Absolutely true. But at the Copenhagen Business School, really a university with little resemblance to US biz schools was different. Sure they trained people to find jobs, after all what do do in a country of 5 million? But what you describe for Europe was less valid for CBS. OTOH Melbourne is what you describe, corporatized, bureaucratic, run by checking boxes. Maybe anglophone countries have a tendency to go to these market extremes, often with a Foucauldian tendency to self-govern as a form of transparency and thus claim consistency with the perceived virtues of the market.
Louis I have a feeling is targeting social science research that is considered esoteric. But that's a tough call since one's interest is like taste. The market is already weeding out many of these so-called esoteric departments -- foreign languages and area studies to name two, though these are quite utilitarian subjects. If both the left and the right start weeding out academic inquiry not much will be left except for MBAs and nursing and psychology -- a favorite in the US -- and criminology. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Anthony P. D'Costa, Chair & Professor of Contemporary Indian Studies Australia India Institute and School of Social & Political Sciences University of Melbourne 147-149 Barry Street, Carlton VIC 3053, AUSTRALIA Ph: +61 3 9035 6161 Visit the Australia India Institute Website http://www.aii.unimelb.edu.au/ Recent Conference (The Land Question) http://idsk.edu.in/program.php New Book Series (Dynamics of Asian Development) http://www.springer.com/series/13342 Recent books: http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780198082286.do#.UI5Wzmc2dI0 http://www.oup.com/localecatalogue/cls_academic/?i=9780199646210 http://www.anthempress.com/pdf/9780857285041.pdf http://www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?pid=295354 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent from my iPad > On Sep 20, 2014, at 23:11, McDonough, Terrence > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > While most of DiMaggio's piece is easily recognized by those of us with > direct experience of "higher" ed, there developments, at least here in > Europe, that he hasn't kept up with. Here lecturers are increasingly > required to be responsible to the "community." In addition promotion is > increasingly dependent on "impact." Impact initially meant academic impact, > which in practice was citation counts, which administrators could do without > any knowledge of the subject or reading the research. It now means social > impact, which in practice means activities and research which are useful to > business and address the policy priorities of civil service bureaucrats. > Advising establishment politicians is particularly valued along with > promoting "business innovation" and the production of marketable products > with research co-funded by major multi-nationals. Repeating conventional > wisdom in soundbites on morning radio which the university president can > catch in his car on the way to work in the morning makes you a valuable > public intellectual. DiMaggio's portrayal of social science graduate school > is increasingly unrecognizable. At our institution graduate students are > funded by grants from government agencies doing empirical research on > questions like the take up of common agricultural policy programmes, or the > proximity of hospitals to cancer sufferers, which are deemed of practical > interest. The holders of these degrees are hired over others because they > are best equipped to attract further grants. All this is not to mention the > dominance of corporate funding in the science departments. This is all > justified as service to the national interest. > > Teaching is also increasingly valued. New hires at our institution are > virtually required to sign up for a master's degree in third level education > which concentrates on teaching techniques. These techniques are usually > inapplicable because they can't be implemented in the dominant large lecture > classes, but will be demanded for promotion because you have been taught how > to do them. The remainder are about things like "learning outcomes" which > are always related to marketable "skills" which will help the students obtain > employment and promote national economic competitiveness. Finally, the latest > fad is promoted like Who Wants to be a Millionaire style ask the audience > clickers. Applicants for promotion must document that they have done these > things in "teaching portfolios." Customer satisfaction must be demonstrated > in teaching evaluations from students who increasingly don't attend class in > any case. > > All of this is touted as making academia "accountable" to the larger > community. Be very careful what you wish for. > > Terry McDonough > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:29:24 -0400 > From: Louis Proyect <[email protected]> > Subject: [Pen-l] Fwd: Academic Fraud and the Ponzi Scheme of ?Higher > Learning? ? CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names > To: Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition > <[email protected]>, Progressive Economics > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > Why is the vast majority of social science research junk? The answer is > based in how academics are trained in graduate school. What?s perhaps > most disturbing is the complete disinterest of professors training PhD > students in emphasizing the importance of practical research, to be used > in some way to improve democracy and society. This goal is rarely > idealized in graduate training. Typically, students randomly pick > topics they personally think are ?interesting? within a vacuum, despite > the fact that most topics of choice are so narrow and esoteric that they > are of little interest to even most of those within the discipline > itself. Over-specialization leads to a mismatch between research > agendas and teaching. Most research has little value for the typical > undergraduate, leaving many professors ill-equipped for their teaching > duties. > > Professors that prioritize being public intellectuals, writing for > popular as well as academic audiences, are often filtered out during the > hiring process in many schools (at very best this quality is rarely > valued in job searches). There seems to be little room in higher ed > today for people committed to making the world a better place. The > neutering of research serves a broader social purpose, however. If > professors ? those with great resources to expose social injustices and > improve the quality of democracy ? are disinterested in applied > research, then they will play an instrumental role in tacitly > reinforcing official propaganda, deception, and societal indoctrination. > Political and economic elites don?t have to worry about intellectual > challenges from the academy in social scientists produce academic > gibberish and psychobabble. > > full: > http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/19/academic-fraud-and-the-ponzi-scheme-of-higher-learning/ > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
