are there any examples (he says presuming the worst...) of successful
challenges/oppositions/resistance strategies/struggles to such idiotic
'initiatives' or are we really in completely powerless positions in such
situations?
____________________________________________
Dr. Duncan Fuller
Division of Geography and Environmental Management
Lipman Building
University of Northumbria at Newcastle
Newcastle upon Tyne
UK
Tel (Direct): (0191) 2273753
Mobile: 07946 401359
Tel (Division Office): (0191) 2273951
Fax: (0191) 2274715
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Batterbury [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 16 August 2002 15:22
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Closure of Birmingham cult studies/sociology
>
> A strange coincidence: the present vc of Birmingham is none other than the
> engineer, Professor Michael Sterling
>
> See
> http://www.bugs.bham.ac.uk/studentvoices/atuni/general/vc.htm
> for details.
>
> Sterling was formerly vc at Brunel.
>
> * During my own time time there (1993-9), the Departments of Physics and
> Chemistry were closed down - admittedly at a time of falling recruitment,
> but a bit of a surprise at a science and engineering oriented university.
> The argument was that previous edicts to improve recruitment had failed,
> as I recall, but the shock was still great.
> * In addition, there was a big fuss about the award of an honorary
> doctorate
> to Margaret Thatcher, that some of us got into hot water for opposing, and
> the university creche was also closed (to which there was also
> opposition).
>
> * My view is that the vc - quite a good leader in other respects -
> operated
> the university on market and entrepreneurial principles - Departments had
> to prove their worth (under devolved budgeting), and there was
> considerable
> importance given to RAE scores as well. 'Underperforming units' always had
> to look over their shoulder, and well-performing ones were rewarded. The
> University improved, but sometimes with some ruthless/hard decisions
> taken.
>
>
> I wonder if this market model has any relevance to the closure of CCS at
> Birmingham? Just speculating. Sociology was not attacked at Brunel to my
> knowledge, but with substantial grants flowing to it and big names like
> Steve
> Woolgar and Alan Irwin, there is no reason it should have been under the
> management model of the time, perhaps.
>
> Raises a perenial question that also is debated at the national level in
> UK: entrust governance to many, through democratic processes with teeth in
> some form of post-Weberian, participatory bureaucracy; or to a few senior
> figures (some elected, some not) who have great power in very Weberian
> (rational/oligarchal)
> bureaucracies? And should the prime focus on a university be on
> entrepreneurial
> activity, or the performance of a social welfare/civic duty function?
>
> If we adopt the entrepreneurial model in universities, occasional
> departmental
> closures are probably more inevitable. I am not sure entrepreneurship can
> be easily combined with other frameworks of governance. The Brunel model
> is like capitalism; great costs, but also benefits.
>
>
> S
>
> -----------------
> To see this story with its related links on the EducationGuardian.co.uk
> site, go to http://education.guardian.co.uk
>
> Death of a department
> A bewildered Frank Webster mourns the unexpected closure of the
> successful Cultural Studies and Sociology department at the University
> of Birmingham
> Frank Webster
> Wednesday August 14 2002
> The Guardian
>
>
> Term ended at the University of Birmingham on June 14. The 2001-2 year
> had been the best of my three years in Cultural Studies and Sociology
> (CSS): the Sociology degree I had been brought in to introduce was top
> of the Guardian rankings for the third successive year, and its sister,
> Media, Culture and Society (MCS) was close behind.
>
> Demand was enormously strong with between 10 and 15 applicants for each
> place, postgraduate recruitment was booming, and ESRC 1+3 recognition
> had been achieved. Financially CSS was robust and set to expand.
>
> The one disappointment had been in the Research Assessment Exercise
> (RAE). In December 2001, we had learned that the Communication, Cultural
> and Media Studies panel had awarded a 3A. This was a surprise since,
> following a rigorous internal review; there was confidence the target
> score (4) would be reached comfortably.
>
> The pro-vice-chancellor responsible for the RAE, an engineer, had
> amended the original submission against my advice to ensure - in his
> judgement - a 4. I had objected, but was reminded that the RAE was his
> responsibility and that I would thank him later for the interference.
>
> The 3A result came as a shock. Nevertheless, CSS was just
> four-years-old, with many young and new staff, and it had developed a
> distinctive and innovative intellectual project operating on the borders
> of cultural studies and sociology. Students' reactions were enthusiastic
> and encouraging, and initial scepticism from some staff had been
> overcome.
>
> Of course, post-RAE research would need re-directing and clearer targets
> set for the 2002-6 period, but CSS was fundamentally strong and full of
> promise. It had fallen just below the university target of a grade 4, so
> CSS responded with detailed plans for the next five years, for which it
> got the backing of the School of Social Science to which it belonged.
