Conference Program

Universities are increasingly called to respond to the crisis in democracy marked by disinformation, polarization and civic disengagement, yet teaching still prioritizes narrow employability over democratic capability (Biesta, 2011; Giroux, 2014). This paper argues that leadership development and global citizenship education in higher education can become concrete sites for democratic renewal when they cultivate 21st century skills such as critical thinking, ethical judgment, digital and media literacy, collaborative problem solving, and global competence as democratic practices rather than labour market assets (Kellner and Share, 2019; Mihailidis, 2018; Oxley and Morris, 2013; UNESCO IICBA, 2024).

This paper draws on a multi-year leadership development programme with colleges and teacher training institutes across Assam, Northeast India, reaching 418 participants across 36 institutions through hybrid and cross-border formats (Uma Global, 2025). The analysis focuses on a cross-sectional participant survey, complemented by feedback from cross-college case-study projects and illustrative open-ended comments (Uma Global, 2025). These data map self-reported changes in personal leadership and agency, communication and collaboration, intercultural and global competence, digital and information literacy, and intentions to contribute to local communities and remain connected to the region, in line with earlier leadership-focused work on pedagogy and regional aspiration (Kakati‑Shah, 2024; Kakati-Shah, 2025a; Kakati‑Shah, 2025b).

The study highlights three clusters of learning outcomes, drawing on survey scales and qualitative feedback from participants in rural and semi-urban contexts (Uma Global, 2025). First, critical and creative thinking combined with digital and information literacy appear to strengthen students’ confidence in evaluating information, adapting to connectivity constraints and collaborating online, including in cross-border sessions that link Assamese colleges with students from King’s College London’s King’s Business Club, Baruch College at the City University of New York, and Rosenheim Technical University of Applied Sciences in Germany (Kellner and Share, 2019; Mihailidis, 2018). Second, communication, collaboration and conflict-engagement skills, anchored in items on public speaking, teamwork and feedback, support more inclusive classroom and group-work practices across linguistic and social differences, consistent with democratic and peace-oriented pedagogies that emphasise dialogue and empathic listening (Andolina and Conklin, 2021; Bajaj, 2022; Kakati‑Shah, 2022a). Third, indicators of global competence, ethical leadership, local commitment, and attention to gender suggest that participants increasingly connect their leadership practice to questions of inequality, sustainability, gender, and brain drain, especially the loss of talented rural youth to urban centres, and express a desire to use their skills for the benefit of Assam and the Northeast region (Lopes Cardozo and Novak, 2021; Kakati‑Shah, 2022b; Kakati‑Shah, 2025b; Uma Global, 2025).

The article proposes a democratic 21st century skills framework in which widely cited skills are re-oriented toward democratic resilience, civic agency, and ethically grounded leadership rather than individual competitiveness alone (Andreotti, 2014; Mihailidis, 2018; UNESCO IICBA, 2024). By positioning Assam’s hybrid and cross-border leadership model, linking colleges in Northeast India with students in London, New York, and Rosenheim, as a potential test case, this paper illustrates how similar programmes could use transformative pedagogy and 21st century skills to renew universities’ democratic roles across different higher education systems (Uma Global, 2025; Kakati-Shah, 2025a).

Although still unfolding, the contemporary crisis in democracy has been extensively studied. This paper asks the question whether universities can help to address the crisis, not only study it, and, if yes, how. The paper has three parts, First, it puts together a comprehensive critical inventory of methods, techniques and types of action in universities that can be identified as directly meant to contribute to addressing the crisis in democracy. This inventory includes various types of dedicated educational strategies and initiatives (some quite traditional, like civic education, others more recent and innovative, including digital components), research initiatives, advocacy, and public engagement models (such as, for example, online platforms for engagement). Second, it provides a framework for assessing the appropriateness and potential impact of these methods, techniques and institutional actions, taken individually or in their combinations in various concrete settings. Third, the paper discusses whether new modalities of engagement by universities in addressing the crisis of democracy are necessary and possible, considering both immediate and longer-term challenges in this area.

Conflict resolution skills are a civic competency foundational to democratic participation and constructive dialogue, yet rarely taught explicitly in educational settings.
This paper presents a proof-of-concept study evaluating an immersive Virtual Reality (iVR) intervention designed to develop perspective-taking skills - the ability to adopt another person's point of view - in adolescents. The intervention is grounded in the pedagogical principle of experiential counterfactual learning: iVR provides a unique environment for experiencing another perspective by embodying the other person.The intervention prioritises accessibility: it is non-invasive, avoids prescribing normative values, and is designed to function effectively in resource-limited educational settings with minimal technological infrastructure. Its modular structure makes it readily scalable across diverse institutional contexts.
We evaluate the intervention through an experimental methodology with two samples of adolescents in two settings, one in London and one in Cairo (N_1=70, N_2=269). Results show that a two-session intervention produces measurable gains in perspective-taking, assessed using a novel behavioural measure rather than self-report, and increases participants' subjective confidence in managing real-world interpersonal conflict. We further report on user acceptability, finding the intervention to be well-received across the sample.
These findings demonstrate how educational immersive technology, when grounded in robust theory and evaluated rigorously, can promote the development of civic skills. The intervention offers a concrete, low-cost and scalable tool for education institutions to contribute to repairing the fabric of democratic life.

Over time, universities have undergone significant transformations in their missions, evolving from institutions focused primarily on teaching to organisations integrating research and, more recently, broader societal engagement. This evolution culminated in the emergence of the university’s third mission, which extends beyond education and research to encompass economic, social, and cultural development.

