The universities are grand things, or so they have come to be. The image of an university is constructed not just of manicured lawns and grand buildings, but also of an unhurried lifestyle and leisurely pursuit of sports or intellect or romantic interests. They embody, typically, privilege and power, and getting through the university and earning the credentials have been, and remains, the rite of passage into socially privileged realms.
However, universities have been changing. They were changing as the societies change and knowledge work becomes more common: Suddenly, it was not just the diplomats and the bridge-building engineers who needed Higher Learning, but even a person who merely programmes a desktop computer and lives in a rented flat needed to attend university. The rhetoric of opportunity society, that one will have a fair shot at life's pleasures no matter where s/he comes from, also made universities central to democratic governance and public conversation: This meant more people going to universities, with diverse intentions and levels of aspirations.
Universities in the post-industrial society are therefore no more initiation places for a genteel life, but institutions of hope and productivity, one that equips the workers and sustains democratic participation. It is not for the few, but for most; it is no longer about privilege and power, but productive and expectant life. However, this is why the divergence of the ideal of the university and social expectations around it are most divergent: Clerk Kerr's vision of multi-varsity, a research institution which produces knowledge, hosts scholarly communities and reach out and influence the society through teaching, which shaped thinking about the universities ever since it was formulated, might actually have been outdated before conception. Kerr, just like Newman before him, might have been articulating the highest ideals that an university represented in his time, but an ideal which already came to pass. Indeed, the Kerr's vision influenced the policy-makers and university administrators, and shaped the rhetoric of college-making across the world. However, by this time, the imperatives, both of the policy-makers and the rising middle classes, have changed.
This creates a mismatch, of vision and required activity, of the institutional aspiration and that of its stakeholders. Indeed, austerity and global recession gives this a crisis dimension, but the need for another university model was created not by the current pressures but the redefined mission of the university. And, the stripped-down version of the university, which is usually associated with profit motive and sneered at, isn't the aberration but possible the new alternative of Kerr's vision, a Minimal University.
Indeed, minimalism isn't consistent with the universality in the concept of the university. But, I shall argue, that the expansive view of the university is a phenomenon rooted in a certain worldview, and wedded to industrial society, and arguably, of the vision of industrial empires. It is the Headquarter of Learning view, which needs the pomp and the grandeur, steeped in mystic and magic, invocation of an imagined medieval aura, an often non-existent heritage and an exclusionary language designed to obfuscate than communicate. But, despite this mystic, the 'barbarians' were indeed knocking at the gates for some time, with their less-than-stellar expectations of 'just a job', a right to live a middle class life of indifferent happiness. This comes to a head as the subsidies stop and one has to turn to private, student contributions towards their education, either in part or full, either through state-sponsored loans or through dipping into family nest eggs.
The Minimal university isn't then just about profit-making, but about keeping the university relevant. Indeed, it is not about stripping all the great universities of their heritage; it is instead about stop the phenomenon of 'Harvard Envy' (a term coined by Andrew Rosen, Kaplan's CEO, which means the ever-upward drive of the universities to add facilities, star professors and other luxurious accessories) and on the other hand, clarifying the expectations and accepting the varieties of the university experience. The top universities will indeed keep doing what they do so well: Produce new knowledge, host communities of scholars and move the communities forward.
However, Minimal University will be designed and serve the rest, and do most of teaching. The Minimal University will do only what the university must do - ensure the standards of learning are appropriate, the students learn meaningfully and have a great experience and that the graduates have the right attributes to become productive workers and contributing citizens. This indeed sounds like the grand scheme of the great visionary, Clark Kerr indeed, just that this part of his vision was never too popular. No one wanted to be minimal, because, academic profession is too concerned about prestige and too little about the service they are expected to render themselves. However, it is in the spirit of service, in minimalism, lies the true heritage of an university, and its real purpose: This is indeed not a For-Profit debasement of the university ideal, but a reconstruction of the original idea and to bring it up to date with time.
At the time when the cost of university education is spiralling out of control, and the universities are failing to provide Hope that its constituents so desperately needs, the Minimal University needs a serious consideration. This thinking is at the heart of what we are building, re-purposing Open software and Open Content, using the existing infrastructure and facilities, connecting the dots between different accreditation agencies and country regulators. This may sound modest, even unambitious, but it is centred around the idea that works and enables, one that gives hope and confidence and not a life of indebtedness, one that frees rather than burdens one with a lifetime of pretension, one that's fit for our age of democratic meritocracy. In short, I believe, it is an idea whose time has indeed come.
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
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.
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
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,
There is no other city like Kolkata for me: It is Home. The only city where I don't have to find a reason to go to, or to love. It is one city hardwired into my identity, and despite being away for a decade, that refuses to go away. People stay away from their homeland for a variety of reasons. But, as I have come to feel, no one can be completely happy to be away. One may find fame or fortune, love and learning, in another land, but they always live an incomplete life. They bring home broken bits of their homeland into their awkward daily existence, a cushion somewhere, a broken conversation in mother tongue some other time, always rediscovering the land they left behind for that brief moment of wanting to be themselves. The cruelest punishment, therefore, for a man who lives abroad is when his love for his land is denied. It is indeed often denied, because the pursuit of work, knowledge or love seemed to have gotten priority over the attraction of the land. This is particularly
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
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
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 ‘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
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.