| subtext | |
|
|
subtext
issue three 30 January 2006 ***************************************************** 'Truth: lies open to all' ***************************************************** Every fortnight All editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors at lancaster.ac.uk Please download and print or delete as soon as possible after receipt. Back issues and subscription details can be found at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext. CONTENTS: editorial, Marion McClintock, Alan Whitaker, motto, demotivation, industrial action, ideopolis, Senate, Wallups' World, not in the news, Knowledge Lab, letters, competition ***************************************************** EDITORIAL What is a university for? Behind ongoing discussions amongst senior management about the university's strategic plan - and indeed behind wider debates provoked by the George Fox Six case and the stalled attempt to 'modernise' the governance of the university - lurks this bigger question. No attempt to address the problems and dilemmas currently facing Lancaster is likely to succeed without addressing this deeper kind of question. Peel one layer of problems, and another layer lies beneath it. Keep peeling, and eventually we may find a management culture that has difficulty accepting opposing viewpoints, in which meaningless numerical indicators are mistaken for goals, students are confused with customers, and the pound sign with the purpose of a university. However, there are signs that other ways of answering such 'big' questions are still alive and well, even amongst our senior managers. Subtext learns that the University Strategic Planning Workshop, the retreat for university managers held at Low Wood from 10-12 January (see the Senate report below) was far livelier than the one held by the VC soon after his arrival. Furthermore, we understand that the dominant tone of discussion was often far from convergent with the initial strategy documents that had been prepared for the meeting. When the revised thematic reports are put into the public domain shortly, we trust that they will reflect this, in order to provoke a widespread, open debate about what sort of university we want and ought to be. Of course, the options facing Lancaster are not simple ones. In particular, it is a fantasy to imagine we are facing an easy choice between being a publicly funded scholarly enclave on the one hand, and an economically driven producer of commercially profitable knowledge on the other. On the one hand, universities are not now and arguably never have been isolated from the state and its economic and military interests. But on the other, engagement with wealth creation is never a value-free endeavour, however much those values might be obscured and disguised. So any academic involvement with the commercial sector brings along with it the obligation to raise questions of value and purpose. Our contributed article this issue on the concept of the 'ideopolis' argues that involvement in the knowledge economy can in fact go hand in hand with liberal, even radical, values (although the ideopolitans at Google may have stumbled last week, ethically speaking, in their decision to get involved with the great firewall of China). Such ideas suggest that Lancaster's humanist, critical academic culture, far from being excess baggage to be jettisoned as we board the 'third mission' of knowledge transfer, should instead be treated as an essential element in what marketers would term our 'Unique Selling Point'. Critical thought is not just valuable in itself; it is also part of the engine that produces new knowledge in the first place; it helps uncover alternative future paths that might otherwise remain invisible; and it helps one avoid stumbling into crises and cul-de-sacs. A university that placed it at the heart of its mission - including its third mission - would have even more to offer wider society. ***************************************************** MBE FOR MARION MCCLINTOCK, ACADEMIC REGISTRAR The New Year's Honours list saw Lancaster's Academic Registrar awarded an MBE for services to higher education. However, the item that appeared in LU News - a simple listing of her career appointments and involvement in important projects, such as the RAE - does scant justice to the less tangible but arguably more significant contribution that Marion has made to Lancaster. Throughout her many years here she has been one of the staunchest defenders of the core values we associate with Lancaster, a forthright advocate of the importance of community and collegiality as vital underpinnings of our work, respect for individuals and their views, and the need for democratic involvement of staff and students in the activities and decision making of the University. Readers of subtext may be unaware that as a member of the English department in the early 1970s Marion experienced at first hand how managerial structures of power and decision-making can be used and abused. Her stance in support of tolerance and academic freedom during the so-called 'Craig Affair' almost cost her her job. It was an experience which only served to reinforce her view that good corporate governance requires a system of checks and balances, and for there to be effective mechanisms whereby individuals, including the most senior, can be challenged and held to account. As a University Officer and as secretary to Court, Council and Senate, Marion has sought to ensure such matters do not go by default, and that the rights and authority of each are respected. At various times, her insistence on due process being followed has not been popular with the 'top table', but Marion has never shirked the task of commenting or offering advice, though always in her courteous way. Unfortunately, in recent years, both Senate and Council have provided little support in this, often opting for passivity and acquiescence. The relative lack of interest and debate within Senate on the current proposals to reform our corporate governance is a further indication of this. Marion, rightly, has been described as one of the 'guardians' of the university's values and for this she deserves all our thanks. If such values