Killing Thinking (Evans)[2004]

8/13/2019 Killing Thinking (Evans)[2004]

1/181


2/181

Killing Thinking:The Death of the

Universities


3/181

Related t i t leWhere Have Allthe Intellectuals G one? - FrankFuredi


4/181

Killing Thinking:The Death of theUniversities

M R Y E V N S

ont nuumL O N D O N N EW Y O R K


5/181

ContinuumTheTower B u i l d in g 15 Ea st 26th Street1 1 York Road N ew Y or kL o n d o n S E 1 7 N X N Y10010www.continuumbooks.com Mary Evans 2004A ll r ig h ts rese rved . No par t of th i s pu bl ica t ion may be reproduced ort ransmit ted in any form or by any means, electronic ormechanical,i nc lud ing photocopying , r ecord ing , or any informat ion s torage or re tr ievalsystem, w i th ou t pr ior permiss ion in w r i t i n gfrom the publ ishers .British Library Cataloguing in Publication DataA catalogue record fo r this book is available fromth e Bri t i sh Li b r a r y .ISBN 0-8264-7312-1( h a r d b a c k )0 8264 7313-X ( pa pe r ba ck)LibraryofCongress Cataloging in Publication DataA cataloguerecord for this book isavailable from the Library ofCongress.

Typeset by B o o k E n sLtd,Ro ys ton , Her t s .P r i n t ed a nd bound i nGreat B r i t a i n by B i d d i e sLtd,K i ng ' s Lyn n
http://www.continuumbooks.com/http://www.continuumbooks.com/


6/181

Contents

Acknowledgem ents viiIntroduct ion ixThrough theLooking Glass:orwhat

Pierre Bourdieu andKingsley Amishave in common 1

The HeartofDarkness: Audit andCompliance 29

The Language ofLearning 49Gendered Spaces 75IronCages 103SurvivalStrategies 129Notes 155Index 165

V


7/181

his page intentionally left blank


8/181

This book w as wr i t t en in troub led t im es, bo thpersonal and professional. During these months Iw as e x t r e m e ly f o r t u n a t e to receive help an dsupport from a n u m b e r of people, all of w h o mprovided care, concern an d ex t raord ina ry k ind-ness.M y than ks, therefore,toJohnB aldock,DavidBoothroyd, John an d Jean Buss, Sarah Garter ,Rosemary Crompton, Hugh and Diane Gunning-h a m , Kathy Davis , Richard d e Fr iend , Mar thaandJamesDavis,Rod Edm ond , B arbara Einhorn ,Frank Fured i , Sa rah Harman, Jill H e m m i n g s ,JohnJervis, TerryLovell,Pat Macpherson,TraceyMill iner , Anne Phil l ips , Steve Pollock, LizziePollock, Karen Phillips, Frank an d Kathy Park in ,Kate Reed, Mir i Song, Howard an d DeborahStoate, Anne Seller,Janet Sayers,Jackie Stacey,Geoffrey Stephenson,Sarah Tong, Jen n y W ill iam s,Judith Webster, Steve and Jenny Uglow, ClareUngerson and A k a n e Hubuki-Bedford .Tw o final de b t s are considerable:first m yt h a n k sto Ge m m a C h a p m a n for her skilled an d pa t ien ttyp ing . Second , thank you to David , To m a ndJamie for being there .

vii

Acknowledgemen t s


9/181



10/181

'The more it costs, the less it 's w o r t h '(S tuden t slogan, London , 2003)

This book w as inspired by the experience ofworking in a Bri t ish universi tyin the la t ter p a r tofthe t w e n t i e t h c e n t u ry and the first years of thetwenty-fi rs t . It has not been a h a p p y time, sincethose yea rs have seen the t ran s fo r m at io n o fteaching in univers i t ies in to the pa in t ing-by-numbers exerc i se of the hand-out cu l ture and ofmuch research into an atavist ic bat t le for funds .Academic life has become subject to a degree ofbureaucra t ic cont ro l which needs urgent an thro-pological investigation as a new form ofsocial lifean d universi t ies would repay the invest igat ion oft ra ined e thnographers . The rich mix of specieswould be rew ard ing in itself, asw ould the contestbetween the spiri t of the universi ty past with thereal i ty of the universi ty present .We are told th a t this world represents ou r bestna t i o na l hope forintel lectu al vi tal i ty an d creat iv-i ty. We are also told that w e should pay more toe n t e r it and to experience its rich resources. Y et

ix

Introduction


11/181

Kill ing Thinking

those r ich resources are increas ingly marginal izedby cul tures of assessment an d regulation, theheavy costsof which (bo th f i nanc ia lan d intel lec-t ua l ) are to be carr ied by s tudents . Increas ingly,s tuden t s are being asked to pay for the costsof theregu la t ion ofh igher educa t ion r a ther than educa-tion itself. H e n c e the slogan which is quotedabove. Access to h igher educa t ion has becomemore widely avai lable: the implicat ions of thatc h a n g e are the concern of the follow ing pages .

x


12/181

Through the Look ing G lass:or what Pierre Bourdieu and

Kingsley Amis havein common

In the a u t u m n of every yea r , t housands ofs tuden t s begin, or re t u rn to , degree courses a tBritish u niversi ties. The y are met by the s t andardform of welcome, which all inst i tu t ions offer toini t iates: registrat ion, local information and abrief introduction to forms of possible discipline.Students are, of course, not deprived of their ownclothes or subject to m an da tory physical exam -ina t ion bu t they are expected to a t t e n d thewelcome addresses of the major au thor i ty figuresof the univers i ty . Most of those figures will bem e n , and so at the poin t in their lives w h e nstudents leave thei r re-const i tu ted an d re-con-s t ruc ted modern families they are conf ron ted w i tha world in which pat r iarchy isalive an d well . B u tthis book is not about pa t r i a rchy in the u n i -versi t ies (al though references to that poin t m ayoccasional ly em erg e) . R athe r i t i s concerned w i ththe content of con tem pora ry B ritish un iversities:the world ins ide what used to be described as the

1


13/181

Kill ing Thinking

' ivory tower ' or, even more fanciful ly, the 'grovesof academe ' .T he words ' ivory' an d 'groves' con ju re u ppictures of th ings tha t are rare an d beaut i fu l ; agrove suggests pastoral scenes, contemplation inquie t places and a w orld of created be au ty, w hi leivory invokes pictures of tiny, rare objects.JaneA u s t e n , for example , once commented tha t hernovels w ere fashion ed out of a t in y piece of ivory.T he words 'rare' a n d 'beau t i fu l ' are not , perhaps,the most likely words tha t many people would useto describe contemporary universit ies. Since theBritish g o v e r n m e n t of Tony B la ir ma de a deter -m ined com m i tm en t to edu ca te ha l f o f everycohort of e ighteen -year-olds in h ighe r edu cat ion(a figure n ot dissimilarfrom t h a t ofothe r W esterncountr ies) ,un iversities hav e become over-crow dedplaces, physically i l l-prepared for the n u m b e r s ofstudents arr iving on their doorsteps. T he aca-demics in these in s t i tu t ion s have l i tt le or no t im efor con tem pla t ion , pas tora l or otherwise, since ou rt ime is taken u p w i t h the new tasks of theunivers i ty in an age of mass prod u ct ion . Findingan ivory tower in this world would be a majorach ievement ; achieving entry to i t a feat compar-able to cl imbing Everes t wi thout oxygen .A t this poin t it w o u l d be possible to embar k ona l e n g t h y h y m n to the depar ted un ivers i ty , aw orld of in te l lectu al con versat ion , engaged s tu -d e n t s an d l imi t less indulgence. To do so, asanybody who has worked in a universi ty for anysignif icant per iod wou ld know, is to depar t to therealmsoffan tasy . Universi t iesin th is co u n t ry (and

2


14/181

Through the Looking Glass

elsewhere) once admi t ted fewer s tu de n t s and w eremore or less ent irely un-pol iced by the kind ofbureaucra t i c Ro t twe i l e rs n ow snapping at al l ourheels, bu t they were n ot necessari ly admirableins t i tu t ions . W e have to establ ish, therefore, thatw e c a n n o t easily defend the past , or invoke thatpast as an a t t ack on the present . B u t w h at can bedone, and i t is the argument here, is to suggestthat w h at universities have become is a distortionof the values of the academy. The shift suggestedhere isn ot , the refore,a shift from the very good tothe very bad. Rather it is a shift from a collectiveworld in w h i c h i nd e p e nd e n t an d cr i t i ca l thoughtw a s v a l u e d , to a col lect ive world in w h i c huniversi t ies are expected to f u l f i l not these valuesbu t those of the marketp lace and the economy.This discussionis no t derived from a nostalgia forthe past , but afear for thef u tu r e . In part icular theconcern which inspires these pages is tha t of theevolut ion of the un iversi ties in to in s t i tu t ion s w hichon ly serve a very smal l -minded mas t e r : thera t iona l bureaucra t ic s t a te of the twenty-f i rs tc e n t u ry .

