The participants at this Meeting for The Aspen Junior Fellows openly acknowledged that standing up to international comparison represents one of the key challenges for Italy’s university education system posed by globalization. It was suggested that, in competing for talent, Italy appears to focus more on maintaining a commendable average standard in university training rather than cultivating institutes of excellence, as demonstrated by the fact that only one Italian university is ranked among the top two hundred in the world, whilst at the level of individual academic disciplines, Italy boasts several acclaimed schools of study. The granting of autonomous governance to Italian universities has – it was observed – led to a not unexpected divergence between universities, with the emergence of significant divides, based, for example, on geographic location. The participants highlighted the need to strike a balance between the demand for university access for all and providing selective university openings for the more “capable and deserving” (to quote the wording of Article 34 of the Italian Constitution). These considerations were seen as also carrying pecuniary implications in relation to aspects ranging from the financing models in operation to the recruitment and incentivization of teaching staff and researchers.
It was felt that in order to ensure a satisfactory standard of Italian university offerings, the four key drivers of change in international education need to be taken into consideration, namely: an increasing globalization of education, the sweeping impact of digitalization, the changing characteristics of students accessing higher education, and the wider ecosystem within which universities operate.
While noting that the international mobility of students has increased substantially, the participants conceded that Italy “exports” many more university students than it “imports” from abroad. In an education scenario marked by “knowledge without borders”, this was seen as entailing a risk that Italian universities will lose their attractiveness. Indeed, overseas training would seem to be an increasingly obligatory career move. It is no longer possible to train people with just technical skills. Rather, it has become essential to ensure that they can operate satisfactorily in an international environment. This implies language skills and a willingness (the right “mindset”) to deal with cultural diversity. To this end, the two strategies that are being followed are those of internationalization “at home” and internationalization “abroad”.
With regards to the second driver, it was remarked that there has been a major uptake over recent years in the use of digital technologies in education, led by the example set by MIT, Stanford, and Harvard. As a result, the new competitive landscape is characterized by two trends: the first sees “elite” universities investing significant resources in distance education, while the second involves the “de-verticalization” of the education sector through the impact of digital technologies.
The third driver of change was described as amounting to a generational change in the profile of university students and their skills and aptitudes, again linked to innovation in digital technologies. Since digital natives have grown up in a world characterized by information overload, the challenge they face is to effectively select knowledge and information best suited to their needs. It was thus viewed as crucial that education not be confined to merely imparting already widely accessible content, but also be geared towards pursuing broader methodological objectives, such as addressing the weaknesses of students, expanding their problem-solving skills, and maximizing the opportunities arising from the increased ability to acquire information.
Lastly, it was stressed that the broader education ecosystem, encompassing the economies exogenous to the local area in which a given university operates, is of great importance. Indeed, life experience and the opportunities stemming from it are key factors that inform the choice of university, in addition to a university’s standard of training and education. Research, engagement with industry and the labor market, cultural and relational offerings, logistics, and level of internationalization were held up as some of the aspects that need to be considered in framing targets for achieving educational excellence. In conclusion, it was submitted that the challenge is to reconcile the Italian university system’s internationalization needs with its groundings in the humanistic and technical culture of the Italian tradition, within a competitive framework that fosters merit with the best academic resources as well as rewarding it.