Learn, Engage, and Act to Advance Age Inclusivity in Higher Education

Shifting age demographics are reshaping our social structures with far-reaching implications for higher education. Aging populations mean more older adults are looking to higher education to meet their professional needs and personal interests, and the longevity economy is calling for a trained workforce to provide services to support the health and functioning of individuals as they age. As well, there is a need to improve students’ aging literacy, along with developing synergistic age-friendly campus-community partnerships to address aging issues. How can institutions explore, create, develop, and sustain more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships? This presentation will introduce the toolkit specially designed by the GSA-AGHE Workgroup for use by faculty, students, administrators, and other campus leaders, and will provide an overview of the Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative and its 10 guiding principles for creating more age-inclusive campuses.

Now What? Maintaining Momentum after Achieving Designation as an Age-Friendly University

The Age-Friendly University (AFU) designation in higher education recognizes the institution’s commitment to a culture of age-inclusivity across programs and policies. While AFU institutions are embracing the demographic shifts in higher education and society at-large, effectively responding to the needs and desires of an increasingly older population requires ongoing acceptance and support from campus leaders to maintain momentum and stay relevant within a dynamic field. This session will describe the intentional and systematic approach utilized by an AFU steering committee to build interest in and develop meaningful collaborations in multiple domains across campus, including at the level of the president. Our initiatives focus on five themes that align with the 10 age-friendly university principles: support for workforce development, broadening community engagement, expanding engagement in aging research and dissemination, addressing barriers related to aging and our physical environment, and facilitating age-friendly efforts across our state. We will present our experiences in expanding awareness of and support for the AFU movement on our campus and share a model for institutions seeking ideas for sustainability of their own initiatives.

Advancing Age Inclusivity in a Pandemic: Age-Friendly University (AFU) Campuses Take Action

The COVID-19 pandemic presented extraordinary challenges for professionals in the aging field across campuses and communities, calling for rethinking and redesigning how their work was structured, their programs were delivered, and their connections were sustained. The pandemic also made clear the value of being an age-friendly institution of higher education, especially as we experience historic changes in age demographics. This symposium features campus leaders representing institutional partners of the Age-Friendly University (AFU) global initiative (endorsed by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education) who will discuss how their age-friendly programs were adapted during the pandemic to continue to advance age inclusivity. These diverse responses exemplify the vast potential of age-friendly opportunities. June and Andreoletti (Central Connecticut State University) will discuss how the Scholars for Life! program supported the engagement of older learners in the neighboring community through the engagement of faculty. Elfenbein (University of North Georgia) will describe how learning experiences for older learners and intergenerational exchange were created beyond the classroom through the Personal Enrichment, Action and Knowledge (PEAK) program. Terhune (Northern Kentucky University) will describe how student support practices and services were adapted to provide working adult students with guidance for navigating their educational needs during the pandemic. Kheirbek (University of Maryland, Baltimore) will describe how age-friendly collaborations with the institution’s medical school leveraged intergenerational connections and technology to foster social connection for hospitalized older adults. Gautam and Melillo (UMass Lowell) discuss how a campus partnership with the Learning in Retirement Association (LIRA) adapted efforts around healthy aging.

Developing Synergistic Relationships between Age-Friendly Universities and Age-Friendly Communities

The Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative was designed to support the Global Network for Age-Friendly Cities and Communities (WHO, 2018) and offers a range of opportunities for institutions of higher education to help communities adapt to their new age-diverse social structures as a result of shifting age demographics. In turn, age-friendly community partnerships are helping to fuel campus efforts to advance age-inclusivity through education, research, and community engagement. At present over 70 institutions have joined the AFU global network, as more campuses prepare to become age-friendly partners. In this collaborative symposium (Directors of Aging Centers and AFU Interest Groups), campus leaders will describe synergistic relationships between their age-friendly campus efforts and the age-friendly efforts of their neighboring communities. Montepare (Lasell University) will provide an overview of the AFU initiative and its set of 10 principles, and make the case that campuses and communities are necessary partners for creating and developing age-friendly efforts. Demonstrating this assertion, Pastor and Rogers (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign) will describe linkages between their community and campus initiatives, including developing a Panel of Elders, television programming for older adults, and hosting joint events. Black and Andel (University of South Florida) will discuss the intersection between the AFU principles and the processes undertaken by age-friendly communities. Revell and Viveiros (University of Massachusetts Dartmouth) will show how campus collaborations with nearby communities are instrumental in sustaining age-friendly efforts, especially during a pandemic.

