Dear Terry,
If you’d like to take up the topic of universities as a locus of research in October, I’ll be happy to consider it. I’m also happy to reflect on the differences between university research and industry research, and the advantages and benefits of each system – as well as their limits.
In October, I will request greater care in your management of what seem to be quotes. You have been placing your own reading of my thoughts in quote marks as though you are quoting my words. This is inappropriate.
In your latest note, you suggested that I describe universities as [ ‘better’ ] at research – the quotation marks and the word better are yours, not mine. You also write about an assumption that [ ‘universities are obviously best at research’ ]. Again, the words are yours, not mine. I did not write this, and these words should not be placed in quotation marks in a way that suggests that I did.
I’m willing to think these ideas through. Please don’t require me repeatedly to distinguish between my ideas and ideas you misattribute to me when you place your words in quotation marks.
Quotation marks indicate that you are reproducing the words of another person. This is basic to research, to debate, and to journalism. When you respond to comments from an author and place quotation marks around statements, readers assume that you are quoting the author to whom you respond. When you use quotation marks, please do not rewrite or restate my words. When you quote me or seem to, I’d like you to use my words, not your own.
When October rolls around, I’m happy to reflect on this issue. Since I have written about universities, I can share a few ideas in advance.
You write that this conversation “will require dropping and deliberately ignoring reflections, assumptions, perspectives and evidence from the past about universities.” You don’t do this yourself, and I don’t plan to.
Your statements about universities demonstrate your own “reflections, assumptions, perspectives and evidence from the past about universities.”
The relations between universities and the societies and cultures that develop and support them go in cycles. You describe a situation that holds in some places and nations, but not in other places and nations. These kinds of problems you describe also run in cycles.
There is an additional problem here. Your experience of universities is narrow. You’ve worked in universities in Perth, Australia, and in the UK. You worked as a researcher and senior lecturer in several departments, but you had no direct experience of university management, university strategy, or the relations between universities and government. Your views are comprised of “reflections, assumptions, perspectives and evidence from the past about universities” to an even greater degree than mine.
It is vital to recognize and understand the shifting mission and nature of the research university over the past century and a half – and the differences among kinds of research universities in the world today. These differences are also shaped by the differences in national systems.
In my view, at least, Emmanuel Kant (1992 [1798]) still has a great deal to say about the very issues that concern you. John Newman (1996 [1852]) and Clark Kerr (2001 [1963]) still have a great deal to say about what universities ought to be and do, and writers like David Damrosch (1995) have examined how universities sometimes fail to be and do what they might. The university is a human institution that does not always achieve its goals. This does not render the goals inappropriate.
While waiting for the October conversation, anyone who wishes to read my view on universities and the role of design education within the university (Friedman 2003) will find a free digital reprint here:
http://www.academia.edu/311100/Design_Curriculum_Challenges_for_Todays_University
Are there problems with universities today? Absolutely. In my view, though, understanding those problems and doing something about them requires a broad enough view and a deep enough understanding to analyze the problems while seeking a way forward.
If you’d like to consider this in October, please bring the issues up that you’d like to discuss.
Yours,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Home Page http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html<http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design> Academia Page http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman About Me Page http://about.me/ken_friedman
Guest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China
--
References
Damrosch, David. 1995. We Scholars. Changing the Culture of the University Cambridge. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Friedman, Ken. 2003. “Design Curriculum Challenges for Today’s University.” [Keynote conference lecture.] Enhancing the Curricula: Exploring Effective Curricula Practices in Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education. Center for Learning and Teaching in Art and Design. First International Conference at the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) London, UK, 10th - 12th April 2002. Cosponsored by ELIA (European League of Institutes of Arts) and ADC-LTSN (The Art, Design and Communication - Learning and Teaching Support Network). London: CLTAD, The London Institute, 29-63. Accessible at URL:
http://www.academia.edu/311100/Design_Curriculum_Challenges_for_Todays_University
Kant, Immanuel. 1992 [1798]. The Conflict of the Faculties. (Der Streit der Falkultaeten). Translated with an introduction by Mary J. Gregor. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.
Kerr, Clark. 2001 [1963]. The Uses of the University: Fifth Edition (Godkin Lectures on the Essentials of Free Government and the Duties of the Citizen). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Newman, John Henry. 1996 [1852]. The Idea of a University. New Haven: Yale University Press. The text of an early edition is accessible at URL:
http://www.newmanreader.org/works/idea/index.html
--
Terry Love wrote:
—snip—
My previous post proffered some evidence it might be worth reconsidering the assumption outlined in your post, that universities appeared to be ‘better’ at research, or had some kind of privileged status in understanding or theorising about design related issues. The post wasn’t intended to fill out every detail that would map the situation completely, only to point to several issues that challenged any assumption that ‘universities are obviously best at research’.
—snip—
When you are free again, I suggest this has to be the basis of any future discussion, and will require dropping and deliberately ignoring reflections, assumptions, perspectives and evidence from the past about universities
—snip—
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