This state, the child of the i l l -matched parentsof En l i gh t e nm e n t r a t i o na l i t y and the m a r k e teconomy, has become (like many ch i ld ren ofunhappi ly marr ied parents ) bo th uns tab le an dfearful. Unstab le in the sense that it lurches fromcrisis tocrisisan d fearful in thesensethatitc an n o te n d u r e a discussion of any idea or possibilityoutside its own experience. Often promiscuous inits behaviour and its allegiances, this state isnevertheless profou n dly con servat ive in itschoices

3


15/181

Kill ing Thinking

and i tsva lu es . U n f o r t u n a t e l yfor the social world,u n happy ch i l d r en do no t always contain thei ru n happ i n es s in thei r ow n domestic space. Thisp a r t i c u l a r u n h a p p y c h i l d h a s no w c o m e tod o m i n a t ethew orldinw h ic hwe - andu n ivers it ies- live. In common wi th o ther unhappy ch i ld rent h e n e e d y s ta t e o f t h e t w e n t y - f i rs t c e n t u r yc lamours for a t t en t i on an d recognition and i t sbot tomless claims for en d or s emen t are voiced bypeop l e s u ch a s Char l es C larke , th e B r i t i s hSecretary of State for E d u ca t i on who , in 2003,voiced the v iew tha t educa t ion for i ts own sake'was a bi t d odg y '. This idea (w idely a t tacke d as i twas) never theless m ade t ranspa ren t the idea tha tedu cat ion had no jus t i f ica t ion in i ts ow n term s .T he impl icat ionof ther e m a r kw astha t va luesan dpriori t ies other than those of educat ion shouldoccupy a central place in universi t ies ; the com-ment made expl ic i t the assumpt ion tha t un iver-sitiesare expected to bei n s tr u m e n t sof the interestof the State .Most of those people who have an interest inuniversi t ies and h igher educa t ion know tha t un t i lthe 1960s u n ivers i ty ed u cat ion w as an exper ienceof fewB ri t ish people. The populat ion as a wholedid not go to un ivers i ty ,nor w as the expectat ionofh igher e du ca t ion (in the senseo fedu cat ion afterthe age of e igh teen) an established part of thec u l t u ra l landscape of abo ut ha lf the popu la t ion .(In 1960, the re w ere eigh teen u n iversi t ies inE n g l a n d ; b y 1966 t h i s n u mber h a d a lmos tdoubled . ) When people wen t to univers i ty , priorto the Br i t i sh post-Robbins expansion of the

4


16/181


1960s, they went to a n u m b e r of ' red-br ick 'universi t ies or the univers i t iesof London , Oxfordan d Cambridge. T he mos t f amou s sat ire ofu n ive r s i t y life w h i c h has b e e n p u b l i s h e d inBritain, Kingsley Amis's Lucky Jim, was set inone of those red-brick universi t iesin which therew as little that w as either socially or intellectuallydis t inguished. Indeed , wha t Amis cap tu red in hisnovel was a dynamic of class relations in Englishunivers i t ies : th e i n t e l l i g en t l ow er -m i d d l e -c la s sm an (Lucky Jim ) at tem pt ing toneg otiate a worldin w h ic h the upper classdefine their r ight to ru lethrough cul tural symbols. Jim Dixon 's d r u n k e na t t ack on those sym bols ( the nostalgia for the pastand the denigrat ion ofm ass, an d mass produced,cu l tu re ) is acomplex, bu t forceful a r g u m e n t a b o u thigher educat ion an d culture which repays con-s iderable re-reading.Pu blished in 1954, Lucky Jim set out an accoun tofclass rela tion s in higher educat ion which isstillrelevant ; the ex-President of the United States,Bill Clinton, once famously r e m a r k e d , 'It's theeconomy, stupid ' , in reply to a question a b o u tpol i t ica l pr ior i t i es . Amis recognized not theeconomy of higher educat ion, but its cul ture an dthe cent ra l i ty of ideas about cu l ture , to ideasabout educat ion. In par t icu lar , Amis recognizedboth the p ar t tha t un iversi ties play in bes towingcul tura l au thor i ty at the same t ime as theyprovide a locat ion for genu ine ly c rea t ive work .Amis at tacked the misuse of universities by asocial eli te; almostfiftyyearsafter the publ ica t ionof Lucky Jim the misuse of the universities is more

5


17/181

Kill ing Thinking

likely to be th rough au thor i t a r i an ideas ra the rthan the au thor i t a r ian ind iv idu a l s w ho doggedthe life ofA m is 'santi-heroJim Dixon.W h e n A m is al low s Jim Dixon to voice hisfeeling about univers i t ieshe gives Dixon the spacetovoice tw o themes, both ofw hich are relevant tocon tem porary un ivers i ties . First , he allows Dixonto v e n t his spleen against the w a y s in whichacademics work . Here is Dixon assessing his ownacad em ic essay:

Dixon had read, or began to read, dozens l ikeit, but his ow n seemed worse than most in its airof being convinced of its own usefulness ands ign i f icance . 'In cons ide r ing th i s s t r ange lyneglected topic' , it began. This what neglec tedtopic?Thiss trang e ly w hat top ic?Thiss trang e lyneglected what? H is th inking all this wi thouthav ingde filed and setfire to the typescript on lym ad e him app ear to himself as m ore of ahypocri te an d fool.1

B ut w ha t A m is does w i th th is idea ism ore than tol ampoon academic work . He a lso sugges ts tha tw h a tJim Dixon isactuallydoingm igh t be useful;the problem is the format and the regula tedorgan iza t ion ofacadem ic w ork , soth a t imp o r t a n tissues can be buried or distorted by the processesand the s t ruc tu res w i th in w hich they a re pro-duced. Dixon hasto publish an d therefore hastowri t e articles in order to secure his career; it isthese imperat ives , ra ther than the ac t iv i ty itself,which produces works of mangled an d ridiculousprose.

6


18/181


T he comments quoted above are m a d e by JimDixon at a m o m e n t ofen tire sobriety. In momentsof extreme d run ken n ess Dixon does n ot becomemore tolerant of the academy but his sober self-loa th ing turns to anger agains t au thor i ty , whetherpersonal (in the shape of his Professor) or genera l( the cu l tura l dominance of what Dixon describesas ' the home-made pot tery crowd, the organichusbandry crowd, the recorder-playing crowd' ) .2Barely able to stand, Dixon del ivers a publ iclec turew hich concludes w i th an at tack on al l thosevalues and habi ts which he had most loathed inthe u n iversi ty. Those past im es w hich Dixon lis tedwere n ot merely loathsome in themselves bu tloa thsome because they were taken as mar ks ofcultural superiority and a consequent r ight toassume authori ty over others . Jim Dixon 's a t tackon 'M err ie En glan de ' is the b eg inn ing of thosecu l tu re war s of post-1945 Br i ta in , wars in whi chthe dem ocratiza t ion of cu l ture and consu m pt ionthat occurred after 1945 w as fiercely contested.Access to u niversit ies w aspart of this contest. JimDixon makes n o secret of the fact that universi t iesare not par t of hissocial w orld. But i t ispar t of theargu m en t of th is book tha t the apparen t dem ocra t -ization of the universit ies (certainly in terms ofaccess) has done l i t t le to con t r i bu t e to shiftstowards a greater degree ofdem ocracy. The twowords , a l though connected, are not necessarilysocially related.The figure agains t whomJim Dixon directshisloathing and dislikeis theHead of hisD epar tm en t ,one Professor Welch. The n a m e isappropriate, for

7


19/181

Kill ing Think ing

Welch is a man w i t h a gen ius for avoid ing workand delegating toothers. Welch mayappearas afool, a m a n u n a b l e ton egot ia te arevolving door le talone more sophisticated formsof technology, buthe m atche s Jaros lav Ha sek 's fam ou s charac terSvejk in his abil i ty to keep his distance from an yform ofeffort. Ini t ial ly a figure offu n an d loathingto Dixon, Welch isfinally presented asbenign an dw e,as readers, m igh t see W elch himself as a sym bolof resistance to ideas abou t efficiency, hard workand a p p l i c a t i o n . W e l c h was not m a n a g e r i a lmater ia l , except in the sense that he representedthe class f rom which Br i t i sh managers (andProfessors) were often d rawn . What Welch r ep re -sents is a set of uppe r-class expe ctations ab ou t ar ight to ru le o thers , and to do so through theassertion ofcu ltu ral superiority.

So the i n c o m p e t e n c eof the officer classisp a r t ofthe t he m eofA m is's nove l .To wr i t ea nove l abou tthe u n ivers i ties in order to m ak e th is poin t seem s,a t first s ight , to be s o m e w h a t fanciful . Y et A mi s ,himse l f a u n i v e r s i t y l e c t u r e r , and part of age n era t ion of m en w ho had served in the B r it ishA r m y a n d thus exper ienced the best , a n d thewors t , of Br i t i sh Officers, clearly recognized thecen t ra l i ty ofedu ca t ion to the post-war world. Atthe t im e of the pu bl ica t ion of Lu cky J im un ivers ityeduca t ionwas the preserve of a small minori tyoft he popu la t ion , bu t the popu la r cu l tu re o f thet ime was increasingly recogn izing the part thatskills an d abi l i t i es which were n o t conf ined to theup per-midd le c lass w ereto playin a social worldw h i c h w a s becom ing increas ing ly se lf -consc ious

8


20/181

Through the Look ing Glass

a b o u t b e i n g 'modern' a n d 'scientif ic ' . Science-for-civil ians (in the shape ofcars , dom est ic m ac hin eryan d other consumer goods) was in the process oft r a ns fo rmi ng the domest ic expecta t ions of theBri t ish . This n e w wor ld m ay h a v e b e e n w h a tRicha rd Hoggart w as famously to descr ibe as a'Candy Floss World' bu t i t was one w h i c h w a sdeeply a t t r ac t ive (and ava i l ab le ) to mil l ions ofcit izens.3T he c o m m e n t c i t e d by H o g g a r t a b o ve is inm a n y w a y s d e e p l y iro n i c .Hoggartw a s pro t e s t in g(in 1957, the date of the first publ ica t ion of TheUses o f Literacy] a g a in s t w h a t he saw as thecom m erc ia l ex p lo i ta t ion o f va r iou sforms of sociallife by the Uni ted S ta tes a n d t h e s u b s e q u e n terosion of m o r e o r g a n i c forms of c u l t u r e . T hei r o n y ist h a t H o g g a r t, a m an of the pol i t ical left,should in re t rospec t ive appear to be d e f e n d i n gprecisely th e k i n d o f c u l t u r a l c o n s e r v a ti sm t h a tA m i s- a man whom o v ed from the pol i t ical leftto the pol i t ica l r ight is a t t a c k i n g . A m i s is nowassoc ia ted wi th the v a l u e s of conse rva t i sm a n dr eac t ion and Lucky Jim is con sequ en t ly consid -ered aspart of the career of a man w ho w as tocri t ic ize the expans ion of the un ive r s i t i e s . B u tv a r i o u s a r g u m e n t s n e e d to be d i sen t ang l ed he re :a r g u m e n t s a b o u t c l a s s a n d c u l t u r a l a u t h o r i t y , f o rexample , need to be separa ted from a r g u m e n t sa b o u t w h a t w o u l d n o w bede scribed a s'dumbingdown'. We can read Lucky Jim as a hymn tod e m o c r a c y , s c e p t i c i s m a n d , m o s t i m p o r t a n t o fall, the rejection of cu l tura l a u thor i ty der ivedfrom class posi t ion. T h e u n i v e r s i t y a t w h i c h Jim

9


21/181

Kill ing Thinking

Dixon works (crea ted from Amis ' s own exper i -ence as a L e c t u r e r a t Swansea Univers i ty an d avisit to Leices ter Univers i ty to see his f r iend , an dd ed i ca t ee , P h i l i p L a r k i n ) is not in itself a comici n s t i t u t i o n . W ha t becomes comi c abou tit - andwha t i n c i t e sJim Dixon to d r u n k e n fury - is theassumpt ion t ha t ed u ca t i on , a n d h igher educa t ionin pa r t i cu l a r , iss y n o n y m o u s w i th the accep tanceof cer ta in cu l tura l va lues , and values der ivedfrom the class posi t ion a nd ex perien ce of theeduca ted upper -midd le c l as s . T h u s th e ven e r a -t ion ofW elch and hisw ife form e d ia e v a l E n g l a n dis impl ic i t ly about the venera t ion of a h ierarch-ical , indeed f e u d a l society, a society in which' c u l t u r e ' was abou t t he p r od u c t i on o f pa r t i cu l a rg o o d s a n d t h e p r a c t i s e o f c e r ta i n c u l t u r a lactivi t ies in ways which were socia l ly exclus ive .In w h a t a p p e a r s to be the i n n o c e n t , ifagon iz ing ,exerc i se o f p l ay ing folk m u s i c a n d r e a d i n gCont inen ta l l i t e ra tu re , l u rks the expec ta t ion tha tthese pract ices confer on the prac t i t ioner bo ths e p a r a t i o n f rom t h e m a j o r i t y , a n d e q u a l l yi mpor t an t , au t ho r i t y ove r i t .

