching and Teacher Education (2013-2016), and the inaugural Dr. Ruth Wong Professor of Teacher Education at the National Institute of Education (NIE) in Singapore. She has been honoured for her research and scholarship with awards such as Distinguished Researcher from the AERA SIG: Research on the Education of Asian and Pacific Americans, and Distinguished Scholar from AERA’s Committee on the Role and Status of Minorities in Educational Research and Development (now Committee on Scholars of Color). She is a Senior Research Fellow of the Learning Policy Institute.

Ruth HAYHOE is a professor at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. Her Asian engagements have included teacher of English and Religious Studies at Heep Yunn School in Hong Kong (1967-78), First Secretary for Education, Science and Culture in the Canadian Embassy in Beijing (1989-1991), Visiting Professor at Nagoya University (1996) and Director of the Hong Kong Institute of Education, now the Education University of Hong Kong (1997-2002). Recent books include China Through the Lens of Comparative Education (2015), Canadian Universities in China’s Transformation: An Untold Story (2016), and Religion and Education: Comparative and International Perspectives (2018).

Wing-on LEE helms IAL as its Executive Director and concurrently serves as a Professor at the Singapore University of Social Sciences. Before that, he was Distinguished Professor and Director of the International and Comparative Education Research Centre and the Central Plains Education Research Centre at Zhengzhou University. Besides having served as Vice President and Chair Professor of Comparative Education at the Open University of Hong Kong and Dean of Education Research at Singapore’s National Institute of Education, Wing On has held senior management positions in internationally renowned higher education institutions over a span of two decades.

Maria MANZON is an associate professor at the Department of Education, Sophia University, Tokyo. She is a core faculty of the Sophia Program for Sustainable Futures. She researches on comparative education histories, and religions and education for sustainability. She has worked at the University of Hong Kong, National Institute of Education in Singapore, and the Education University of Hong Kong. Her publications include Comparative Education: The Construction of a Field (2011), Origins and Traditions in Comparative Education (2019), Equity in Excellence: Experiences of East Asian High-Performing Education Systems (2019), and Comparative Education as a Field in Asia: Retrospect and Prospect (2017).

Simon MARGINSON is Professor of Higher Education at the University of Oxford, Director of the ESRC/OFSRE Centre for Global Higher Education (CGHE), and Joint Editor-in-Chief of Higher Education. He is also a Lead Researcher with the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, and a Professorial Associate of the University of Melbourne. Simon’s research is focused primarily on global, international and comparative higher education, global science, higher education in East Asia, the contributions of higher education, and higher education and social inequality. In 2014 Simon was the Clark Kerr Lecturer on Higher Education at the University of California, Berkeley, and received the Research Achievement Award at the US Association for the Study of Higher Education. He serves on advisory committees at Tsinghua University, Peking University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Academic Ranking of World Universities, and the University of Tokyo, and is an international board member for Educational Research in China. His scholarship is widely published and cited (Google h-index 74). Recent books include High Participation Systems of Higher Education, edited with Brendan Cantwell and Anna Smolentseva (Oxford University Press, 2018); Changing Higher Education for a Changing World, edited with Claire Callender and William Locke (Bloomsbury, 2020). Forthcoming are Changing Higher Education in India (edited with Saumen Chattopadhyay and N.V. Varghese, published in December 2021) and Changing Higher Education in East Asia (edited with Xin Xu), both from Bloomsbury.

Keynote Speeches

Keynote Speech 1
Women, Faith and Sustainability: A Dialogue among Asian Civilizations Ruth HAYHOE, OISE, University of Toronto, Canada Maria MANZON, Department of Education, Sophia University, Japan Abstract: Women have had a long engagement with sustainability in Asia, and this has been notably rooted in their faith traditions. Women have been particularly sensitive and open to forms of wisdom and knowledge available in other civilizations which could help to solve some of the unintended consequences of progress. They are more likely to embrace a multi-faceted approach to knowledge and an openness to forms of dialogue that include moral, affective and aesthetic understanding, as well as cognitive. Yet their roles and contributions are not a main point of reference in global discourses. We explore the other ways of being, knowing, and acting that are evident in women’s educational leadership and how they may foster an integral, holistic understanding and an inclusive approach to sustainable futures. We draw portraits of influential women educators in several East Asian civilizations, and share dialogues with them that have been important in our personal journeys in comparative education.

Keynote Speech 1

Women, Faith and Sustainability: A Dialogue among Asian Civilizations
Ruth HAYHOE, OISE, University of Toronto, Canada
Maria MANZON, Department of Education, Sophia University, Japan

Abstract: Women have had a long engagement with sustainability in Asia, and this has been notably rooted in their faith traditions. Women have been particularly sensitive and open to forms of wisdom and knowledge available in other civilizations which could help to solve some of the unintended consequences of progress. They are more likely to embrace a multi-faceted approach to knowledge and an openness to forms of dialogue that include moral, affective and aesthetic understanding, as well as cognitive. Yet their roles and contributions are not a main point of reference in global discourses. We explore the other ways of being, knowing, and acting that are evident in women’s educational leadership and how they may foster an integral, holistic understanding and an inclusive approach to sustainable futures. We draw portraits of influential women educators in several East Asian civilizations, and share dialogues with them that have been important in our personal journeys in comparative education.