> There was reason to remain positive about the future.
>
> On June 20, I met with Head of School to review plans for the coming
> year. To my astonishment he told me he had received instructions to
> close CSS by the following month, and that only four staff were to be
> retained (out of 12.6 positions) to deliver the programmes that would be
> relocated.
>
> Of the four 'fixed and limited' posts to remain, one would be in
> sociology, the rest in cultural studies. A severance offer would be
> made, and if insufficient numbers took this up, then redundancy notices
> would follow.
>
> Job losses had never been considered a serious issue over the previous
> six months. A 65-page university plan, 2002-7 had recently passed
> through council. A short paragraph made reference to CSS, but it
> contained not a whisper about staff reductions.
>
> The decision to decimate CSS came presumably from central management
> alone. The Head of School had received no feedback on the School of
> Social Science's strategy regarding CSS, yet now he believed the
> situation was 'non-negotiable'.
>
> There was no point in seeking a meeting with the vice-chancellor since
> all that remained was to implement the decision. Our meeting ended, he
> instructed a secretary to inform the CSS staff of the situation by
> e-mail. He refused to attend an emergency department meeting, feeling he
> had nothing to say.
>
> Though no explanation for the decision was provided, the university has
> since issued statements that the 70% reduction in CSS staffing was
> justified because there were 'under-employed' staff elsewhere who could
> take over.
>
> All staff in CSS took 'voluntary' severance. They were appalled by the
> university's behaviour and convinced that quality programmes were
> undeliverable by just four remaining staff. So they left together, in
> defence of academic standards and intimidated by the threat of
> redundancy.
>
> As professor of sociology my own position was untenable. A full degree
> in sociology, with well over 100 undergraduates, is neither viable nor
> credible with a single sociologist. I also knew that excess expertise
> was not available elsewhere in Birmingham - the Department of Social
> Policy and Social Work, our closest cousin, promptly reported it had
> nothing to offer.
>
> There were a couple of political sociologists around, but these already
> contributed specialist options to our degree and were set squarely in a
> Department of Political Science and International Relations, a far cry
> from our sociology which advertised the 'cultural turn' as its central
> concern.
>
> Undergraduates were away on vacation so unable to comment, but the 50
> plus research students in CSS, who had been ignored thus far, vigorously
> protested the university edict. There have also been howls of outrage
> from around the world. A student website has been tracking and
> documenting the situation.
>
> It seems that just three or four central managers have killed the
> university's renowned worldwide brand, the 'Birmingham School' of
> Cultural Studies.
>
> They have likely stemmed the strong supply of overseas research students
> and the invigorating cosmopolitanism this brought to Birmingham (as well
> as losing direct income well in excess of =C2=A3100,000 per annum).
>
> They have potentially devalued the degrees and diminished the
> experiences of returning undergraduates, some of whom are now seeking
> legal advice regarding the discrepancy between what was promised and
> what will be delivered.
>
> Extraordinarily, the university is continuing to recruit students to
> programmes which it insists are unchanged.
>
> Rumours circulate that a political scientist (who personally led his own
> department to a 3A) has agreed to take over sociology, lured by the
> offer of additional posts, and a philosopher who specialises in the
> study of virtue is to be brought out of retirement to re-conceive
> cultural studies. A research fellow and a part-time lecturer are being
> drafted in, and last year's course materials are being sought out as
> guides for stop-gap teachers.
>
> Meanwhile, the CSS staff who worked so hard to make the degrees among
> the best in the country are unemployed.
>
> The completely unanticipated loss of our jobs is much like a
> bereavement. First the shock, then the adrenalin rush to handle the
> bureaucracy - in our case consult lawyers and clear offices in just over
> a month.
>
> Now the awful realisation dawns and we leave somewhere we enjoyed
> working, without a word of farewell or thanks. Recognition, in the form
> of e-mails from all over the world, are our unexpected obituaries.
>
> · Frank Webster was formerly Head of Department, Cultural Studies
> and Sociology, at the University of Birmingham.
>
> Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited
>
> Dr Simon Batterbury, Assistant Professor
> Dept. of Geography and Regional Development
> The University of Arizona
> 409 Harvill Building, Box #2
> Tucson, AZ 85721-0076, USA
> Phone: (520) 626-8054
> Fax: (520) 621-2889
> http://geog.arizona.edu/~web/faculty.htm
>
> currently:
> Visiting Research Fellow, Development Studies Institute, London School of
> Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, United
> Kingdom. Tel: +44 (020) 7955-7425
> Fax: +44 (020) 7955-6844
>
> from Sept:
> Visiting Professor
> International Development Studies/Geography
> Roskilde University
> Building 05.1, P.O. Box 260
> DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
> http://www.institut3.ruc.dk/iu/homepage.htm
|