Lucky Jim can , therefore, be read as a radical ,an d still d i s tu rb ing c r i t ique of class-based expec-ta t ions of cu l tura l priv ilege and au tho r i ty . T heFrench social theorist Pierre Bo urd i e u has theor-ized preciselythe same ter r i toryasA mis, a rgu ing ,in an essay in Practical Reason, that 'symboliccapi ta l ' (w hich inc lude s cu l tu re ) has a real va luei n the secu r i n g ( an d m a i n t a i n i n g ) o f socia lposition an d privi lege. H e wr i tes :

10


22/181


Symbolic capital is any property (any form ofcapi tal whether physical , economic, cul tural orsocial) when it is perceived by social agentsendowed with categories of perception w hichcause them to know it and to recognize it, togive it va lue ...

4

Alternat ively , as Jim Dixon, speaking ofProfessorWelch, says:H e w a n t s to test m y react ions to cu l t u re , seew h e t h e r I 'm a fi t person to teach in aUniversi ty , see? N o b o d y w ho can't tel l a flutefrom a recorder can be worth hearing on theprice ofbloody cow s u n de r E dw ard theThird.5

Bourd ieu an d Amis both knowhow m u c h c u l tu re ,in all i ts forms, mat ters . In different ways eachm an l ived through the re-wri t ing and the re-posit ion ing of cu ltu re in the 1960s an d the 1970s:Amis came to express grave reservat ions aboutwider access to higher educa t ion , Bourd ieu toarg u e ag ainst the se izingo f 'h ig h ' cu l tu re for socialprivilege. B u tw h at the two m en never abandonedw as recogni t ion of the relat ionship between classan d cul ture: there was, to each of them, n o sensein which a c u l t u re w as ever 'class free'. T heimpor tance of this debate , an d these ideas, toeduca t ion , an d part icular ly higher educat ion, w asequal ly apparent to both and i t is thus that thei rideas provide such a rich source for the discussionof w h a t hashappened - and ish a p p e n i ng - touniversi t ies. We can see, in the work of these twom e n , a discussion of the themes tha t should , bu t

1 1


23/181

Kill ing Thinking

a ll too often do not , inform debates about h ighereduca t ion . Among those themes a re th ree whichmeri t par t icular a t tent ion: the reason for u n i -versities; the relat ionship between univers i t ies ,class an d cu l t u r e ; and the appropr iate form oforganizing universi t ies .The first issue, that of d e b a t e s a b o u t thera t ionale for universi t ies , is one tha t has changeddramat ica l ly in the past f i f t y years . When Amiswro te Lucky Jim universi t ies were s t i l l largely

regarded as necessary train ing groun ds for thesocial eli te and the locus of essential scientificresearch. T he nat ion needed l i t e ra te d ip lomats ,civil servants and all kinds of professional m enw ho could be rel ied upon to recognize thei r ownand the state's interests. At the same t ime thenat ion also needed scientific expert ise of var iouskinds , and u n ivers i ties could (and did ) providethis. Universities of this era were the preserve ofwhi te , middle-class men, in some ways part ofChr is topher CaudwelPs 'dying c u l t u r e ' and theseedbed of the idiot , aggressive, mil i tary cul turea t tacked by Virginia Woolf in Three Guineas? B u tby the end of the 1950s a con s en s u s hadestabl ished the ap pa ren t ly un con tes tab le v iewt h a t a highly educated - by whi ch was m e a n te d u c a t e d at a u n i ve r s i t y - p o p u l a t i o n wasnecessary to m a i n t a i n the economic an d a d m i n -is t rat ive f u n c t i o n s of an ad van ced i n d u s t r i a lsociety. T he univers i t i es therefore acqui red an e w , a n d more cen t ra l , par t in deba tes abou tthe prosperity of the nat ion . Fur thermore , mostWestern social democracies came to see access to

1 2


24/181


universi t ies in the years after the end of theSecond World War as both an indiv idual r ightand a sen sit ive ind icat ion of the e x ten t of socialjust ice in a part icular society.These tw o principles, of social just ice an decon om ic necessity, w ere recognized by theB rit ishR obbins Com m ittee w hich, reported in 1963, an dstated th a t , 'courses of highe r ed u ca t ion should b eavailable for all those who are qualified by abilityan d a tta i n m e n t to pursue them a n d w h o wish todo so'.7 But the R obb i n s Repor t , a l though a lwaystaken as the transforming point in the history oftwen t i e th -cen tury Bri t ish higher educat ion, cameat the en d of adecade ofexpan s ion: the n u m b erofs tudents in full-t ime higher education practicallydoubled from 122,000in 1955 to 216,000in 1962.8T h u s whi le Robbins emphas ized the con t i n u edneed for expansion in higher educat ion i t wasessentially a b o u t fu r t he r expans ions ra ther thanthe inven t ion of an ent i rely n ew approach . TheRobbins Repor t , in mak i n g r ecommen d a t i on sab ou t t he n e ces sa r y i n c reas e i n n u m be r s o fs tudents in higher educat ion , fu r t he r recognizedthe exist ing diversi ty of Br i t i sh h igher educat ion ,from an c i en t to red-brick universi t ies an d fromteacher t raining col legestopolytechnics providin gclearly identified vocat ional t ra in ing .H i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a t the his tor ica l poin t jus tbefore i t s g rea ter expans ion was not , therefore , ah o m o g e n e o u s or nat ional ly cont ro l led exerc ise .W h a t e m e r g e d as the ethos of pos t -Robbins ' ,'new' univers i t ies of the 1960s was an amalgamof l ibera l expec ta t ions a n d asp i ra t ions abou t

13


25/181

Kill ing Thinking

e d u c a t i o n w i t h m o r e m u n d a n e h o p e s a b o u t th ec o n t r i b u t i o n of the 'n e w ' h i g he r ed u ca t i on to thehoped for ' technologica l r e v o lu t io n ' of the 1960s.Th e ne w Br i t i sh un iver s i t i es offered a br oad -bas ed cu r r i cu l u m, bas ed on ideas abou t mu l t i - ,cross- and in te r -d isc ip l ine s . A n ew person w asexpec ted to emerge from a c u r r ic u l u m w h ic hreached (in the i n f a m o u s descr ip t ion of a coursea t the Univers i ty of Sussex)from 'Plato t o N a t o 'a n d w h oem br aced bo t h th e na tu ra l sc i encesa n dth e h u m a n i t i e s (m o s t fam ous ly at the U n i ve r s i tyof K e e l e ) . ' N e w ' u n ivers i t ies becam e rap id lypopu la r wi th s tuden t s , and the s i t e o f a s e t o fc u l t u r a le x p e c t a t io n s a b o u t th e m e a n i n g a n d t h efunc t i on of h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n .Opt imism w as not , however , the only god-pa r en t of the new univers i t ies . A s soon as theconst ruct ion ofthese n ew univers i t iesw as agreed,voices were ra i sed about , first, the kind ofs tu d e n ta b o u t to be e d u c a t e d t h r o u g h p o s t-R o b b i n sexpansion and, second, the na tu re ( and indeedthe qu a l i ty ) o f the edu ca t ion tha t s tude n t s w ou ldreceive. When the Univers i ty Grants Commit teereviewed p lans for the new Univers i ty of York itc o mme n te d that :

The York Board claims that forund e rg radua t e sof the presen t ag e often lacking in familybackground conducive to students ' habits an dc u l t u ra lin teres ts pu rsued in common, res idenceis a part of the benefits of the Universityeduca t ion whose value can scarcely be over-stressed.9

14


26/181


Or to put it a n o th e r w a y , w h e n t h a t c om m e n twasm a d e in 1962, univers i ty adminis t ra tors had someconce rn abou t how, if at al l , they were going tom a k e silk purses out of the sow's ea rs about tod e s c e n d u p o n t h e m .In retrospect the uncon tes t edc u l t u r a l b a g g a g e c o n t a i n e d in the r e m a r k iss t r ik ing ; public schoolboys at Oxbridge areu n p r o b l e m a t i c as u n d e r g r a d u a t e s , bu t n e w a r -r ivals from other des t ina t ions are going to needcompensatory socia l iza t ion torend er them accept -able to the wor ld of the univers i t ies .T he quest ion of how to i n t e g r a t e s t u d e n t s i n t othe world of the universi t ies takes us to the issuew h i c h was to chal lenge , an d c o n t i n u e to chal-l enge , un ive r s i t i e s t h roughou t the 1960s and the1970s,that of cu l tu re , an d i ts pa r t i cu la r manifes t -a t ions in class, race an d g e n d e r . It w o u l d be

foolish to assume that c lass was no t an issue foruniversi t ies ( a n d s tu d e n t sa n d staff in t h e m ) in theBri tain of the first fifty years of the twent ie thc e n t u r y . Numerous wr i t e r s have expressed the i rnega t ive feelings a b o u t the 'Br ideshead Revis i ted 'aspectsofO xford an d Cambr idge : the d o m i n a t i o nofthe public schools, the a lmost comple te absenceofw om en and e thn ic m inor it ies , the often erra t ics t a n d a r d s and the social exclusion of a n y o n e n otfrom the Br i t i sh ru l ing c lass . But a t the same t imeBri t ish u n ivers i ties in these years w ere the hom e ofKeynes , Ru the r ford , Hodgk in , Wi t t gens t e in ,J. H.P l u m b and so on and on - to A n t h o n y B u n t ,Burgess a n d Maclean . Divers i ty was fa r fromabsen t , even if expec ta t ions of h o m o g e n e i t y w e r ethenorm. It was thisexpectationof homogene i ty

