Many governments and universities have pursued excellence by emulating world-class models and relying on international ranking schemes for validation and ideas for improvement. Others have relied on traditional notions of quality and research productivity. These approaches rely on the accumulation of wealth and talent – strategies that are “rivalrous” limiting the opportunities of others to be as effective. Focusing on portraits of eight different institutions reveals other approaches to excellence, all of which rely on defining and pursuing a purpose.

The School of Advanced Studies (SAS) is a liberal arts school within the University of Tyumen in Russia. Founded with financial support from a national excellence strategy, SAS models individualized learning and different ways of managing an institution. Its activites have already influenced the larger regional institution and attracting attention from other national universities. SAS also challenged the conventional view of the university’s role in preparing graduates for specific vocations, balancing that with a desire to be engaged with the region, its enterprises, and its government.

Qatar University (QU) in Doha, Qatar, was founded as a public institution whose purpose was to provide higher education to the academically talented students from the country. After several decades, the institution sought to pursue international standards of excellence, hiring international faculty and offering courses in English. However, a course correction led the institution back towards its original purpose and a desire to strengthen national identity and values.

The eight very different higher education institutions define excellence in ways that make sense to the people they serve and reflect the demands of culture and place. They are places that have looked for and pursue a clear sense of purpose and where institutional behavior aligns with stated values and goals. These portraits offer insights into the ways institutions can create cultures of excellence without slavishly following the norms and metrics celbrated by international ranking schemes. They also show policymakers that concentrating resources on a few institutions is not the only way to lift quality and strengthen a national system.

Nazarbayev University (NU) in Astana, Kazakhstan, has aspirations both to be an internationally renowned research university and to serve as a model for the nation’s universities. NU began by partnering with elite international research universities and creating an admissions system based solely on academic merit and English-language proficiency. It benefited from sustained State support and continued institutional leadership but faces challenges in maintaining its focus while responding to shifts in the nation’s real politick.

Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (UC) is one of the leading universities in the region. Founded to deliver professional education for young Chileans from all backgrounds, UC has maintained its commitment to excellence and access. Its faith-based origins have been reframed into an expansive vision of an institution that is serving the needs of the nation while also addressing pressing societal problems.

Dublin City University (DCU) in Dublin, Ireland, from its founding has pursued innovation, career preparation, and serving the surrounding community and broader society. DCU has one of the most extensive internship programs in the country, preparing students for the workplace. It has spearheaded efforts to expand access and has extensive community-based research aimed at addressing pressing local issues that reflect broader societal challenges. The demands of sustaining remarkable success in teaching and community engaged research, as well as a new generation of faculty, is raising questions as to whether DCU should now compete with prestigious peers or double down on work that is challenging conventional academic norms.

Asian University for Women (AUW) in Bangladesh offers a rigorous liberal arts education to promising young women from across Asia. Established with the support of donors and the national government, AUW has built relationships with many low-resourced and marginalized communities. Its educational offerings prepare students for academic success and cultivate their leadership potential. It faces challenges balancing its founding purpose with the long-term imperative financial stability.

Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai is distinguished by its commitment to field-based learning and research. It has been at the forefront of the development of the social sciences and social work education in India for seventy-five years. TISS has benefited from the continuity of leadership and widely shared core values. It has a longstanding commitment to partnering with communities throughout India, and its fieldwork projects develop realistic solution to seemingly intractable social problems.

This chapter characterizes History as an interpretive discipline, one in which conclusions are drawn by applying critical thinking to the available evidence, rather than one that aims to achieve actionable results from experimental or observational results. It points out that History aims not at reproducible and definitive outcomes but at broadening and deepening inquiry. It seeks to define what kinds of questions historians most value, questions that contribute to and enable such deepening and widening inquiry. Finally, this chapter discusses in greater depth the methodological and epistemological division introduced in the Introduction, between those more attracted to the historicist tradition examined in Chapter 1 and those more attracted to the methods, aims, and epistemological assumptions of social-science theory and of critical social theory. The chapter discusses both the strengths and weaknesses of these competing traditions and the pedagogical benefit of introducing students to both – the unique intellectual flexibility that the study of the discipline of History can cultivate.