COOPERATION MANAGEMENT MODEL: A CASE STUDY AT THE FACULTY OF ECONOMICS UNIVERSITAS NEGERI MEDAN

The purpose of this paper is to explore the collaboration that has been implemented in the curriculum as a cooperation management model to support campus performance indicators. Cooperation management uses the management functions introduced by Robbins et al., namely planning, organizing, operating, coordinating and evaluating. The case studies used in this research involve all study programs (N = 9) at the Faculty of Economics Universitas Negeri Medan, Indonesia. The data were collected using a questionnaire consisting of items focused on a differential semantic scale and qualitative responses to all items submitted at the time of the interview. This paper also reveals the dominant functions of cooperation management performed in the study program, namely: organization (8.00), planning (7.87), coordination (7.75), action (7.56), respectively evaluation (6.96). The function of the actuating and evaluation components is a severe concern for campus leaders. Flexibility and commitment to fund management support is essential for existing collaborations and plans for cooperation on strategic objectives. The implications of the study's findings - the model of industrial cooperation to strengthen collaboration between the two sides will serve for the future.

A Toolkit for Advancing Age Inclusivity in Higher Education

The pioneering Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative, endorsed by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), calls for institutions of higher education to respond to shifting demographics and the needs of our aging populations through more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships. Over 70 institutions have joined the AFU global network and adopted the 10 AFU guiding principles. In support of the initiative, a GSA-AGHE-AFU workgroup was organized to develop strategies to help GSA members and their campuses explore how they can be more age-inclusive and create pathways to joining the AFU network. One outcome of the workgroup’s efforts was the creation “Tools for Advancing Age Inclusivity in Higher Education”, designed with support from AARP. In this symposium, workgroup members describe this suite of tools which can be used by faculty, students, administrators, and other campus leaders. Montepare will introduce the symposium with an overview of the AFU network and the workgroup’s goals. Morrow-Howell and Schumacher will discuss tools for “Making the Case” with examples from efforts on their campuses. Porter and Bergman will describe tools for “Getting Started” and how campuses can begin to mobilize age-friendly efforts. Andreoletti and June will share tools for “Gaining Momentum” with tips for creating age-friendly campus connections and collaborations. Silverstein and Gugliucci will describe tools for “Assessing and Tracking Success” that can be used at any stage of the process for exploring a campus’s age-friendliness. Information about joining the AFU network will be provided.

The Policy of Honoris Causa Doctorate in Indonesian Higher Education (2000-2020)

This article examines the conferring of honorary doctorates in Indonesian universities, which has increased significantly in the last twenty years, 2000-2020. This research applies the document analysis method; data obtained from public documents from government, universities, magazines, and newspapers. Normatively, the university conferred the Doctor Honoris Causa to individuals with outstanding service or work and contributed to science, technology, culture, humanity, and society. The study reveals that the Indonesian authorities have issued three amended regulations regarding honorary doctorates between 2000-2020. This policy provides increased flexibility to universities in determining the awarding of honorary degrees compared to previous regulations. This research has uncovered an evolutionary trajectory of shifting away from awarding the honorary doctorates to the academic community towards non-academic and even political circles and public officials. Such a policy or practice invites criticisms that this signifies an exchange of interests between campus leaders and the power establishment in Indonesia. The analysis of this research reveals that with the decentralization of power during the post-reformation era, there is a transformation of institutional logic of higher education from recognizing knowledge advancement and scientific contributions of members of intelligentsia towards empowering the legitimacy of ruling establishments, especially among politicians and powerful public officials.

SoTL and the Humanities

In this article, we share themes and tensions experienced by humanities faculty undertaking a scholarship of teaching & learning (SoTL) project as part of a multi-campus, grant-funded initiative. Faculty participants in the project iteratively transformed a course to improve one or more aspects of their students’ learning over a three-year period and documented the process and results in a course portfolio. To support their individual and collaborative work, each of the four campuses had a local leader, and participants met regularly with campus teams, convening with the full group annually for cross-campus knowledge exchange and peer review. At the project conclusion campus leaders gathered participant reflections and discovered a pattern of tensions that included: disciplinary ways of knowing, ways to represent knowing, and ways of writing and sharing. These tensions are similar to those identified elsewhere and can be potential impediments to this work for some in the humanities. Explicitly addressing those potential tensions while helping faculty see how their own disciplinary approaches can help them investigate their course practices is a useful first step toward more contributions from humanities scholars.

Supporting Student Success in the New Normal

The new normal in higher education can mean different things on varied campuses. The new normal, which occurred because of the COVID-19 pandemic, is the current atmosphere across the higher education landscape. This has meant more technology at many institutions of higher education (IHE) in numerous areas on campus. Other post-pandemic changes include a new financial reality, finding new ways to support student learning and campus community, and a new reality for many campus programs. This version of higher education looks hauntingly similar yet vastly different than the old vision of the higher education landscape. The COVID-19 pandemic caused many institutions of higher education to hit the fast forward button on implementing innovations and change. This change not only meant a move toward distance education using current methods in new ways but also activating plans for other innovation, such as streamlining paperwork, advocating for remote work, and offering traditional coursework in a new format. Campus leaders may need to redeploy human, financial, and physical capital in alignment with their new operating models (Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America [TIAA], 2020).