15


27/181

Kill ing Thinking

which was to be shat tered by what can on ly bedescribed as the 'cu l tu re wars' of the 1960s andthe 1970s, wars that also took place in the UnitedStates an d m u c h ofW estern Europe.The 'cu l tu re wars ' in the universi t ies arose inpar t from global re-al ignments in the relat ionshipsbe tween genera t ions . ' Y o u t h ' s tar ted to wr i t ewhat was or ig inal ly his own scr ipt , but soon ascript t h a t w as also being re-wri t ten for w o m e n .T he sexual revolu t ion of the 1960s and themassive political movements in the Uni ted Statesabout Civi l Rights an d opposit ion to the war inV i e t n a m g a v e a ne w m e a n i n g to 'polit ical ' an dthe impl ica t ions of tha t idea underpinned then u m e r o u sdeba tes w hich began ab ou t ques tionsofconven t iona l au thor i ty a n d leg i t imacy. S tudentss tar ted to ques t ion what they were taught , andhow they were t a u g h t it. Academics, seldomanx ious to voice their protests through 's i t t ingin ' a t the very in s t i tu t ions w here they w ereemployed, also began to re- think the con ten tand the n a t u re of the cu r r i cu l u m. T w o par t i cu la rexamples of the 'war' over the cur r i cu lum werethe de bate in the Un ivers ity ofC a m b r idg eEn glishFacul ty in the 1970s (a debate which becamef ron t p a g e n e w s a n d resu l t ed in b o t h staffres ignat ions an d some re-wri t ing of the syllabus)and the many ba t t l es in universi t iesin the Uni t edStates over the absenceofboth w omen an d e thn icminor i t i es from social science an d l i t e r a t u resyllabuses.10 T he 'coun te r -cu l tu re ' as i t becamek n o w n in the 1960s and 1970s w as then blamedfor all forms of cul tural decl ine. Phi l ip Larkin , in

6


28/181


hisy o u t h the grammar schoolboyappalled by thea m a t e u r i s m of m u c h of the teaching at theUniversi ty ofOxford (and the a u t h o r of a novel ,Jill, a b o u t the bleak experiences an d social miseryof a grammar school boy at Oxford) came to penthe following lines:

W h e n the Russ ian t anks ro l l wes tward , whatdefence for you and me?Colonel Sloman's EssexR ifles? The Light HorseofL .S .E? 1 1T h e t e rm ' c u l t u r e w a rs ' , a n d m u c h of thel anguage used in the deba tes abou t it, suggestsactual war: blood on the carpe t of the SeniorCommon Room and f ierce loa th ings . But , asTerry Eagleton ha s poin ted out ,

T he Clash be tween Cul ture an d cul ture , how-ever, is no longer simply a batt le of defini t ions,but a global conflict. It is a m a t t e r of a c t ua lpolitics, n ot just academic ones . . . it isp a r t ofthe shape of the world poli t ics of the newm i l l e nn i um . T h o u g h culture, as we shall see, isstill not poli t ically sovereign, it is in t ense lysovereign, i t is intensely relevant to a world inwhich the jo in t weal th of the three richestindividuals isequal to the combined weal th of600 million of the p oorest . It is ju st th a t thec u l t u r e wars which mat te r concern such ques-t ions asethn ic c leansing, not the relat ive meri tsofR a c ine an d soap opera.12

This passage w as w r i t t e n in 2000, and i ts lastsentence ind ica tes an i m p o r t a n t shift on the par t

17


29/181

Kill ing Thinking

of an academic who once played an importantrole in those 'culture wars' which debated thecontent of the university curriculum. As Eagletonpoints out, the battle over 'culture' in highereducation is nolongerabout whatistaught,sinceby 2000 most Western universities had becomepluralist in their definitions of appropriate cur-riculum in higher education. But what thisindicates is a turning away from the previousliberal idea that people could become 'better' or'educated'through the study of certain authors orideas to the view that there is no necessary moralgainin thestudyofparticular individualsortexts.This leaves universities with a moral vacuum attheheart of their teaching of the humanities, andto a certain extent the social sciences. (Thatsentence also raises the question, which needsmore extensive discussion,of the way inwhichit isthehumanities and the social sciences which have'carried' the values of the universities. Battlesabout science in the universities have largely beenabout the sources of f u n d i n g for science andseldom, particularlyin a general sense, about thenatureof thecurriculum.)The lost moral purpose of the teaching ofsubjec ts in the artsand social sciencesis formanypeople anexcellentand to-be-welcomed develop-ment. Not everyone endorses the idea thatMansfield Park an d Middlemarch can teach u smorality and thirty years of structuralism andfeminismhavetaught us alldeepscepticism aboutwords such as the 'family' or 'deviance'. Theliberal university of the 1960s and the 1970s,

8


30/181


w hich w idened i ts cu rr icu lum and ex tended i tsin take , never the less main ta ined th e idea tha thigher educat ion w as about t eaching , an d a b o u tteaching a set ofvalues and a certain famil iar i tyw i t h the process of cri t ical inquiry . That modelhas, in Bri ta in , largely been superseded by a newmodel which makes much more expl ic i t theeconomic role of the univers i t ies . It is thus tha tuniversities become part less of 'cu l tu re ' in theliberal sense of en g ag em en t w i th cer ta in forms an dkinds of knowledge bu t ra the r w i t h a poli t icalc u l t u r e which ism anifestly a b o u t thef u r th e r a n c eof the aims of the Western s ta te . To r e t u r n toEa g l e t o n ' s q uo t a t i o n : th e ' c u l t u r e w a r ' overRac ine orsoap opera islong gone; the rea l cu l turew arisa b o u t national poli t icsand - if weex tendthe argument g loba l ly - a b o u t the legi t imacyofWestern assumpt ions .In the twenty-fi rs t c e n t u r y we can suggest thata concern for Rac ine (or other aspects of 'h igh 'cu l tu re ) is possibly the new radicalism, as indeedis any in teres t in any work or set of ideas whichisremoved from the assimilat ive grasp of globalcapi ta l i sm. In making th i s sugges t ion what isvoiced is a complete shift from the late 1960s andearly 1970s when re -wr i t i ng the cur r i cu lum toinc lude mass cul ture and the c u l t u re of those'minori t ies ' such asw o m en an d non-whi te peoplew as a radica l act iv i ty . Courses about women,about post -colonia l l i tera ture , about the Brit ishsoap opera Eastenders an d M a d o n n a w e re n otalways welcomed wi th open arms; indeed theywere more l ikelyto provoke, on both sides, raised

19


31/181

Kill ing Thinking

voices an d clenched fists. B u t thisn ew con t en t d idclaim its place, and by the 1980s the s t u d y of'mass ' or 'popular' cu l t u r e w as a well-establishedpart of the univers i ty cur r icu lum. Protes t aboutsubject m a t t e r is not over, as recent cri t icismsofthe so-called 'Micky Mouse 'degrees ofM edia an dCul tura l S tudies have demons t ra ted , bu t fierceopposit ion to the very idea of a more inclus ivecur r i cu lum has disappeared. Mockery of degreeswhich inc lude the s t u d y of footbal lers or garagemusic has become mu t ed , n ot least because it hasbecome apparen t tha t a broader cu r r i cu lum, an da broader in take to theu niversi ties ,has done verylittle to shift either the n a t u r e of the British classs t ruc tu re as a whole or the locat ion of signif icanta c a d e m i c p o w e r a n d r es ou r ces . I n d eed , th ec o n t i n u i n g d o m i n a n c e by the un ivers i t i es ofOxford , Cam br idg e and Lon don of a lmos t everyevaluatory l ist in English higher educat ion is anobject lesson in the folly of under -es t imat ing thein te l l igence of 'good ole boys'. Those 'old-typenatural fou led-up guys ' as Phil ip Larkin describedhimself, an d h is ge ne ra tion of O xbr idge edu catedmen, might possess l i t t le in the way of experienceof s t ree t cu l ture , bu t they could tra nsparen t lym atc h i ts vigo ur an d assertiveness.13 A s 'streetf ight ing m e n ' the Vice Chancel lors of Oxford,Cambr idge an d London clearly took n o prisoners.The world in which Vice Chancel lors of richan d privi leged universi t ies had to exercise them-selves to maintain their privi leges was one inwhich n ew forms of organizat ion an d assessmentdemanded al l avai lable skills of i ngenu i ty and

2


32/181


i n te l l igence . I f we wish to n a m e a d a t e on w h i c hthese changes were i n t roduced i n to Eng l i sh ( andindeed Br i t i sh ) un ive r s i t i e s t hen w e h a v e an u m b e r of da t e s from w h i c h we can choose.M ar i lyn S t ra th ern has sugg es ted th a t 1792 i s acrucia l date for universi t ies , s ince i t was in 1792that a m e m b e r of the Univers i ty of C a m b r i d g eproposed tha t a ll a n s w e r s in the t r ipos examina-t ion should be wr i t ten as wel l as verbal . AsS t r a t h e r n c o m m e n t s :

W i t h m e a s u r e m e n t c a m e a new mora l i ty ofa t t a i n m e n t . If h u m a n p e r f o r m a n c e c o u l d b emeasured , then t a rge t s cou ld be set and a imedfor. W h a t isbecam e expl ic it ly jo ine d w i th w ha toughtto be.Thisnew moral i tywas epi tomizedin the concep t ofim p r o v e m e n t . 'Improvement'is w o n d e r f u l l y o p e n - e n d e d , for i t a t o n c edescribes effort a n d resul ts . A n d it invi tes on eto make both ever more effective - a processf rom w h i c h th e t e s t s t h e m s e l v e s a r e n o ti m m u n e : m e a s u r i n g the i m p r o v e m e n t l e a d s toimprov ing the measures .1 4

It is perhaps cheer ing to be r em in d e d t h a t acu l ture of assessmen t and im prove m en t i s no t theinven t ion of the la t e tw e n t ie t h c e n t u r ybu t the latee ighteen th ; equa l ly academics ma y b e depressedto see how li t t lew e have been able to i n t e rv e n e inw h a t c o u l d be in te rpre ted as a forced m a r c htoward sys temat ic a n d i n t r u s i v e a u d i t .The e x p e c t a t i o n s a b o u t a u d i t w h i c h nowdomina t e un ive r s i t i e s do n o t , of course, s implyex ten d, as they did in 1792, to the a u d i t of

