Amidst the intensified discourse surrounding universities' societal impact, social innovation and entrepreneurship (SIE) has emerged as a way to refocus universities' engagement in sustainable development, particularly through their core mission of teaching and learning. Growing interest in SIE education over the decades has led to a proliferation of courses and programs offered in various disciplines by universities worldwide. Nevertheless, scholarly research unpacking the SIE educational processes remains scant and lacks multidisciplinary perspectives. Educators of SIE continue to face challenges in designing curricula and adopting appropriate teaching approaches. This study fills this gap by offering ample empirical evidence based on a documentary analysis of 53 syllabi from 43 distinctive courses accompanied by interviews with the academics responsible for the design of these courses across all eight publicly funded universities in Hong Kong. The analysis identifies multiple patterns within two major themes: the changing scope and positioning of SIE education and the varying orientations of SIE curricula. The findings provide valuable insights and identify areas for further exploration for the design of impactful SIE learning experiences for students. Furthermore, by situating the examination of SIE teaching and learning within the lens of curriculum theory, this study establishes a foundation for future research to undertake systematic and rigorous comparative analyses of curricula in diverse contexts. Copyright © 2024 Taylor & Francis.

In this study, we explore the identity development of PhD graduates transitioning into non‐researcher roles. Through the conceptual lens of identity‐trajectory theory and based on interviews with 26 PhD graduates from three leading research universities in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, we analyse their identity‐trajectory development after their transition to non‐research employment. The findings show that PhD graduates develop their identity trajectories based on their existing sense of researcher‐self through a variety of practices that involve intellectual, networking and institutional dimensions. Individual agency plays a key role in overcoming structural constraints in the workplace, yet its level varies according to one's willingness to pursue a non‐research career. The findings highlight the fluidity in identity development and the role of the researcher‐self as a positive legacy of doctoral training, including for PhD graduates taking non‐researcher roles. Copyright ©2024 Wiley.

This paper employs the notion of a “career script” as a conceptual basis to examine how age-based academic career norms are internalized, strategized, and reproduced among PhD students aspiring to become academics. It draws on interviews with 70 PhD students at leading universities in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau that were organized and explored using narrative inquiry. The findings suggest that the tournament-like, age-based career scripts are primarily shaped by institutional policies on recruitment and funding applications and reinforced through social interactions. Doctoral students internalize the established criteria for success defined by the career scripts and stigmatize those who lag behind in the attainment of institutionally predetermined milestones, thus discouraging any attempt to rescript career norms. While enacting successful career scripts, students experience age and temporal anxiety at a fairly young age, exacerbating ageism in the academic labor market. Copyright ©2024 Springer.

Publication pressure is perceived to be filtering down into doctoral education worldwide. We explore the causes and effects of the perceived centrality of publishing among doctoral students, emphasising the impact of publication pressure on students’ identity trajectories. We draw on a qualitative analysis of 90 mainland Chinese doctoral students at universities in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau. We find that the credentialisation of publications in the increasingly competitive and publication-dominant academic labour market results in publishing-centred doctoral journeys. Our key finding is that the centrality of publishing affects every aspect of identity trajectory development: it causes doctoral students to commodify knowledge production, devalues coursework, conference participation, and teaching assistantships, encourages students to regard their supervisors as publishing facilitators and their peers as rivals rather than collaborators, and marginalises engagement with external stakeholders. In discussing these dimensions, we emphasise the need for a more comprehensive evaluation of candidates’ abilities and honours in academic recruitment and call for policies to curtail the overemphasis on research output in academic evaluations. © 2022 Society for Research into Higher Education.

This study's principal objective was to explore the statistically predictive power of academics' research agendas for their job dissatisfaction beyond demographics. Five hundred and forty-seven academics from the eight publicly funded universities in Hong Kong responded to the Multi-Dimensional Research Agenda Inventory-12 (MDRAI-12) and the Job Dissatisfaction Scale (JDS). Three key findings were obtained. First, good psychometrics for the MDRAI-12 and the JDS were obtained. Second, research agendas varied by age, gender, academic rank, and academic discipline, while job dissatisfaction varied by age, academic rank, and institutional ranking. Third and most importantly, when age, gender, academic rank, academic discipline, and institutional ranking were statistically controlled, trailblazing research agendas generally negatively contributed to job dissatisfaction, whereas a cohesive (conservative) research agenda positively predicted job dissatisfaction, as hypothesized. Implications of the findings are discussed for academics and university senior managers. Copyright © 2023 Springer Nature.

