Philosophical Foundations Of Good University Governance In Higher Education

Daryono Daryono; Yudi Hari Rayanto; Nunuk Indarti

doi:10.63922/ijeter.v4i03.6199

Daryono Daryono University of PGRI Wiranegara, Pasuruan, Indonesia
Yudi Hari Rayanto University of PGRI Wiranegara, Pasuruan, Indonesia
Nunuk Indarti University of PGRI Wiranegara, Pasuruan, Indonesia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.63922/ijeter.v4i03.6199

Keywords: Good University Governance; philosophical foundations; virtue ethics; deontological ethics; democratic education

Abstract

Higher education institutions are increasingly confronted with demands for transparency, accountability, efficiency, participation, and institutional responsiveness amid globalization, digitalization, internationalization, and the growing corporatization of higher education. These developments have strengthened the importance of Good University Governance (GUG), but have also raised fundamental questions concerning the normative foundations underlying its principles and practices. This study aims to reconstruct the philosophical foundations of Good University Governance by examining the ethical, democratic, and humanistic values that provide normative justification for university governance. The study employs a qualitative philosophical research approach based on library research. Academic literature, policy documents, and major philosophical works related to university governance, ethics, democracy, and higher education were analyzed through conceptual, hermeneutic, and normative-critical analysis. The theoretical framework synthesizes four philosophical traditions: Aristotelian virtue ethics, Kantian deontological ethics, Deweyan democratic philosophy of education, and Habermasian communicative action theory. The analysis demonstrates that Good University Governance should not be understood merely as an administrative mechanism for improving organizational efficiency and institutional performance. Rather, it constitutes a value-based governance framework grounded in moral responsibility, human dignity, practical wisdom, democratic participation, deliberative communication, and the pursuit of the common good. Aristotelian virtue ethics provides a foundation for integrity and ethical leadership; Kantian ethics grounds accountability in moral responsibility and respect for human dignity; Dewey emphasizes democratic participation and the university as a community of inquiry; while Habermas strengthens the deliberative and communicative basis of institutional legitimacy.

References

Alibašić, Haris., Atkinson, C. L., & Pelcher, J. (2024). The liminal state of academic freedom: Navigating corporatization in higher education. Discover Education, 3(7), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00086-x
Aristotle. (2009). Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)
Barnett, R. (2011). Being a University. Routledge.
Christensen, Tom. (2011). University governance reforms: Potential problems of more autonomy? Higher Education, 62(4), 503–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9401-z
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications
Dewey, John. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. McGraw-Hill.
Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Truth and method (2nd rev. ed., J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). Continuum.
Habermas, Jürgen. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Volume 1. Reason and the rationalization of society. Beacon Press.
Hare, R. M. (1963). Freedom and reason. Oxford University Press.
Huisman, J. (2009). International Perspectives on the Governance of Higher Education.
Islami, Prita. (2025). Good university governance in higher education: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Jurnal Maneksi, 14(1), 129–139.
Jones, Glen A.. (2013). Governing quality: Positioning student learning as a core objective of institutional and system-level governance. Higher Education Governance and Policy, 1(1), 5–20.
Kattsoff, L. O. (2004). Elements of philosophy (terjemahan Indonesia: Pengantar filsafat). Tiara Wacana.
Kant, Immanuel. (1998). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1785)
MacIntyre, A. (2007). After Virtue (3rd ed.). University of Notre Dame Press.
Marginson, S. (2011). Higher education and public good. Higher Education Quarterly, 65(4), 411–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2011.00496.x
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2012). OECD principles of good governance. OECD Publishing.
Rescher, N. (2001). Philosophical reasoning: A study in the methodology of philosophizing. Blackwell Publishers.
Ricoeur, P. (1976). Interpretation theory: Discourse and the surplus of meaning. Texas Christian University Press.
Risanty, R., & Kesuma, S. A. (2019). Good university governance: Experience from Indonesian university. Jurnal Perspektif Pembiayaan dan Pembangunan Daerah, 6(4), 515–524. https://doi.org/10.22437/ppd.v6i4.6195
Scott, P. (2006). The academic profession in a knowledge society. In U. Teichler (Ed.), The formative years of scholars (pp. 19–30). Portland Press.
Shattock, M. (2010). Managing Successful Universities. Open University Press.
United Nations Development Programme. (1997). Governance for sustainable human development: A UNDP policy document. UNDP.
World Bank. (1992). Governance and development. World Bank.
Zed, Mestika (2014). Metode penelitian kepustakaan (Cet. 3). Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.