[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-594554-105":59,"doc-detail-594554-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","australian-universities-review-universities-and-the-public-good","Australian Universities’ Review - Universities and the public good","","The paper reviews knowledge exchange policy and university practice in Australia, focusing on the policy–practice nexus and the capability to translate research knowledge into action. It argues that Australian knowledge exchange has not been well articulated, leading to project management and collaboration skill gaps and limited researcher motivation. The review uses a knowledge exchange framework built on high-quality scholarship, stakeholder collaboration, mutually beneficial outcomes, and public-good intent, recommending a clearly articulated national policy and strengthened university capacity.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/australian-universities-review-universities-and-the-public-good/594554/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/australian-universities-review-universities-and-the-public-good/594554.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Aldword","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-19","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":81},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What problem does the paper identify in Australia’s knowledge exchange policy?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It identifies a policy deficit reflected in limited project management and collaboration skills and reduced motivation among researchers to engage in collaborative knowledge exchange processes.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How does the paper define knowledge exchange in its review framework?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It describes knowledge exchange through four components: high-quality scholarship, stakeholder collaboration, mutually beneficial outcomes, and public-good intent.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What does the paper recommend for Australia’s future knowledge exchange approach?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It recommends a clearly articulated national knowledge exchange policy and enhanced university capacity to implement knowledge exchange initiatives.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},594554,1792231888,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":81,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},2336478940917,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nUniversities and the public good  \nA review of knowledge exchange policy and related university practice in Australia  \nMichael Cuthill & Éidín O’Shea University of Southern Queensland  \nBruce Wilson RMIT University  \nPierre Viljoen  \nCentral Queensland University  \nAustralian policy relating to knowledge exchange has never been well articulated, notwithstanding that the nexus between knowledge, engagement and higher education in Australia has been on the national agenda for several decades (Grattan Institute, 2013) . In universities, this policy deficit is reflected in a lack of project management and collaboration skills, and limited motivation of researchers to engage in collaborative knowledge exchange processes. Taken together, poor policy and inadequate practice constrain the effective use of knowledge in socioeconomic development and national innovation. This paper primarily focuses on the knowledge exchange policy–practice nexus in Australia. We adopt the term ‘knowledge exchange’ while acknowledging many other related concepts, such as knowledge transfer, university community engagement, integrative applied research and engaged scholarship. We draw attention to international contexts in which universities, governments, industry and funding agencies are now explicitly supporting and facilitating collaborative knowledge exchange activities. Our review suggests that Australia needs a clearly articulated national knowledge exchange policy, along with enhanced university capacity to implement knowledge exchange initiatives.  \nIntroduction  \nThe idea that universities have an obligation to the public good dates back to at least 1200 AD with the advent of the earliest European universities, such as Bologna, Paris and Oxford (Cuthill, 2012; Brown & Muirhead, 2001) . As such, universities have long promoted themselves and justified public funding on the grounds that they serve  \nthis public good (Collini, 2012). This is currently subject to debate in forums across the world at a time when uni- 36 Universities and the public good Michael Cuthill et al.  \nversities are under increasing pressure to clearly demonstrate their societal benefits while producing high-quality, high-impact scholarship, and operating as astute business managers.  \nThe increasing demands on universities have prompted calls for new kinds of university, those that are responsive to the needs of society and are prepared to adopt collaborative approaches to their scholarship (Barber et al., 2013). These universities have been variously described using terms such as ‘open university’(Miller & Sabapathy,  \nvol. 56, no. 2, 2014  \nA U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \n2011),‘innovative university’(Christensen & Eyring,2011),‘engaged university’(Petter, 2013), the new‘public university’(Burawoy, 2011) and Goddard’s (2009) concept of a‘civic university’.The core concept here is that all publicly funded higher education institutions have a civic duty to engage with the wider society – at local, national and international levels – on issues of public relevance.  \nThe focus of public good universities is presented indifferent ways:  \n• addressing the so-called grand challenges of the 21st century (Barber et al., 2013)  \n• increased public policy focus (European Commission, 2012)  \n• scholarly interaction with industry, focusing on the valorisation of intellectual property (Breznitz & Feldman, 2012)  \n• scholarly engagement involving public, private and community sector stakeholders that contributes to social justice and development (Kajner, 2013; Cuthill, 2012) .  \nEach of these centres in one way or another on the sharing – the exchange of knowledge – between university researchers and public actors who wish to contribute to new knowledge and to use it.This paper presentsa review of knowledge exchange policy and practice in Australia. Four underlying components are commonly seen to defi","cbCaimF4XyWDoOBl","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimF4XyWDoOBl","pdf",307505,11,"English","# Introduction\n## Universities’ obligation to the public good\n## Calls for new university models\n## Components of knowledge exchange\n## Related concepts and international context","[{\"question\":\"What problem does the paper identify in Australia’s knowledge exchange policy?\",\"answer\":\"It identifies a policy deficit reflected in limited project management and collaboration skills and reduced motivation among researchers to engage in collaborative knowledge exchange processes.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper define knowledge exchange in its review framework?\",\"answer\":\"It describes knowledge exchange through four components: high-quality scholarship, stakeholder collaboration, mutually beneficial outcomes, and public-good intent.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the paper recommend for Australia’s future knowledge exchange approach?\",\"answer\":\"It recommends a clearly articulated national knowledge exchange policy and enhanced university capacity to implement knowledge exchange initiatives.\"}]","Australian Universities’ Review - Universities and the public good | PDF",1792079379,28]