Keynote Speech 2
Beyond the Centre-Periphery Framework in Higher Education Studies Simon MARGINSON, Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK Abstract: The paper argues that as political economic and higher education capacity become more diffused across the world, and diverse cultures and languages are acknowledged, normalising the sector in the basis of the hitherto dominant Western (and primarily Anglo-American) model of the university, for example the templates used in global rankings, is less and less appropriate. In general and in higher education, the times call for an approach grounded not in Western hegemony and its isomorphic echoes but in unity in diversity, heer butong, in which we identify global systems and common ethical ground that enables us to sustain a relational environment, while acknowledging – indeed, celebrating - the nationally-culturally nested and locally variant nature of higher education and science. On one hand this suggests identification of common protocols and rights, including respect for the other. On the other hand it suggests tolerating variations in relation to institutional autonomy, given the diversity of political cultures and state formations, recognising the culturally nested nature of academic freedoms, and in epistemic organisation, working with the de Sousa Santos’ ‘ecology of knowledge’s’ approach. These ideas are illustrated with similarities and differences between Sinitic (Chinese civilisational) and Anglo-American approaches to higher education and knowledge, as well as wry reflections on geo-political efforts to engineer a sharp East/West polarisation and maintain Western domination over China.

Keynote Speech 2

Beyond the Centre-Periphery Framework in Higher Education Studies
Simon MARGINSON, Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK

Abstract: The paper argues that as political economic and higher education capacity become more diffused across the world, and diverse cultures and languages are acknowledged, normalising the sector in the basis of the hitherto dominant Western (and primarily Anglo-American) model of the university, for example the templates used in global rankings, is less and less appropriate. In general and in higher education, the times call for an approach grounded not in Western hegemony and its isomorphic echoes but in unity in diversity, heer butong, in which we identify global systems and common ethical ground that enables us to sustain a relational environment, while acknowledging – indeed, celebrating - the nationally-culturally nested and locally variant nature of higher education and science. On one hand this suggests identification of common protocols and rights, including respect for the other. On the other hand it suggests tolerating variations in relation to institutional autonomy, given the diversity of political cultures and state formations, recognising the culturally nested nature of academic freedoms, and in epistemic organisation, working with the de Sousa Santos’ ‘ecology of knowledge’s’ approach. These ideas are illustrated with similarities and differences between Sinitic (Chinese civilisational) and Anglo-American approaches to higher education and knowledge, as well as wry reflections on geo-political efforts to engineer a sharp East/West polarisation and maintain Western domination over China.

Keynote Speech 3
What about the Development of Continuing Education and Training: The Case of IAL in Singapore? Wing-on LEE, Institute for Adult Learning, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore Abstract: This presentation aims to share how the Institute for Adult Learning (IAL) in Singapore has delivered its missions over the past decade in developing training programmes for adult educators, with efforts to further professionalise the TAE Sector, and upgrade adult educators as professionals (AEP). In order to create a Community of Practice (CoP) for these adult educators, IAL set up an AE Network (AEN), and further established a Learning Enterprise Alliance (LEA) as the CoP for the enterprises. On the front of adult learning pedagogy, IAL has developed indigenous pedagogical approaches in order to meet the learning needs of its learners. The six principles of learning design is the best known pedagogy developed in IAL. On the front of learning for innovation, IAL provides a platform to invite adult educators, learning soluntionists and enterprises to collaborate, trigger and incubate innovation ideas, as represented by iN.LAB’s innovation series. IAL has only a short history of just more than a decade, it shows the institutionalisation effects on advancing continuing education and training, as demonstrated by its achievements in enhancing the various initiatives such as AEP, AEN, and LEA; developing indigenous pedagogy for adult learners; and developing learning for innovation agenda.

Keynote Speech 3

What about the Development of Continuing Education and Training: The Case of IAL in Singapore?
Wing-on LEE, Institute for Adult Learning, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore

Abstract: This presentation aims to share how the Institute for Adult Learning (IAL) in Singapore has delivered its missions over the past decade in developing training programmes for adult educators, with efforts to further professionalise the TAE Sector, and upgrade adult educators as professionals (AEP). In order to create a Community of Practice (CoP) for these adult educators, IAL set up an AE Network (AEN), and further established a Learning Enterprise Alliance (LEA) as the CoP for the enterprises. On the front of adult learning pedagogy, IAL has developed indigenous pedagogical approaches in order to meet the learning needs of its learners. The six principles of learning design is the best known pedagogy developed in IAL. On the front of learning for innovation, IAL provides a platform to invite adult educators, learning soluntionists and enterprises to collaborate, trigger and incubate innovation ideas, as represented by iN.LAB’s innovation series. IAL has only a short history of just more than a decade, it shows the institutionalisation effects on advancing continuing education and training, as demonstrated by its achievements in enhancing the various initiatives such as AEP, AEN, and LEA; developing indigenous pedagogy for adult learners; and developing learning for innovation agenda.