Amongst all jurisdictions, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China has been one of the most effective in limiting cases of COVID-19, despite being one of the first places to be affected by the pandemic in early 2020. In the months since the first case was confirmed, COVID-19 has affected all aspects of Hong Kong society, including the higher education sector. In this collective reflective essay, we describe the effects of these unexpected external events on academics' lives and the responses of higher education institutions. Specifically, we address the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on academics, their professional relationships, institutional frameworks, and Hong Kong's higher education sector as a whole. We conclude that the most significant effect of the pandemic is uncertainty, together with new realities expressed in sayings such as 'living with Zoom, learning from webinars'; 'you will be informed "in due course"', stay calm "until further notice"'; and 'people are stuck, but business is on steroids'. The essay further describes a three-pronged institutional reaction to the pandemic, focused on control, support, and positioning. It concludes with critical views on the way 'useful' knowledge in today's higher education is defined and how concepts and practices have been challenged during the pandemic. Copyright © 2021 Routledge.

This study explored factors that influence academics to collaborate in research with their doctoral students. It focused on Hong Kong academics, using data from the Academic Profession in Knowledge Society survey conducted in 2017–2018. The study found that academics' research collaboration with doctoral students is influenced by several factors, including research and teaching styles and institutional conditions. Specifically, those academics whose research agendas were characterised by discovery and collaboration were more likely to report working with their doctoral students, whereas those whose research agendas focused more on convergence were less likely to do so. The more legislative the academics' teaching style was, the less they collaborated with their doctoral students. Independence in research and institutional expectations of external funding increased the propensity to collaborate with doctoral students. Academics in the humanities were found to collaborate less with their doctoral students than those in other disciplines. The study suggests that the scholarly preference and styles of the academics, as well as their disciplinary and institutional backgrounds, need to be considered to improve research collaboration between academics and their doctoral students. Copyright © 2021 Springer.

This study assesses how four types of mobility, which are analysed simultaneously, are associated with the current research output quality and visibility of academics working in the city-based higher education systems of Hong Kong and Macau. Transnational educational mobility is associated with the academics' educational path, whilst intrasectoral job mobility, intersectoral job mobility and transnational job mobility are related to their professional careers. The research output, quality and visibility of academics are based on three indicators pertaining to the publications of these academics in international, peer-reviewed and indexed journals: the number of publications, the cumulative SCImago journal rank of these publications (which measures quality from an output perspective) and the citations obtained by these publications (which measures visibility). The results show that different mobilities have different effects on research output, quality and visibility, and that often these effects can be beneficial to one indicator but concurrently detrimental to another. Nested analyses of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM academics, and by sex, offer further insight into the associations of these mobilities with knowledge output and outcomes. Copyright ©Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

This research pioneered the investigation of the role of doctoral students' thinking styles in their program satisfaction and perceived intellectual competence. Participants were 285 STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) students in Hong Kong. Results showed that students' thinking styles as measured by the Thinking Styles Inventory-Revised II (Sternberg, Wagner, & Zhang, 2007) statistically significantly predicted their program satisfaction and perceived intellectual competence as assessed by two of the scales in the newly constructed Graduate Student Survey (Shin et al., 2015)-beyond their gender, program year, and academic discipline. Findings have brought new insights into the assessment of doctoral students' program satisfaction and perceived intellectual competence. At the same time, findings have contributed to the literature on intellectual styles and that on doctoral education in STEM fields. Practical implications of the findings are proposed for STEM doctoral students in understanding their own ways of thinking and program experiences and outcomes, as well as for academics and senior managers in their efforts to enhance students' access to positive program experiences and outcomes.
[Copyright of Journal of educational psychology is the property of American Psychological Association.]

This article explores how the past mobilities of academics affect their current research output (and its multidisciplinarity). Five types of mobility are used simultaneously in the analysis. Field mobility and transnational educational mobility are associated with academics' educational path, whereas transnational job mobility, intra-sectoral job mobility and inter-sectoral job mobility refer to their career path. The analysis is based on a representative sample of academics based in Hong Kong and Macau. Results show that intra-sectoral job mobility (up to a threshold) and transnational job mobility positively affect research output and its multidisciplinarity, whereas inter-sectoral job mobility, field mobility and transnational educational mobility exert slight or no effect. Nested analyses of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM academics as well as experienced and junior academics offer further insight into the roles of these mobilities. Impacts of mobile experience were stronger among junior than senior academics, and in STEM fields than non-STEM fields. The article discusses these findings along with the significance of considering mobilities rather than mobility when analysing academic trajectories and the determinants of academic research production.
[Copyright of Higher Education Quarterly is the property of Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12161 ]