64 / 184
ENCUENTRO INTERNACIONAL DE UNIVERSIDADES ESTATALES
62
The key to retaining exibility to exploit the unexpected lies in a fundamental understanding of the
nature of phenomena. Basic research can invigorate teaching that probes the limits of understanding.
Such generic understanding also represents a fundamental ‘transferrable skill’ which can be applied to a
much wider range of circumstances than any catalogue of speci c knowledge. It is a vital investment in
the future. Universities should create and pass on ‘useful knowledge’, yes, but one has to be careful about
employing a de nition of utility which is geared towards producing the most fruitful results. Useful
knowledge is a capability deeply embedded in the fundamental role that universities have in creating
new knowledge. In practice, many of the qualities that governments prize in universities are by-products
of deeper functions of the university.
Some of the most important contributions to society that universities should deliver can be summarized
brie y. In education, universities should serve to make students think; they should not pass on
ready-made bits of knowledge, but enable students to grapple with uncertainty, with deep underlying
issues and with context. They should teach them to question interpretations that are given, to reduce the
chaos of information to the order of an analytical argument; to seek out what is relevant to the resolution
of a problem and to de ne a problem in the rst place. Many of the qualities prized by government –
entrepreneurship, managerial capacity, leadership, vision, teamwork, adaptability and the e ective
application of speci c technical skills – are derived from the more fundamental qualities named above.
Statements about the deeper value of education are often thought to be sentimental. But they should be
regarded as utilitarian. The values named above form a bedrock that enables the practical skills needed
by society: those of doctors, engineers, scientists, teachers, lawyers, ministers, businessmen, and social
scientists. The combination of deep, personal understanding and technical skill is a powerful alchemy
that sustains a creative and innovative society. It is crucial to its capability to take bold, imaginative and
principled action in the face of an uncertain future.
The point is to direct a student’s attention to that which, at rst, exceeds their grasp, but whose
fascination draws them after it. Watering down and teaching ready-made bits of knowledge does not
enable students to take up the challenges of the future.
While research-based teaching provides the capability to be a responsible and useful citizen, students are
important ingredients in an atmosphere conducive to innovative research. In contrast to specialist
research institutions, universities provide a highly competitive surrounding, where the young are
encouraged to question their teachers. Moreover, universities are unique in the range of knowledge they
encompass. As a consequence, they have the potential rapidly to restructure and recombine their skills in
novel ways in order to address the many trans-disciplinary issues that are becoming increasingly
important, and to explore new avenues of understanding.
There is much debate about ‘innovation systems’ and the role of universities in them. But the notion of a
single, durable innovation system is now thought to be erroneous. Rather, multiple innovations systems
operate concurrently in the same region. This implies that it is ill conceived to take a prescriptive view of
innovation. Innovation is not a supply-driven process, fuelled by inventions, often created in science and
technology. The university’s role in innovation is in developing human capital, at bachelors, masters and
doctoral levels; in contributing to the intellectual, social and cultural resources of a region in ways that
encourage inward investment of knowledge intensive business, and in helping to stimulate
entrepreneurial activity. A recent study of the role of higher education in meeting international business
demands concludes that it is “the quality of sta at all levels that is the most important determinant of
business competitiveness”. These individual qualities are embodied in university graduates.
DIA 2: DESAFÍOS DE LAS UNIVERSIDADES PÚBLICAS PARA EL SIGLO XXI
142
CONFERENCIA: “Estado actual y proyecciones de las Universidades Públicas de los Estados Unidos”
142
Jaime Chahín
142
CONFERENCIA: “Responsabilidad del Estado respecto a la Sustentabilidad de la
Universidad Pública Nacional”
154
Juan Manuel Zolezzi, Consejo de Rectores.
155
PANEL: “Financiamiento de las universidades estatales: antecedentes y perspectivas para el siglo XXI” 161
Juan Manuel Zolezzi
162
Luis Ayala
162
María Olivia Mönckeberg
172
Felipe Morandé
180
Hugo Fazio
185
CONFERENCIA: “La Mercantilización de la Educación, el ejemplo de la Universidad”
185
Roger Dehaybe
185
CONFERENCIA: “Enseñanza Superior, Universidades Públicas y Universidades de Clase Mundial.
Relación entre estos términos y las Políticas de Investigación y Desarrollo en Brasil”.
186
Hernán Chaimovich
186
PANEL: “Futuro de las Universidades Públicas en Chile”
193
Sergio Pulido
193
Jorge Las Heras
197
José Antonio Viera-Gallo
202
José Joaquín Brunner
205
Ennio Vivaldi
212
Ricardo Núñez
220
CONFERENCIA: Alcances y conclusiones del Encuentro
226
Francisco Brugnoli
226
CONFERENCIA DE CIERRE
232
Mónica Jiménez, Ministra de Educación
232
4