Keynote Speech 4
Dead ideas, Missing Ideas, and Enduring Idea(l)s: Some Perspectives on Teacher Education for Connectivity, Inclusivity and Sustainability A. Lin GOODWIN, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Abstract: The events of the past two years, dominated by the COVID-19 pandemic, have had an indelible effect on just about every aspect of our lives, especially teaching and learning for our children. The good news is that everyone, whether parents, public citizens or policy makers, has developed greater clarity about the essential role that teachers play, not just in the instruction of young people, but in holding up society and ensuring economic progress and smooth social functioning. But heightened consciousness around the importance of teachers and schools has been accompanied by greater awareness of shortcomings in education systems. There is a renewed call for teachers to be equipped to meet the demands of the “new normal.” It is not surprising then that just about everyone, including educators themselves, has jumped into the conversation about improving teaching and teachers, which in turn means re-imagining teacher preparation. In Hong Kong as well as internationally, teacher development has become a central focus. Teacher educators are re-tackling the question of what teachers should know and be able to do in the face of current imperatives—digital divides and numerous inequities, vast economic upheaval, racism and social unrest, political disorder, and more. At the same time, teacher preparation must also be forward looking, nurturing teachers who are ready to support students who can navigate the unknown and create a better and more inclusive future. This question is not easily answered and will likely be answered in different ways by educators in different contexts. In her talk, Professor Goodwin offers three perspectives teacher educators can use, regardless of their unique contexts, to examine the familiar, that is teacher education as they know (and do) it, in order to imagine the strange—teacher education as it might possibly be. To ignite re-thinking, she suggests teacher educators look for: Dead ideas—cherished practices and givens that may have long outlived their utility but remain cemented in place and so block fresh thinking; Missing ideas—content, viewpoints, actions, histories or narratives that should be front and center in teacher preparation but are either absent or marginalized and therefore perpetuate the status quo; and Unrealized ideas and ideals—goals and intentions we highlight as important and strive to enact, when in reality our talk and walk as teacher educators remain far apart. Undoubtedly, envisioning the future of teacher education is a weighty and complicated challenge. But it is a challenge we can as a profession undertake if we can un-learn the taken-for-granted, ask new questions, and re-commit to our aspirations to strengthen connectivity, realise inclusivity, and ensure sustainability.

Keynote Speech 4

Dead ideas, Missing Ideas, and Enduring Idea(l)s:
Some Perspectives on Teacher Education for Connectivity, Inclusivity and Sustainability
A. Lin GOODWIN, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Abstract: The events of the past two years, dominated by the COVID-19 pandemic, have had an indelible effect on just about every aspect of our lives, especially teaching and learning for our children. The good news is that everyone, whether parents, public citizens or policy makers, has developed greater clarity about the essential role that teachers play, not just in the instruction of young people, but in holding up society and ensuring economic progress and smooth social functioning. But heightened consciousness around the importance of teachers and schools has been accompanied by greater awareness of shortcomings in education systems. There is a renewed call for teachers to be equipped to meet the demands of the “new normal.”

It is not surprising then that just about everyone, including educators themselves, has jumped into the conversation about improving teaching and teachers, which in turn means re-imagining teacher preparation. In Hong Kong as well as internationally, teacher development has become a central focus. Teacher educators are re-tackling the question of what teachers should know and be able to do in the face of current imperatives—digital divides and numerous inequities, vast economic upheaval, racism and social unrest, political disorder, and more. At the same time, teacher preparation must also be forward looking, nurturing teachers who are ready to support students who can navigate the unknown and create a better and more inclusive future.

This question is not easily answered and will likely be answered in different ways by educators in different contexts. In her talk, Professor Goodwin offers three perspectives teacher educators can use, regardless of their unique contexts, to examine the familiar, that is teacher education as they know (and do) it, in order to imagine the strange—teacher education as it might possibly be. To ignite re-thinking, she suggests teacher educators look for:

Dead ideas—cherished practices and givens that may have long outlived their utility but remain cemented in place and so block fresh thinking;
Missing ideas—content, viewpoints, actions, histories or narratives that should be front and center in teacher preparation but are either absent or marginalized and therefore perpetuate the status quo; and
Unrealized ideas and ideals—goals and intentions we highlight as important and strive to enact, when in reality our talk and walk as teacher educators remain far apart. Undoubtedly, envisioning the future of teacher education is a weighty and complicated challenge. But it is a challenge we can as a profession undertake if we can un-learn the taken-for-granted, ask new questions, and re-commit to our aspirations to strengthen connectivity, realise inclusivity, and ensure sustainability.