21


33/181

Kill ing Thinking

s tuden t s . Staff, both academic an d non-academichave been inc luded in the processes of aud i t , ashave the many forms of reg u la t ion and assessmentw hic h univers i t ies n ow possess. In this world, aworld which we can see as l inked to 1792 by ah i s to ry o f pos t -en l i gh t enment expec t a t ions o fchange, progress an d na t iona l i ty , the par t ic ipantsare offered w h a t is presented as a democra t icright . B u t j u s t as app aren t dem ocracy becomespart of the apparent legi t imacy of universi t ies, sothe defini t ion of that experience becomes lessdemocra t i c by v i r t ue of the na m i ng and theident i f ica t ion of the reasons for universi t ies. In1792 univers i t ies were n ot asked by the State todefine their purpose, nor did the State think itpar t of its re spon sibi li ties to do so. In Bri ta in th ishas now changed an d less distant dates than 1792m a rk shifts of considerable importance for u n i -versities. Tw o dates, in part icular , s tand out : theJarrett Re p o r t of 1985 and theBearing Repor t of1997.15 The Bearing Repor t of higher edu ca t ionexplicitly sta ted that univers i t ies had four func-t ions: they should 'be a signif icant force in theregional economy, support research an d consult-a n c y an d a t t rac t inward inves tment , p rovide n ewe m p l o y m e n t a n d meet l abour marke t needs an dfoster e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p a m o n g s t u d e n t s a n ds t a f f. 1 6 T h i s b l u e - p r i n t f o r t h e f u n c t i o n a n d t h ebehav iour of the universi t ies m et litt le open an dexpl ic i t chal lenge from the most powerfu l inBritish universi t ies,w h o n o do u bt recognized tha tt h e y c o u l d c o n t i n u e to m a i n t a i n t he ir o w nposition in the academic an d indeed the social

22


34/181


world wi thout expl ic i t participation in thisa g e n d a . B u t w h a t Bearing ( a n d th e JarrettRepor t ) bo th did was to impose upon univers i t iesa quasi-democrat ic ethos of col lusion with thevalues of a market economy. Under the umbre l l aof the principle that recipients of publ ic moneyshould be accountab le to publ ic scru t iny w asi nc luded an expl ic i t commitment to a part icularform ofpu bl ic - a publ ic which wholehear ted lyendorsed the m a rk e t .In Min ima Moralia the German social cri t icTheodor Adorno wro te of those whose lives arecommit ted to the 'essential illusionofc h a n g e ' as amask for the recognition ofreal social difference.17The expan sion of recru i tm en t to the universi t iesisa rgua b l y an example of those changes which ineffect bring about li t t le or no real change, bu tnevertheless absorb an d o c c up y h uge a m o un t s ofi nd iv idua l an d social energy. The creat ion of asignif icant sector of the labour market which canbe described as ' g r a d u a t e ' does not in itselfi nd ica te an y absolute increase in h u m a n skill, le ta l o ne h um a n satisfaction. Moreover , the condi-t i o ns und e r w h i c h t h a t expans ion h a s beenachieved, the survei l lance an d s t andard i za t ion ofthe academy, have played thei r ow n par t in thet rans la t ion of univers i t ies from a degree ofi nd e p e nd e nc e to a high degree ofin tegra t ion in tothe valueso f the market economy. T o c a p t u re theshift in the quali ty of the experience of life incontemporary Bri t ish universi t ieswe can re tu rn toAmis. Some twen ty-four years after the publ ica-tion of Lucky Jim Amis publ ished a novel called

23


35/181

Kill ing Thinking

Jake s Thing., in which the subject is not theuniversi t ies but the absence of m iddle-ag ed, m alelibido. B u t since the cent ra lcharacter,Jake, is aunivers i ty teacher w e might read Jake s Thing asan al legory ab ou t the loss of vi ta l i ty in u n iversi tiesthemselves.A mi s,by the t imeof the publ ica t ionofJake s Thing, w as well establ ished in his reac-t ionary persona, and in his scepticism about them erits of the expansion of the n u m b e r sofs tu d en t sin higher educat ion . He re the hero of Amis 'snovel , Jake R ichardson , con fronts one of h ispupils:Now your spel l ing . I 'm qui te to leran t aboutthat , [because a policy ofbeing qu i te in to leran twou ld mul t ip ly the fai lure ra te by someth inglike ten, which would never do] but the samething appl ies . I know some of these names aredifficult; even so, I think i t might pay you fori ns tance to r emember tha t Medi t e r ranean i sspelt withone T an two R's and not theotherw ay round. Especial ly [he went on, s t r iving notto shake from head to foot wi th rage an dcon tem pt as he spoke and sum m on ing to his a idthe thought that in the Oxford of the 1970'splenty of h is col leagues would share MissCalvert 's difficulty] since it appears in theactual t i t le of the sub jec t and is very l ikely tocomein thew ord ingofsomeof the quest ions-

four t imeson this paper , in fact.18

The imag ined s tu d en t in Am is'sfiction has movedf rom the ha rd -work ing M r M ichie o f Lucky J im tothe less-than-enthusiast ic Miss Calvert of Jake s

24


36/181


Thing.Ag enera t ionofmen- ofw hom Lark inandAmisareonlyapart- which a t t empted to claimthe universi t ies for their ow n find tha t these veryinst i tu t ions remain in the same (privi leged) handasever but are nowinvad ed by a popular cu l turetha tboth preserves an d disgu ises class.T he a t t ackon the t radi t ional 'h igh ' c u l t u reofu n iversi tiesh ascome, in Britain, from a complex coalition: left-w ing modernizers ,Tory pragmat i s t s an d al l-partyan d all-class philistines. It isthu s im possible to laythe responsibil i ty for the t rans fo rmat ion of theuniversi t ies at any par t icu lar door: the wish tochange an d chal lenge the cur r i cu lum of un iver -sities is not an academic agenda wi th an y clearparen t age . Dur ing the years when M rs Tha tche rw as Prime Minis ter i t was clear that the Pr imeMinis te r had no interest at all in the idea oflearning for its own sake; as the only PrimeMinis te r in l iv ing memory to be refused anhonorary degree by the Univers i ty of Oxfordthere w as clearly a recognition that MargaretT h a t c h e r and the higher learning had litt le to sayto each other. But at the time of wri t ing there isl i t t le evidence that the Bri t i sh s ta te under aLabour government is more en thusias tic abou ted u cat ion for it s ow n sake.That needy child of il l-matched parents , the contemporary Bri t i sh s ta te ,f inds (in c o m m o n w i t h m a ny unh a p p y c h i l d re n )tha t it is often difficult to concent ra te on thedifficult problems. The quest ion of w h a t e d uc a -tion is, and exac t ly wha t it isfor,has always beena difficult one to answer . Rather than try andt h i nk t h ro ugh a coheren t an sw er , success ive

25


37/181

Killing Thinking

governments clearly preferto accept the pressuresand the interests of the market. Resisting thosepressures would require the exercise of criticalreason, precisely the f a c u l t y now being margin-alizedby the neworderofhighereducation.

In 2003Jack Rosenthal adapted Amis's LuckyJim for British television. In that adaptationDixon's drunken lecture is re-written for thetwen ty- f i r s tcentury,andconcludes withthewords,'we should f ight in the universities for properteaching and make our lives merry'. This re-writingofAmis echoesapleamadebyBourdieuforthe d e f i n i t i o n of scholarship to be 'to playseriously'. He writes - with an optimism thatcannot butappeardoomed to disappointment:

Homo scholasticus or homo academicus is someonewhocan play seriously because his or her state(o rState) assures her the means to do so, that is,free time, outside the urgency or a practical

1situation . . .Perhaps, for some academics, a degree of 'free 'time, in the f o r m a l sense of time which is nottimetabled, still exists. But the 'practical situa-tion',in theshapeof the impositions, expectationsand regulations of the state, increasingly assail thisf r e e d o m. It is not, therefore, that academics arenecessar i ly teaching more than twenty or thirtyyearsago (although many are) but that the 'free 'space that surrounded teaching is no longer, inanysense, definableas 'free ' . In offices and lecturetheatres thatarenowadays costedfor thepurposesof internal budgets, academics c o n f r o n t State-

26


38/181


cons t ruc ted agendas of pe r f o r man ce . The n eed yunstable child that is the British state of thetwenty-f irs t cen t u r y has never learnt t rus t , an dalmos t never prac t i sed coopera t ion . For thisc r ea t u r e , on l y ba t t e r y f a r mi n g for the m i n dpromises t h a t reason will never escape to serveany th ing excep t the most avaricious an d limitedkeeper .

2 7


39/181



40/181

The Hear t o f Darkness:Audit and Compl iance

I am enthusiastically applying for the lecture-ship. M y efficient, i n d e p e n d e n t an d collectiveteach ing methods can grea t ly enhance ther epu ta t ion of you r d epa r t men t . I competen t lyt ransform lec tur ing an d research into signifi-can t l ea rn ing env i ronmen t s . I priori t ise, man-age and co-ordina te inclus ive act ion plans tomeet c o h e r e n t a n d comprehens ive t a rge t s .C u r r e n t l y m y t u t o r i n g e v a l u a t e s c o m p l e xrepresentat ions an d format ions of sexism, het-erosexism, racism an d class oppression. I trainteachers to raise academic achievements byimplem en t ing equal opp or tun i t ies procedures. Iam dedicated to p r o m o t i n g s t i m u l a t i n ga p p r o a c h e s t h a t a re r e l e v a n t to s t u d e n t s 'aspirat ions. I optimistically aid mult idiscipl in-ary reforms to research an d lectu r ing s trateg ies .I am ethical ly an d moral ly accountable togiving grea t educat ional qual i ty . I offer regu la rad v i ce , pas t o r a l g u i d an ce a n d c u r r i c u l u min format ion that develop pragmat ic in i t ia t ives .In t eg ra t ing s tuden t par t i c ipa t ion I encouragetheir academic, personal and social progress.(Let ter ofA ppl ica t ion , UK , 2001)

