In response to Laura's: see below for some signs of resistance (the events listed at the end are happening at U of Birmingham, starting tomorrow).
S.
-----
Alternatives to the Corporate University
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alternatives-to-the-Corporate-University/176102789099687
Society is increasingly being run as if it were a business.
Our 'democracies' are organised by and for groups of elected careerists who claim to represent us but really seek little more than to further their own career. Our public services are provided in an attempt by over-paid leaders of public institutions to create profit.
Despite this, democratic institutions must still pay lip-service to the idea of "participation". From political campaigning (Obama) to business management (Google) the word is used to encourage popular involvement in decision-making processes. Whilst the contemporary meaning of "participation" refers to involvement, the origin of the word has its roots in notions of "sharing" or "possession". In this sense, we consider participation to be synonymous with democracy.
In contrast to the business ethos underpinning the current 'Corporate University', therefore, we believe the University should facilitate the development of citizens' abilities to participate within contemporary democracies. We therefore find it deeply problematic that our Universities are currently run largely for profit and to promote the egos of a few key individuals at the top of the Corporate University. We are concerned that:
* Political spaces are largely unavailable.
* Political discussions are almost non-existent.
* There are very few opportunities to engage in democratic or participatory processes within the Corporate University.
* The voice of staff and students is barely present in making key decisions.
* Existing bodies designed to permit staff and students to have an input into the decision-making of the University rarely seek, and are anyway unable, to challenge decisions taken by the 'leaders' of the Corporate University.
This all acts, therefore, to undermine the development of actually-engaged citizens and sends a clear message to people in the early stages of their adult life - that participation in the running of society's institutions is (and should be) reserved for the few privileged 'experts' who can be trusted to make decisions and increase revenue.
Alternatives to the Corporate University is a series of events organised to discuss how we might replace the present Corporate University model with a more participatory one - either through reform of the present University or through experimental approaches such as initiatives in popular education. Events will include focus on such subjects as:
* Alternative approaches to education
* Discrimination in the Corporate University
* Democratic reform of the Corporate University
* University activism: stories and strategies in search of alternatives
Alternatives to the Corporate University invites and strongly encourages any interested person to propose and/or organise talks.
Forthcoming events:
Women in the Corporate University, Tuesday, March 8 · 2:00pm - 3:30pm, Arts Lecture Room 6
Imagining Alternatives to the Corporate University, Wednesday, March 30 · 4:00pm - 6:00pm, Arts Lecture Room 5
Sarah Colvin
Professor in the Study of Contemporary Germany and Director, Institute for German Studies
University of Birmingham
Muirhead Tower
Edgbaston
Birmingham
B15 2TT
Tel: ++44 121 4158627
________________________________________
From: JISCmail German Studies List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Laura Martin [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 March 2011 09:09
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Only 3-4* papers
Dear colleagues:
I wonder why we are playing this game any longer.
Our universities are requiring us to 'pay for ourselves' by bringing in large funding bids--we've been actively discouraged by some (not all) at my University from going for smaller bids because they 'cost more to administer than they are worth'. There is apparently no irony intended here about what that says about the number of administrators and the red tape they have wrapped even small bids up in in order to keep accurate tabs on us and justify the existence of all those administrators. It used to be that a small bid went straight to the PI: now it goes to Research & Enterprise in a months-long, opaque procedure.
And yet, as you all know, the success rate for even medium funding bids (if those even still exist) is dwindling to nothing: therefore academics are being required to chase more and more for less and less. A colleague here quoted a statistic (which I can't verify) that only something like 7% of academics (interestingly in sciences as well as arts) have a large grant at any one time, thus leaving 93% of us to be deemed failures by our employers. To demand us to chase these bids is simply bad management: a waste of our time and absolutely destructive of our morale (with due respect for those of you out there who have managed to get such bids, which we all know you deserve!)
On top of the funding fun, we have the REF wreckage: we will be decapitated personally by the principal in a public ceremony held in the quad (substitute titles and locations from your own institutions as you see fit) if we don't come up with the goods. Steve's posting to this list shows us just what sort of fiasco we are heading for: it will be very difficult for many excellent, hard-working colleagues to 'perform' to cue in a system that seems loaded against success.
I think we can probably all see that there really does need to be some accountablity on the part of academics and that our research output does need somehow to be noted or monitored: there are some positive aspects about the research assessment culture. But clearly things have really gotten out of hand. Tail is wagging dog.
What remains in all of this of academic freedom, if we can't pursue the research on topics of interest to ourselves, to be conducted alone or with others, as we choose, not according to some centralised agenda? I am of course preaching to the converted about academic freedom, but let's not forget the implications this has for those young (and not so young) people we are meant to be educating.
Lastly is the effect this is having on the 'Shape' of universities. Professor Sir Adam Roberts, president of the BA, may rightly say in this week's THE that arts and humanities student places are not actually being funded less than STEM subjects, but when our administrators are making strategic decisions based on what research income they can expect, then the difficulties for us outlined above are more than some minor inconvenience: it means the closure or reduction to a minimalist presence of even academically important departments (such as but not limited to modern languages).
So, back to the opening question: why are we playing along? Why don't we stand up for academic freedom, for the respect we are owed as professional teachers and researchers, for the high levels of teaching and in our subject areas to remain available in this country?
An ecomonic crisis--caused not by some act of providence but greed--does not require the measures our universities are suggesting. There are other ways to tighten the belt. Could the problem be that the more logical solution is to reduce amount of red tape and box-ticking measures, and therefore reduce too the number of administrators--the very people who are calling for our heads if we don't perform the impossible?
So--can we agree to work together, across the country (or countries!) and between instituions to stop the managerial rot which has set in?
Laura
|