Perhaps this is a distinctly unfashionable question, particularly when so many new universities are being built all over the world and more people than ever before are going to the university. However, unless one belongs to that rare group of people who think that the government - governments, in this case - knows better, this is a question worth asking, as public money is being poured in, either to build greenfield universities or to pay for students attending private, profit-making, ones.
The university leaders usually treat the purpose of universities as self-evident truth and exempt, conveniently, their own institutions from the critical examination they claim every aspect of life should be subject to. However, given the importance of universities in the contemporary cultural life - they are deemed to be the creators of individual worth as well as its judge - some questions are worth asking. To do so, it's important to start at the very beginning, and ask - what are these institutions for?
One answer to the question above is that it is a wholly inappropriate question. Universities are, as some would want to say, places outside time, islands where knowledge for its own sake could be pursued. It is easy to start believing this: History-making of the western universities have stretched back to Plato's academy, almost 2500 years ago, and the Eastern ones, in India and China, reach back to similar periods. But more mundanely, most universities claim a medieval heritage, with distinctly medieval robes and rituals at convocations, Latin motto, architecture invoking its timelessness and language and lectures built around the monastic ideal. If an institution survived as long, it is part of human society itself and may not need an explicit purpose beyond nourishing the civilization.
It is best to acknowledge the limitations of the above answer - that universities are not really timeless but rather a fairly modern creation in its current form. We may have expropriated the iconography but the modern universities are not much older than railways, if that. In this version of the answer, the universities are everything. They are an institutional form that serve the society by creating and capable professionals, whichever profession may be needed at a given stage of society's development. It is not above the society and its concerns of a particular time, but rather an indispensable institutional form to make social development possible. Going to the university is not going outside the time in a search of knowing oneself, but rather connecting with real life and improving personal prospects.
This vocational/ professional argument is indeed at its strongest, as the private investment pours into the universities of today. But this is in conflict with another claim that it is as old as the university itself - that it creates knowledge. The knowledge creation ideal stems from the reclaimed heritage of Plato's academy, from a time when Gods did not have the final word as they competed between themselves, though it was somewhat muted in the Middle ages when there was nothing much, other than interpreting the God's words, to know. But the platonic ideal was all over in the new incarnation of the universities, particularly the German and American research universities, and they were built around skepticism, research and production of new knowledge as their ideal. The trouble is that this is in direct conflict with the professional preparation function, as the latter assumes the specificity of knowledge and particular time frames to attain this.
The other answer, predictably therefore, is that the university is for everything. It prepares for vocational/professional life, but it also creates new knowledge. This is the omnibus answer, one that is usually offered when no one has really thought what the answer should be. Creeping behind this answer is the university in its current form, large modern corporations which grants degrees, defining what expertise is and certifying individual expertise. From this vantage point, universities are part of a vast global network - and with common norms, language and practices, they are more connected than they appear - focused on organizing and certifying knowledge, gate-keepers of what is worth or not worth knowing.
This 'curating' function of the university makes it sound like an encyclopedia or a museum or a library, with degree-granting being the chief functional distinction. However, the modern university's origins are more recent than any of those three. In fact, it has arisen as a reaction to the print culture and dissemination of popular knowledge, which encyclopedia or the libraries may have represented. Luther may have been an university professor when he unleashed his thesis, but it is his later symbolic role in the reformation - that of order against the chaos of peasant revolt - that signify the role the university plays in the spread of popular enlightenment. It is the state's attempt to create structures of knowledge and define the agenda of development of it, a function it has done remarkably well since the mid-Nineteenth century.
My academic research is increasingly focused on this curating function of the university. I study Indian universities, which were somewhat untouched by German / American ideals of knowledge creation, impossible as that ideal would have been within the confines of colonialism, and was fully focused on organizing knowledge and granting degrees. Their history, therefore, did not elicit much interest as it did not fit the narratives of universal knowledge or the research university ideal. But they were among the first institutions dedicated to curation, subservient to the British state, a model that may throw much analytical insight into the current corporatised form of the universities. And, that is relevant as the universities themselves try to adjust to the world of private knowledge, where corporations privatise knowledge creation functions and recast the curating role of the universities away from public interest to private purpose. This makes universities more relevant, as they represent spaces of negotiation about how the new technologies would actually be developed and new norms would be shaped, and I intend to explore this with a global view of the development and transformation of the universities a hundred years ago.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
A week into lockdown and things are beginning to change. Mornings are late, afternoons are lazier and evenings never end; meditations are filling out the time for Yoga routines and Netflix profiles are strewn with half-finished movies. This state-mandated, state-funded period of idleness is being likened to being called up to serve, but is nothing like that: Such a comparison is really an affront to the idea of service. Instead, this is just one long streak of panic; of the centre not holding and life not going on as usual. With the usual patterns and rules in suspended animation and business talk - and business - being rendered meaningless, space is opening up for unusual questions: Is Capitalism about to end? Is this the death of globalisation? Does it get uglier from here? My grandfather's generation would have scoffed at us. They saw through wars and pandemics. But, in fairness, we haven't had a life-ending crisis of our own. Notwithstanding the experiences of th
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
The Creativity Imperative Businesses today consider creativity of their staff as a critical, possibly the most critical, factor for their ongoing survival. This is because the environment, political, social and commercial, has become so fluid; as Yogi Berra put it, “the future isn’t what it used to be”. Constant change, demanding and more aware customers and citizens, rapid information dissemination through new technologies of information and communication, and intense competitive and regulatory pressures, are pushing companies and people who work for them to innovate and adapt continuously. Set in this context, employee creativity has a whole new meaning. It is traditionally understood as people thinking about products and services, which did not exist before, or tweaking and improving the existing ones. Competitive pressures add to this creativity imperative. Information is fast and cheap, and communication technology is driving the costs of production and distribution
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.