29


41/181

Kill ing Thinking

The primary task of a useful teacher is to teachhiss tud e n t storecognize 'i n con ven i en t ' facts- Im e a n facts t h a t arc inc o nv e n i e n tfor their pa r tyopinions. And fo r every party opinion there arefacts t h a t are ex t remely inconven ien t , for myopinion n o less than o thers .( 'Science as a Voca t ion ' , in From M ax W e b e r : Essays

in S o c i o l o g y . Rout ledge and Kegan Paul, 1967)T he first qu otat ion above w as not w ri tten for aunivers i ty sat ir ical revue, nor on April 1st. It is areal le t ter (in the sense tha t it is sent in absolu teseriousness) wri t ten insupport of a job applicationin an 'old' Engl ish Univers i ty . It is an il l i teratelet ter , in the sense of the use of the Engl ishl a ngua ge , but i t also suggests, particularly dra-mat ica l ly , the conceptual i l l i teracy of the c u l tu r eof a u d i t an d assessm ent w hich n ow do mina t e sEnglish universities.This cul ture w as introducedw i th terrifying fervour , from the b e g inn ing of the1980s: some landmarks in i ts dark progress acrossthe landscapes of un iversi ties w ere the TeachingQua l i t y Asse s sme n t (TQA) e xerc ise an d theR e se a rc h A sse s sm e n t Exe rc is e (R A E ) . Otherno tab le innova t ions have been the in t ro duc t io nof w h a t is k n o w n as ' ben ch-mark in g ' (in wh ic ha c a d e m i c s u b j e c t s a re expec ted to establ ishexact ly w ha t a grad u a te in tha t subjec t shouldk n o w ) a n d i n t e r n a l a u d i t (a m e a n s by wh ic hcolleagues can police colleagues in their ow nuniversi ty, in addi t ion to offering their servicesforex terna l policing exercises) . M ari lyn Stra the rn ,George Ritzer, Norman Fairclough an d Frank

3


42/181

The Hear t o f Darkness

Furedi have been among those who have takenissuewith this practise of audit and assessment. Allthese authors have, in d i f f e ren t ways, challengedthe assumptions that under-pin and in form thesepractices: the critiques have been fierce, passion-ate and informed by experience of life inun ivers i t i e s in Britain and the United States. Inaddition to these voices, the pages of the T imesHigher Education Supplement ( T H ES ] ring ou t everyweek with the protests of academics againstsurveillance and policing. Very few academicswould be prepared to endorse the value andassumptions of the new audit culture and thefo l lowingcomment, madein2003,istypicalof theviewsofmany:

British academicsare being crushed by assess-mentsoftheir research and teaching . . .Therewas no resistance to the introduction oftheseStalinist measures, least of all from the ViceChancellors, all eager for their CBE's andKnighthoods, their reward for presiding overthe destruction of a once universally admireduniversity system. . .The teaching assessmentisalso ludicrous. I remember inviting a leadingassessor to give a guest lecture to one of myclasses on a subject on which he was anauthority. Since hegaveone of the most ineptlectures I have heard in my life, it isprobablybest that he sticks to assessing how to assessother people.1

Theseremarks were madebyMichaelBurleigh,adistinguished historian and clearly someone for

3


43/181

Kill ing Thinking

w h o m the Bri t i sh aud i t cu l ture had come torepl icate e lements of tha t to ta l it a r ian cu l turew h i c h he described in his w o r k on Hi t l e r ' sG e r m a n y . In the same issue of the T H E S AlisonWolf, a Professor at the University of London'sI n s t i t u t e of Ed u cat ion , voiced the opin ion tha t'W e should, by now, unders tand that univers i t iescan ' t produce complete ly work- ready employ-ees an y more than workplaces can take overed u ca t i on . '2 Thus in one issue of the TH ES (andby n o m e a ns an except ional one) current govern-ment pol icy about the univers i t ies is f o u n dw an t ing in tw o w ays: the defini t ion of the purposeof the univers i ty and the means through whichthat purpose is to be achieved.It w o u l d be possible torep l icate the quo ta t ionsabove a hundred-fo ld . Apar t from those some-w h a t furt ive zealots who must , at some level ,actually endorse the values of the TQA/QualityA s s u r a n c e A g e n c y ( Q A A ) , t h e R A E a n d aun ive rs i ty /workp lace all iance, it is difficult ton am e (or indeed en cou n ter) champions of thesepractices inside the universi t ies. But the secretbrotherhood, and sisterhood, of assessors clearlyexists, s ince wi thou t it the exercises ofassessmen t(and possible punishment) could n ot exist. Thehorrible psychic reali ty of aTQA/QAA assessorisalmost too awfu l tocon templa te , bu t contempla teit w e m u s t if we are to have an y hope ofident i fy ing this beast , for whom ex t inc t ion is theleast that can be hoped. First, w e have torecognize ( u n f o r t u n a t e though i t may be) tha tbeing educated involves assessment an d involves

32


44/181

The Heart of Darkness

be i n g j u d g ed by others. From the very firstmoment when we a re told at nursery school thatou r g lueing leaves som ethingto bedesired , or t ha tour colouring in is bet ter described as colour ingout , we are expected to conform to cer tain normsan d expectat ions. From the age offive toeighteenw e make our way t h r ou g h a school system which,in Bri ta in at least, is now endlessly beset by testsan d goals of a t ta inment . Over- tes t ing in Britishschools has now achieved its own crit ics (and itsow npoli tical rea ct ion , in the form of theresistan ceby many teachers to i t ) but the same widespreadpubl ic sympathy has yet to emerge for the idea ofover- tes t ing in universi t ies.3 Precisely becauseunivers i ty educat ion has , unt i l recent ly, been thepreserve of the few, it is futile to suppose manypeople wi l l extend much sympathy to those whohave manifest ly passed the tests.The cu l t u r a l lagwhich can stilliden tify be ing a s tud en t w i th be ingat the Oxford of Brideshead Revisited is not easilypersuaded of the problems facingacademics.The genera t ion of s tuden t s which is now atuniversi ty in Br i ta in is the first genera t ion whichhas bee n tested s ince the ag e of seven. Test ing hasbecome som ethingof an at ion al pas t ime (for thoseofcou rse forw h om it is not al ready aprofessionalcaree r) in th at schools , u n iversi t ies an d the cu l tu reitself participate in the support , creat ion an dtransmission of tests about all aspects of h u m a nlife. We tes t and moni tor our weight , our heal th ,our abi l i ty to parent and to form las t ing relat ion-ships. T he c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n a c u l t u r e ofappraisa l , beset with the neurot ic anxiet ies which

33


45/181

Kill ing Thinking

this ar t iculates , and the social facts of growinglevels ofobe sity and personal instability is seldomdiscussed. But in this context w e have to ex ami n ethe con ne ction betw een this increasing ly anx iouscu l tu re and univers i ty pract ices .It is thus tha t w e need to try and enter thenightmare world of the univers i ty appraiser orq u a l i t y a s s u r a n c e m a n a g e r . (T h e s i tu a t io n svacant of a l l educat ional per iodicals wi l l demon-strate the w idespread ava i labi l ity of these posts.)W e have to assume (a l though it is somet imes

difficult) tha t these w om en an d men c a n n o t becompared wi th thepiano playerin thebrothel -these people d o ac tua l ly know tha t they areworking in universities. B u t w ehave to ask exactlyhow it isth a t thisfact will be k n ow nor discovered:given that through the manuals which assessorsare t a u g h t to assess it is often difficult to ident i fythe exact process which is being assessed. So wecould perhaps assume that assessors choose theircareers in order to make good the absence of Godin a secu lar society. Ju dg em en t in the twenty-fi rs tc e n t u r yn o long er lies in the han d of God: w i th ou tthis moral compass, however r igid i t may haveappea r ed , w e en thus ias t ica l ly create o ur o wnsystems of j u d g emen t . The facile belief that asecular societyis in somew ay free of the au t hor i t yofjudg em en t w ou ld beproved false by a day spentin a B ri tish u n ive rsi ty. Since God no long er exists,w e have invented assessment. It isthu s possible toimag ine tha t thej u d g i n g ofothers has become anew form of the de m ocrat iza t ion of God. Equ ally,th e express ion ' l i t t le H i t l e r s ' mi g h t have a

3 4


46/181


resonance for many academics ; desp i t e its un f o r -t u n a t e anti-German con no tat ion s, m ost peoplea re fami l i a r w i th the idea tha t there a re somepeople (be they in universi t ies or any otherc o m m u n i t y ) who s imply cannot res is t the oppor-t u n i t y to eva lua te , j udge a n d even reach theparad ise of the appra iser, the con de m n at ion of theappra i s ed . S ince con temporary academics arenow routinely assessed by their peers , thei rs tuden t s , the i r Head of D e p a r tm e n t an d w h i c h -ever ex terna l body happens to be visiting then e i g h b o u r h o o d , th e caree r oppor tun i t i e s for thepo ten t ial assessor are con sidera ble. I t is , in fact , agrow ing sec tor of h igher ed u ca t ion and one w hichoffers a deep ly r eward ing ca ree r t r ack for thosecommit ted to j u d g e m e n t , and the assessment ofw h a t is now k n o w n as 'pe r fo rmance ' .

