1 / 13

ESRC Seminar Series: ‘New Perspectives on Education and Culture’ Seminar 6: Knowledge Cultures

Universities, Knowledge Regimes and Publics John Holmwood University of Nottingham Campaign for the Public University . ESRC Seminar Series: ‘New Perspectives on Education and Culture’ Seminar 6: Knowledge Cultures British Library, December 3 rd 2012. Trajectories in higher education….

boyce
Download Presentation

ESRC Seminar Series: ‘New Perspectives on Education and Culture’ Seminar 6: Knowledge Cultures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Universities, Knowledge Regimes and PublicsJohn HolmwoodUniversity of NottinghamCampaign for the Public University ESRC Seminar Series: ‘New Perspectives on Education and Culture’ Seminar 6: Knowledge Cultures British Library, December 3rd 2012

  2. Trajectories in higher education… • From a social democratic (Robbins) to a neo-liberal knowledge regime (Browne). • From a knowledge society to a (global) knowledge economy. • From a multi-versity (Kerr) to a mono-versity. • From higher education as a national system to universities as knowledge corporations within a global rank order.

  3. Robbins: one axiom, four aims… • “courses of higher education should be available for all those who are qualified by ability and attainment to pursue them and who wish to do so” (1963: para 30) • “there is no single aim which, if pursued to the exclusion of all others, would not leave out essential elements. Eclecticism in this sphere is not something to be despised: it is imposed by the circumstances of the case. To do justice to the complexity of things, it is necessary to acknowledge a plurality of aims” (1963: para 23).

  4. the public benefit of a skilled and educated workforce (1963: para 25), • the public benefit of higher education in producing cultivated men and women (1963: para 26), • the public benefit of securing the advancement of learning through the combination of teaching and research within institutions (1963: para 27), • and the public benefit of providing a common culture and standards of citizenship (1963: para 28).

  5. A social democratic knowledge regime..? • An inclusive public interest in higher education • Education as a social right, underpinning democratic inclusion • Higher education associated with economic growth in the context of a secular decline in inequalities (from mid-1930s to early 1980s) and the expansion of the welfare state • Emphasis upon disciplinary knowledge and professional expertise. • Provision of knowledge for ‘evidence-based’ policy – linked to the foundation of the SSRC (ESRC) in 1965. • [Relatively low-level of community-engagement/community-based learning because of ‘institutionalising’ character of welfare state]

  6. Two ‘critiques’ and one ‘pathology’… • Rise of mass higher education and radical critiques of inclusion/exclusion (gender, race and the new left). • Critique of professions/knowledge as power. • Neo-liberal critique of welfare state and idea of social rights of citizenship (not initially applied to education). • Critique of professions/state as power to be replaced by markets. • Pathology is the problem of funding as citizens become addressed as ‘consumers’/’taxpayers’ (first identified by Clark Kerr); reinforces instrumental orientation to knowledge

  7. Emergence of a neo-liberal knowledge regime… • Jarratt Report (1985) and shift from collegial/professional organisation to managerial hierarchy. • Market proxies and the audit of teaching and research (QAA and RAE/REF). • Shift from public funding of teaching to a ‘co-funding’ model - Dearing (1997). • Two further steps represent full-blown model: • Impact agenda/ pathways to impact • Implementation of Browne Review

  8. The neo-liberal knowledge regime… • Research is valued for its contribution to economic growth and for the extent to which it can be ‘commodified’. • Education is to be considered as an investment in human capital and a private responsibility of individuals. • Entry of ‘for profit’ providers – including, and especially, multinational corporations. • Stratification of universities and the creation of a new ‘elite’ of resource rich, research-intensive universities and resource poor, teaching-only institutions. • ‘Freeing’ universities to pursue ‘for-profit’ activities, and to seek ‘for-profit’ partners.

  9. From knowledge society to the knowledge economy. • Higher education now as the engine of widening inequality not its amelioration. (UK in top 10 of most unequal countries) • Emphasis on ‘low aspirations’ and social mobility into ‘selective’ universities, but 25% of UK’s young people live in poverty. Those without qualifications cast as undeserving poor. • But also generational inequality – shift in burden of costs of higher education from current taxpayers onto young (fees, and as future taxpayers in terms of the costs of the loan system). • Aim is to ‘lock in’ taxpayer rejection of public spending

  10. But also an attack on ‘publics’… • Idea of a ‘public’ depends on dialogue, with politics as the representation of publics. • Market as ‘non-dialogical’. • Reduction of publics to the market is anti-democratic (cf Occupy). • Public university serves as a space for the production and dissemination of knowledge, including the evaluation of expertise. • Impact agenda and the emphasis on co-production of knowledge, but latter emphasises instrumental relations and already constituted interests.

  11. The ‘public’ … British Social Attitudes Survey prior to Browne Review: • 70% thought advantages of university education were more than simply being paid more • 65% were opposed to differential fees for the same course • 75% thought fees prior to the revised system left students with too much debt • 80% thought children from better-off families had more opportunities than those from less well-off familes • 27% thought people in Britain have similar opportunities regardless of income Discussed in Stephen McKay and Karen Rowlingson ‘ The religion of inequality’ in John HolmwoodA Manifesto for the Public University (Bloomsbury 2011)

  12. But attitudes are softening in the latest survey … Just not in the manner expected (or mobilised by Government rhetoric): • Among those with graduate level qualifications, 42% support the idea that students should pay for the costs of higher education, and 30% believe there should be a reduction in the numbers studying at university. • Among those without qualifications , 11% support the idea that students should pay for the costs of higher education and only 19% believe there should be a reduction in student numbers.

More Related