“The final strand is knowledge transfer. It encompasses many dimensions of interaction between academia and wider society…”[102]
It “involves conceiving the University as a two-way exchange of knowledge and skills with the wider community, to the mutual benefit of both.”[103]
Melbourne aspires to be known locally and globally as a university deeply embedded in its communities. Through knowledge transfer activities we seek to enrich the Melbourne Experience for students. As a public-spirited institution Melbourne seeks to engage communities in collective experiences, providing opportunities for reflection and conversation, for co-production in which academic forms of knowledge and expertise find new applications, purposes and platforms beyond the typical reach of scholarship.
As a public-spirited institution Melbourne declares its intention to make research, student learning and external engagement serve public ends.[104] The University is therefore an owner, patron and agent in cultural life, as well as being an educational institution.[105]
The Growing Esteem strategy discusses a number of forms of knowledge transfer including public debate, cultural collections and activities, commercialisation and the work of alumni. Information and communication tools have greatly increased and streamlined the possibilities for information dissemination and collaborative creation. As ever, streamlining does not mean that it takes no time, attention or resources. What is the resource balance between this and other missions of the University?
It is not clear that everything scholarship produces is relevant to knowledge transfer activity. The University was well aware of this when developing Growing Esteem: “As a public-spirited university Melbourne will serve local and international communities best by selective engagement, when it has distinctive contributions to make and when the benefits are compelling.”[106]
As a public-spirited university seeking to serve public ends, should we adopt a Harvard-style mandate to make our scholarly output open to the world?[107] Our teaching materials? Our research outputs? How will this be funded?
The University’s special, cultural and archival collections are a valued and potentially valuable resource for the nation, but it would be costly to complete the work that would allow this value to be realised.
We currently provide access for the public to our library collections and facilities where possible and for a subscription fee we also permit borrowing.[108] While open access to library facilities comes at a near zero cost per single visitor, overall it adds to the pressures on space, IT and staff.
What role should our information and cultural collections, physical and virtual, play in bringing the community into the University and reaching out from the University to the broader community?
What obligation do we have in preserving existing collections and our emerging scholarly output where it is of national or international significance? Who should take responsibility for this? How might this be funded and sustained?
What obligation do we have to make our rare collections available beyond our immediate scholarly community? How might this be sustainably funded?
Should we continue to facilitate free public access to our libraries and, if so, how do we seek to fund this?