Wes tern democrac ies have made much, par -t icular ly since the 'fall ' of the Ber l in Wal l in 1989,of the vices and cruel t ies of Stal in 's Russia. Thesesame countr ies have a lso made much of thatr e a d i n g of George Orwel l ' s 1984w hich sees thenovel as simply an at tack on Soviet totali ta rian -i sm. 'Not likeus' goes the refra in of these crit ics,seeing in Orwel l only a cr i t ique which endorsesthe idea of the 'evilempire' of post-1917 Russ i a .The 'People's Tragedy' - w h i c h Orlando Figeshas described as the history of post-revolutionR u s s i a - was u n d o u b t e d l y th a t ; the secondt ragedy of the descen tof the coun t ry i n to g rea t e rpover ty after 1989 isalso pa rt oft h a t history.4 B u tthose in te rpre ta t ion s of h i s tory , and l i t e ra tu re ,w h i c h ident i fy an d assoc ia te to ta l it a r ian ism an d

35


47/181

Kill ing Thinking

author i tar ianism o n l y with state socialism, over-look an d ignore the cap aci ty of the de m ocrat icWest forcon form i tyan d bureaucra t ic cont ro l . W emight note that on 23June 1931, Stalin decidedthat there should be an end to 'special is t-bait ing' :It w o u l d be s tup id a n d u n w i s e to regardpract ical ly every exper t and engineer of theold school as an unde tec ted criminal an dwrecker . . . Hence, the task is to chan g e ou ra t t i t u d etow ard the eng ineers and technic ians ofthe old school, to show them greater at ten t ionand sol ici tude, to display more boldness inenlis t ing their co-operat ion.5

O n this,Joseph Stalin w as some w ay ahead ofcontemporary Brit ish Prime Ministers an dSecret-aries ofSta te for E d u ca t i on , for w h om the idea ofprofessional special izat ion, part icularly insu bjectswhich are n ot read i ly recogn izable in term s oftheirpart in the labour marke t , is a threa t a nd achal leng e. M ost s tr iking ly, acade m ic su bjects suchas his tory seem to chal len ge the im ag inat ion ofpoli t icians.A l thou g h they are them selves produ ctsofasociety w hich has been formed out ofcen turiesofs t rug gle fordem ocracy an d universal welfare itappears difficult for poli t icians to recognize tha tthe world as lived in thelate twent ie th- , or earlytwenty-f i rs t -century Wes tmins te r is not the onlypossible form of social org an iza t ion , nor th a t theproblems which they face are not always uniquein hu man h i s t o r y .T he greatest tw en t i e th-cen tu ry w r it e r to haveconsidered the question of the dominat ion of the

36


48/181

The Hear t of Darkness

bureaucrat ic in Western societies is the Germansociologist M ax Weber . Weber recognized that'modern' ( tha t i s twen t i e th-cen tu ry) bureaucracypresented var ious kindsofproblems, not the leastof whi ch is the 'dictatorship of the official'. Theway out of th is dominat ion was , for Weber ,politics- thea t te m p tbyind iv idu alstoc om m u n -ica te ideas of choice an d d i f ference to thepo pu lat ion . Essen t ial ly, W ebe r hop ed for a societyin which inform eddeba t e- thepracticeofpolitics- could thenbetran slated into socialandpoliticalaction by a bureaucratic machine . W h a t h et hought wou ld ac tua l ly happen - and form a n ypeople exact ly what has happened - isthatthebureaucra t ic would impose its cons t ruc t of m e a n -i n g a n d poss ibi l i ty o n pol i t ics . In W e b e r ' spessimistic pr ed i c t i on , bu r eau c r a t i c d i s c i p l i n ew o u l d b e c o m e the d o m i n a n t form of socialorgan iza t ion:

th e c o n s i s te n t l y r a t io n a l i s e d , m e t h o d i c a l l ytrained an d exact execution of the receivedorder , i n w h i ch a l l pe r s on a l c r i ti c i s m i ssuspended.6Weber 's account of the twent ieth century hasinformed numerous s tud iesofW estern capi ta lism .N ot least among these discussions has been thedeba te abou t the Holocaus t . This discussion w asg en e ra ted by the a r g u m en t o f Z y g m u n t B au m anthat mod er n i t y mad e the Holocaust possible: theabi l i ty (and impulse) to organize an d control thesocial world, together with a sophist icated tech-nology, provided the social means of genocide.7

37


49/181

Kill ing Thinking

The politicsof fierce and obsessive anti-Semitismwere imposed upon a social world which - ass t ud i e s as diverse as The Authoritarian Personalityand The Third Reich have suggested - acceptedand endorsed a culture in which bureaucraticorder wasaccepted.8Theextreme exampleof theHolocaust is (very fortunately) an extraordinarycase of the negative uses of bureaucracy but itshouldserve to remind us that the order producedby bureaucracy - andindeed itspossibilitiesforfa i rness andsocial civility- isnothing withoutapolitics to in form and motivate it. This can beachieved - although theachievement isalwayscontested by thoseof the political Rightwho seeonlythedemocraticin abureaucratic order- butWeber's own view, and that of others who observethe state of the twen ty- f i r s t century, was thatpolitical goals would only be acceptable iftranslatedintothebureaucratic normsof efficient ,procedural rationality and technical skill. Weberwas ultimately pessimistic about the part thatpolitics could play in directing and d e f i n i n gbureaucratic order. His prediction was thatbureaucracies would engulf the political, a pre-dictionwhich invokestheprospectofspontaneousreaction. Those fo rms of reaction can take theforms of fascism or political ideologies which callfor the end of'state control' or 'nannystate'.Allthese apparently libertarian ideas are rooted inideas about the rejection of'control' and 'order',whichmight place them in a Romantic traditionwere they not so often associated with extremedegrees of social conformity.

38


50/181


It is in this a rgu m en t tha t it ispossible to see anaccount of the modern world which preciselydefines the curren t organ iza t ion of Bri t ish uni-versities. The expansion of higher educat ion ismanifest ly a polit ical aim , and (at least in B ri tain )a lways a political aim of the Left. B u t thatexpansion has , in effect, been de-poli t icized bythew ay inw hich it has beencarriedout . T he verybu reau cra t ic s t ruc tu res w hich have been imposedupon universities have achieved both thedevalua-t ion of the eve n tua l goal of a u n ive rs i ty ed uc at ion(the social and the intel lectual value of a f i rs tdegree) an d the vision of de m ocra tic access andp a r t i c i p a t i o n w h i c h i n f o r m e d t h e m o v e m e n ttowards higher part icipat ion levels . There aremore stude n t sin higher educat ion (even ifsom eofthem are not in what i s usual ly assumed to be a' univers i ty ' ) bu t publ ic scept ic i sm about what isachieved at the completion ofthat higher educa-tion has become considerable. At the same t ime,the world of the universities has become domin -ated by the achievemen t of bu rea u cra t ic s tan d-ards an d compliance with prescriptive standards.Whereas once all 'old' univers i t ies had consider-able au t on om y- and yetw ere rem arkably s im i larin m a n yof the s t andards of ach i evemen t - then ew system of universi ty policing has achievedfur ther hierarchies wi th in h igher educat ion . Aton e t ime there w as li t t le difference b e t w e e nuniversi t ies outside Oxford an d Cambr idge , n owOxford an d Cambr idge remain on e el i te amongother eli te groups: the 'Russell ' group , and the' research-led un iversi ties ' being ju s t tw oexam ples.

39


51/181

Kill ing Thinking

Performance tables of all aspectsofu n iv e rs i tylifedivide univers i t ies and, in addi t ion to the u s u a lfierce an d v ic ious compet it ion be tw een ind iv idua lacademics , p ro duc e fierce an d vicious com pet i t ionbetween ins t i tu t ions .Given th a t un ive rs i ti e s a re supposed to con-ta in the most as tu te an d in te l l igent minds oft h e i r g e n e r a t i o n it is ine v i t a b l e t h a t que s t io nsshou ldbea sk e d a b o u thowth i s s i tu a t ionof thed o u b l e a c h i e v e m e n t of the d e v a l u a t i o n a n d d e -d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of h igh e r e d u c a t io n - shouldh a v e c o me a b o u t . O n e awfu l possibility is t h a tacad emi cs , ourse lvesthe p r o d u c t s ofdo ing -w e l l-i n - ex ams , could not resist the possibi l i ty of doingeven m o r e e x a m s a n d tes ts a n d t h u s b i n d i n gourselves in to an endless sado-masochis t ic t rys tw i t h the QAA, TQA a n d R A E assessors.Thisd a r k a n d h ide o us i de a is not w i t h o u t a cer ta ina m o u n t of supp or ting ev idence . For over tw oh u n d r e d y e a r s v a r i o u s forms of c o m m e n t h a v en o t e d th a t the p rofess ion of scholarship can bea c c o mp a n ie d b y th e mo s t h ide o us p e da n t ry a ndpoint lessness . C o m m e n t s a b o u t t h e f i n a l p o i n t -lessness of much of the ac t iv i ty of moderni tyaccord eas ily w i th the f ict ional dep ic t ion ofthosecharac ters such as George Eliot's i m p o t e n t (ina ll senses) scho la r Casaubon w ho de v o te t h e m-selves to a r igid version of scholarship. Eliot 'sp o r t r a y a l of C a s a u b o n in Middlemarch is t ingedw i t h sa dne ss a b o u t the w a s t e of h u m a n life a n dthe loss of the capac i ty for h u m a n love.9 E. P.T h o m p s o n , i n d e s c r i b i n g t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r yscholars, w as less char i table:

4


52/181

The Heart o fDarkness

I have never ceased to be astounded whenobserving the preening an d mating habits offully grown specimens of the species AcademicusSuperciliosus. The behaviour patterns of one ofthe true members of the species are unmistak-able. H e i s inflated with self-esteem a n dperpe tua l ly self-congratulatory as to the highvocation of theuniversity teacher; bu t heknowsa lmos t nothing about any other vocation, andhewillliedownand lethimselfbe walked overif anyone enters from the outer world w h o h a smoneyor power or evena tough lineinrealisttalk . . . Superciliosus is the most divisible a n dreliable creature inthis country, beingsointentupon crafty calculations of short-term advant-ages - this f a vour for his department, thatc h a n c eofpromotion- orupon rollingthe log ofa colleague who, next week, at the nextcommit tee , has promised to run a log for him,that he has never even tried to imagine thewood ou t of which a ll this timber rolls. He canscur ry fur iously a n d se l f- importan t ly around inhiscommittees, likeawhite mouse runningin awheel , while his master is carrying him, cageand all,to besold at thelocalpet-shop.10

These comments, by a man whospent much of hislife (althoughby n omeans all)as anacademic, ringall too true. There is not, as yet, definitiveethnography about British universities in thetwenty-first century, but the habits ofSup erciliosusare all too familiar toanyone who hasworked in auniversity.Thatthisis thecasecan be demonstrated

41


53/181

Kill ing Thinking

by reference to the considerable fict ion thatpresents univers i t ies , an d the people w ho w o rkin them, as often vicious, pet ty and self-seeking.I n d e e d , j u d g i n g by the t es t ament of fict ion,univers i t ies are physical ly dangerous places; fewother i ns t i t u t ion s i nh ab i t ed by middle-class pro-fessionals have such a record for dead bodies.From th e tales of M ichae l In n es an d DorothySayers about murderous go ings-on at the Oxfordof the 1930s to the equally lethal context ofCaro lyn He i lb run ' s Harvard in the 1960s, uni-versities are clearly n ot safe places.