In the Lithuanian academic discourse, relatively little attention has so far been paid to the third mission of universities. While this concept has been extensively analysed in the international literature, in Lithuania it is discussed only fragmentarily and is most often based on isolated examples of empirical studies or conceptual papers (Stonkienė & Matkevičienė, 2014). Universities declare the importance of the third mission and their commitment to creating social, economic, and cultural value in official strategic documents; however, it remains unclear how this mission is understood and implemented in practice.

The qualitative research method chosen for the study (semi-structured interviews) is a method that aims to understand social or human phenomena by examining the meanings, experiences and interpretations of participants in their natural context (Creswell and Creswell, 2022).The qualitative research method chosen for the study (semi-structured interviews) is a method that aims to understand social or human phenomena by examining the meanings, experiences and interpretations of participants in their natural context (Creswell and Creswell, 2022). A qualitative research approach is particularly appropriate for examining the third mission of universities because it enables an in-depth exploration of meanings, interpretations, and institutional perspectives that are shaped by social, organisational, and policy contexts. Ten interviews were conducted with Lithuanian state universities. For data analysis the content analysis was applied. It relies on sequential steps, thus ensuring depth of data interpretation (Silverman, 2024). Independent data analysis followed by consensus was applied. Two researchers independently analysed the data. The results were then compared, and similarities and differences were discussed until consensus was reached on the final analytical framework.

The analysis of scientific literature and the findings of the present study confirm that the University’s Third Mission is an essential, though conceptually complex and multifaceted, component of contemporary higher education. It extends beyond the traditional core missions of teaching and research and is fundamentally oriented towards meaningful interaction with society, addressing social, cultural, and economic challenges at local, regional, and broader levels.

The study demonstrates that the Third Mission is increasingly perceived as equal in importance to teaching and research and is becoming a strategically significant direction of university activity. Universities are positioned not only as knowledge producers but also as creative laboratories and innovation hubs embedded in everyday civic life. Through lifelong learning, inclusive knowledge transfer, social engagement, and collaboration with diverse stakeholders, universities contribute to social inclusion, civic creativity, and regional development.

This presentation traces the post–World War II era in American higher education through the lens of its democratic commitments. The erosion of liberal democracy in the United States compels renewed examination of both the normative justifications higher education has advanced for supporting democracy and the pedagogical and programmatic strategies institutions have employed to pursue that goal. Central to this inquiry is how scholars and practitioners conceptualize the relationship between higher education and the promotion of liberal democracy.

Should higher education prioritize the cultivation of critical thinking as a foundation for democratic support? Should universities seek to reduce income and wealth inequality, given evidence that such inequalities undermine democratic stability? Should institutions encourage and facilitate student political participation, including voting? Or, alternatively, should democracy promotion lie outside the core mission of American higher education?

To address these questions, the presentation examines the mechanisms universities have used to promote citizenship and democratic engagement. These include civic and historical education, voluntarism and service learning, social innovation and entrepreneurship initiatives, and—particularly following the election of Donald Trump—efforts to foster civil discourse on campus. I analyze the underlying assumptions behind each approach and evaluate available empirical evidence regarding their effectiveness.

Finally, the presentation assesses the current position of American higher education more than one year into the Trump administration’s sustained political and policy challenges to the sector, examining institutional responses and strategic adaptations. It concludes by considering what American higher education might look like were democratic commitments treated as a primary institutional priority and will analyze contemporary civic engagement initiatives reflect competing and often incompatible theories of democracy embedded within American higher education.

This paper analyzes the case study of MuDiB, the Diffused Museum of the University of Milan - Bicocca, as a tool for activating university participation and fostering connections with the local community (Boylan, 1999). Within the objectives of the third mission, one of the key aspects is the valorization and dissemination of knowledge. At the same time, the cultural and social mission is well-realized through the full promotion of cultural events, as well as the creation and management of museum hubs. The case of the University of Milan-Bicocca is unique in that, as a young university, founded in 1998, it never considered having a museum as a specific institution. Over the years, however, the presence of several collections deposited within the various Departments has become increasingly recognized. In particular, thanks to BiPAC, the Historical, Artistic, and Cultural Heritage Research Center, founded in 2017 and comprising a representative from each Department, a process of initial information gathering has begun, which has led to the uncovering of this hidden heritage. Over time, an increasingly detailed cataloguing process has been undertaken, leading to the identification of the initial nucleus of the collection of MudiB. The museum, founded in 2023 (Capurro, Zuccoli, 2023), is characterised by its role as a university museum, a local museum, and a diffused museum (Drugman, 1982, 2016). These characteristics make it an ideal place to implement the objectives of the Third Mission. As a university museum, it studies, preserves, and publicises the University's collections, housed in the various departments, highlighting their historical significance in relation to the university's three core activities: research, teaching, and the Third Mission. As a local museum, it fosters connections with the neighbourhood and the city, not forgetting that this campus was born from a project that prioritised the relationship between the University's spaces and the Bicocca neighbourhood. As a distributed museum, it does not concentrate the collection in a single exhibition space, but rather enhances the objects present in the various departments, maintaining their connection to the various disciplines to which they are connected. The museum carries out many different activities, from cataloging to the placement of works within the university context, from the creation of new exhibition spaces with significant objects that narrate the history and research of the Departments, to the organization of an annual exhibition and the promotion of a photography competition for the university population and the general public. All activities are documented and evaluated both numerically and qualitatively. The museum's choice is to fully adhere to the ICOM Prague 2022 definition: "A museum is a not-for-profit, permanent institution in the service of society that researches, collects, preserves, interprets, and exhibits tangible and intangible heritage. Open to the public, accessible, and inclusive, museums foster diversity and sustainability. They operate and communicate ethically, professionally, and with the participation of communities, offering diverse experiences for education, enjoyment, reflection, and knowledge sharing." From this perspective, the university and its museums can become a crucial point of discussion, exchange, and collective construction of social knowledge (Colazzo, 2002).