11 Only a foolwould walk to thephotocopier w i thou t w a tch ingher or his back .Thompson ' s image of the a c a d e m i c w h i t emouse being t aken to be sold at the pet shophas, sad to say, now an a w f u l ring of t ruth to i t

since n ot only have univers i t ies commit ted them-selves to the rule of the bureaucra t i c agenda , t heyhave also al lowed themselves to be b o ugh t bycommerce, industry and the market . This pur-chase of the academic whi te mouse has taken tw oforms: the invasion of the c u l t u re of the u n ivers ityby ideas about 'enterprise ' an d 'the needs ofi n d u s t r y ' ; and the l i tera l purchase of u n ivers itya p p o i n t m e n t s or expertise by those individuals orinst i tut ions which wish to enhan ce their poweran d prestige. Of the two, it is a rgua b l y the firstt h a t is the more pernicious, s ince it isless explici t ,more genera l an d less easy to resist. Thoseappoin tments expl ic i t ly funde d by wea l thy i nd i -v idua ls have been subjec t to considerable com-ment (and on occasions rejection by poten t ia l

42


54/181


recipient ins t i tu t ions) but a cu l tu re o f 'enterpr ise 'is more difficult to contest.12 Increasingly too, inthe Bri ta in of the twenty-fi rs t cen t u r y , it becomesmore an d more difficult tochal leng e the very ideath a t u niversi ties should be engaged in 'enterpr ise 'an d 'linksw i thin du s t ry '.T he fol lowing commentsby Char les Clarke demons t ra te how the b o u n d -aries ofdebate have shifted:W h a t I have said on a n u m b e r of occasions,including a t Worcester, is tha t the 'mediaeva lconcept ' of the univers i ty as a communi ty ofscholars is only a very limited justification forthe state tofund the app ara tu s o f u nivers i ties . I tis the wider social an d economic role ofuniversi t ies t ha t justifies more signif icant statefinancialsupport.This isclearly a cent ra l issuefor us to deba te . It is w hy I invited Vice-Chancel lors to aseminar w i th thecon federa tionof B rit ish In d u stry and Patr ic ia H ew it t , theSecretary of State forTrade and Indus t ry . Westarted an excel lent d iscuss ion about how u n i-versities can l ink in bet ter with their localeconomies.13

T he par t icular ly chi l l ing, an d depressing, aspectsof these remarks is that the word 'debate' hastaken on a new, Orwel l i an , mean ing to it: w h a tCharles Clarke envisages as a'debate'is ofcoursea roomfu l of people w i th the same idea , w orkingout how to put that idea in to effect. A n y o n e w h oquest ions the view that un ivers i t i esshould l ink inbetter with their local economy would not beenjoying the heady del ights of a day out w i t h the

43


55/181

Kill ing Thinking

Confedera t ion of Br i t i sh Indus t ry an d Patr iciaH e w i t t . Bu t i f acad emi cs w an t to resist thea s sum p t i o n t ha t we s hou l d en g ag e w i t h t heeconomy and the labour market, questions sti l lr ema i n a bou t how w e shou ld m ake the a r g u m en t .It is not enough , however much w e regret it, tosa y t ha t s u ch a n e n g a g e m e n t is p r o f o u n d l yw i t h o u t in te l lec tua l in teres t .W e might , however , beg in to m a k e the caseforthe absolu te d i s tance of universities from theinterests of the economy through asser t ing , farmore loud ly than has so far been the case, that theboun dar i es o f the academ ic a re very m u ch w or thdefend ing , an d wor th defend ing because theyconst i tu te a set ofstandards an d aspirations thatarc democrat ica l ly avai lable and can genera l lyinform the social world a b o u t the possibilities ofthe in tel lect . Going to univers i ty to learn how toprocess received, bowdlerized knowledge ( theh a n d - o u t c u l t u r e of the Q A A ) is not a b o u tlearn ing to th ink or consider. It isabou t l ea rn inghow to organ ize pre-packaged in form at ion . Am o nk e y could no t do i t, bu t th en a m on key w ouldn ot w a n t to.This form of univers i ty educat ion is' democra t ica l ly ' avai lable in the sense that con-s iderab le n u m b e rs o f e igh teen-year -o lds ( andothers) can now enter un ivers i ty , bu t this is notabout democracy any more thanCharles Clarke's' deba te ' is abou t d i sag reemen t an d discussion. Ademocrat ic universi ty educat ion al lows students toenter the sys tem (and remain wi th in it) w i t hdiverse aspirations an d incl inat ions. Many m ayvery w e ll w a n t to s tudy mediaeval his tory, others

44


56/181


m ay w a n t to s t ud y how to be the best - informedgraduate in social policy that N ewLabour couldwish for. Democracy allows this, as it allowss tudents to be t aught in different ways and as i tal lows academics to pursue d iverse , an d evenidiosyncrat ic, interests .T he 'ivory tow e r' of the academy w as a t tackedin the pas t because i t wasperceived as i r re l evan tto the social world, an d associated too closelyw i t h a caste of over-pr iv il eged w hi te m en . B u tthat second associat ion is i m p o r t a n t , b e c ause itshould remind u s tha t un ivers i t i es have in m a n yw a y s remained se rvan t s of the same masters .Here then, the a r g u m e n t is n ot that universi t iesshou ld re tu rn to a golden, ivory bui l t past , bu tt h a t they shou ld a t t empt to separate themselvesmore than has ever been the case, from theaspira t ions of the m a rk e t e c o no m y . U n t i l a b o u t1970 ( w h e n e n t r y to h igher educa t ion in Br i t a ind id begin to becom e m ore e x ten s ive) B r it ishuniversi t ies were par t lyabout class assim ilation :ensur ing tha t genera t ions ( l a rge lyofy ou n g m e n )cou ld con t i nue to reproduce a par t icu l a r cu l t u re .B u t in ad di t ion to th is , B rit ish u n ivers i t ies w ereabout i n t e l l ec tua l i nves t i ga t ion , abou t da r ing tospecula te a n d a b o u t aff i rming th e possibil i ty thatcr i t ica l inquiry had va lue . It is r o m a n t i c tosuppose that universi t ies, an d people in them,have d i spass iona te ly pursued t ru th . T he historyof i n t e l l e c t u a l life i n t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r yd e m o ns t r a t e s t h a t m a ny of the ideas that havehad a t r a ns fo rm i ng i m p a c t on ou r cu l t u re ( fo re x a m p l e f e m i n i sm a n d psychoana lys i s ) have

45


57/181

Kill ing Thinking

come n o t from the un ivers i t i esbu t from ou t s idet h e m . Never theless un ivers i t i es have a l lowedge n era t ion s of s tu d en ts the space in w hich theycan consider these ideas, not in terms of thedifference w hich these ideas m ak e to the wor ld asa whole, but in terms of the difference these ideasm ak e to o the r ideas . Ide al ly , w ha t can be se t int ra in by a un ivers i ty educa t ion is the abil i ty tor ecogn ize the re l a t ionsh ip be tween ideas , an dhow t o eva l u a t e t hem.L e a r n i n g in this way is l ight years away fromthe 'key skills' model oflearn ing tha t isembodiedin the expectat ions of the Qua l i t y As s u r an ceA ge nc y . This c r ea t u r e from the d ep t hs of hel l iscurr icu lum an d discipline, blind: the content , thesubs t ance of a discipl ine is reduced to a resourcethrough which s tudents can acquire the means ofd e m o ns t r a t i ng t h e 'key ' or ' t ransferable ' skillswhich wil l then be apparent ly 'useful ' to thel abour marke t . In r ev iewing the comments o f anAssociate Director of theQAA on the teaching ofSocia l Anthropology Mar i lyn St ra thern wrote :

HEFCE's spokesman makes it explici t : skillsm u s t bedisembedded . . .How ever, by now thereader wil l not be surprised to learn tha t theskills hav e a lread y been d efin ed . The skills inquest ion have to m a t c h up to cer tain expecta-tions.Nor is it any surpr ise that - in cer tainrespects the expecta t ions mimic the skills ofaud i t p resen ta t ion itself: clar i ty ( rather thanlogic), i t emiza t ion ( r a ther than connec t ion) ,bul le t poin t s ( r a ther than paragraphs ) , a n d

46


58/181


simplified organisa t ion ( ra ther than involu t ionor evolu t ion in a r g u men t ) . Above a l l , n otambi g u i t y , cont rad ic t ion or hesi tat ion.14Stra thern goes on to argue tha t where th i s modelof ' learn ing ' leads is towards the 'de-disciplining'ofu n ivers i ty subjects, and she cites the example ofN ew Zea land ' s credit system ofhigher edu cat ionw hich a l lows s tud en ts to accu m u la te in a range of' learning envi ronments ' . It is thus possible toemerge wi th a degree in t ha t cou n t r y w i thou t an ysubs t an t ive discipl inary t rain ing. As a choiceabou t higher educat ion, the N ew Zealand modelcould elic it com m en ts ab ou t al it tle learning beinga completely pointless thing. But fordem ocracy tohave any meaning we have to respect tha t choiceab ou t the m ean s of h igher edu cat ion . Equa l ly , w em i g h t w a n t topreserve ou r rights asacadem ics ina democracy an d argue tha t 'key' and ' transfer-able' skills do not consti tute a valuable form ofeducat ion an d tha t an y model ofedu ca t ion w hichis based on them should be furiously resisted.

47


59/181



60/181

The Language o fLearningIn British universities all teaching isjudged (bya sort of spectral, invisible or scarcely visiblebody of au thor i t i es ) in t erms of ' l e a rn ingoutcomes ' . As a teacher one is obl iged to actand feel like a sort of au t omat on , s omeon econcerned wi th 'deliver of u n i t ' ( ra ther than' t eaching of cou rse ') the ou tcom e of w hichshould be specifiable in advance. Teaching isbecoming mechanized in a wa y tha t makescaricature seem improbably realistic: Dickens'sM r Gradgr ind would have found it difficult tobelieve. It is not only the teacher w ho becomesan automaton, but a lso the s tudent , for he orshe too is obliged to live up to the ' learn ingoutcomes ' set down in advance, in other wordsin a sense not to live at all, merely to 'receivedeliver ' . (Nicholas Royle , The Uncanny,M an chester Un ivers i ty Press, 2003)

Orwellw as the greatest twentieth-century novelis tto m a k e the case to a genera l audience: wordsmat ter . Phi losophers have long known this , an dlong wri t ten about i t , but George Orwel l ' s 1984

49


61/181

Kill ing Thinking

s tands , for m an y people , as the defini t ive a c c o u n tof the way in which words an d mean i n g s can beabu s ed an d misused . T he f ic t ional wor ld ofOrwell 's 1984w as hard ly the first place in whi chwords had been divorced from the originalmean

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	john-welsh
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Killing Thinking (Evans)[2004]

Documents