are to be safeguarded we need others also to engage in this important task. Without this Lancaster is likely to become a very different place to live and work, which is something we may all come to regret. Subtext joins the rest of the university in congratulating Marion. ***************************************************** FAREWELL ALAN WHITAKER As members of the University community are aware, Alan Whitaker has resigned as Pro-VC for College, Staff and Student Affairs and has taken early retirement from the University from the end of 2005. Alan joined the University in 1977 and worked in the Department of Organisation, Work and Technology in the Management School, serving as its Head of Department from 1989-92 and from 1996-98. He also gave much service to AUT on campus over the years. In 1998 he became Pro-VC, a post he held until December 2005. It is as a result of his work in that position that many of us who have come to Lancaster in recent years got to know him. Alan's brief as Pro-VC for College, Staff and Student Affairs included fostering good working relationships between university management and the student body, dealing with the colleges, dealing with student support and welfare, overseeing issues of equal opportunities, widening participation and much else besides. Alan handled this extensive and difficult brief (made infinitely harder because of the vast college and accommodation building scheme) with integrity, honesty and endeavour, balancing his position as a member of the University's senior management with his constant support for staff and students alike. His support for the colleges and his unflagging work on their behalf was unceasing, and in this area he leaves a huge legacy, that hopefully will be built on by his successor. The student body has had much to thank Alan for over the years, and successive LUSU Presidents have testified, in a tribute article to Alan that appeared in SCAN in December, to his openness and willingness to always give advice and help to them in their work. Subtext remembers Alan as someone who gave advice to staff as they struggled over personnel and student issues, and as a constantly friendly voice and source of support. In an environment which has all too often fostered an 'us and them' mind-set, Alan showed that one can serve in senior management and remain part of the university community as a whole. His social presence was never limited to a friendly and warm engagement in administrative affairs, however, for Alan has always been a convivial member of the University, invariably happy to share a pint or two, usually in his favourite Furness Bar, with colleagues and students alike. In that, too, he set an example that would be of value to others in senior management. Sightings of him in Furness bar on a recent Friday evening suggest that he may not have entirely deserted the habitat, and we hope that he will continue to grace us with his presence there in future. Like Marion McClintock, above, Alan too has been a true guardian and staunch defender of the core values we associate with Lancaster, and a powerful advocate for, and worker on behalf of, the values of community and collegiality. A friend of staff and students alike, he is going to be very sorely missed indeed, and the University will be a poorer place for his departure. Subtext wishes to thank Alan for all he has done for the University, and wishes him every happiness in his post-Lancaster University life. ***************************************************** HELLO MOTTO In subtext 2 a reader reminded us of the university motto, 'patet omnibus veritas', usually translated as 'truth lies open to all'. This week, our masthead proudly boasts our very own motto: 'Truth: lies open to all', suggested by Johnny Unger as a rather elegantly acerbic variant. Now we hear from a subtext reader that a similarly repunctuated version of the motto has occasionally appeared on official university documents. Indeed, we are starting to wonder whether the present management might prefer the new, rather Nietzschean, colonised version. If this is the case, subtext is happy to offer the management our own variant, so that we can adopt the unpunctuated version, with its lofty, democratic principles, in return. So if a representative of the management is prepared to meet us at a prearranged location, we are prepared to do a swap. But make no mistake - if we catch wind that anyone has contacted the Crown Prosecution Service, the motto gets it. ***************************************************** DEMOTIVATORS Subtext thanks alert reader Steve Wright, who informed us of the consulting website http://www.despair.com/consulting.html, which contained numerous demotivators that captured our attention, such as: 'Consulting: If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem.' 'Arrogance: The best leaders inspire by example. When that's not an option, brute force works pretty well, too.' 'Conformity: When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other.' There is more than a hint of Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary to these various demotivators, and indeed to our new motto, so we present here a selection of Bierce's definitions that might be of local interest, including his own definition of 'truth' (for the whole glorious thing, originally written in 1911, see http://www.alcyone.com/max/lit/devils): MORAL, adj: Conforming to a local and mutable standard of right. Having the quality of general expediency. TRIAL, n: A formal inquiry designed to prove and put upon record the blameless characters of judges, advocates and jurors. In order to effect this purpose it is necessary to supply a contrast in the person of one who is called the defendant, the prisoner, or the accused. If the contrast is made sufficiently clear this person is made to undergo such an affliction as will give the virtuous gentlemen a comfortable sense of their immunity, added to that of their worth. TRUTH, n: An ingenious compound of desirability and appearance. ***************************************************** LAUT Industrial Action The AUT has recently sent ballots to its members on the matter of industrial action (http:// www.aut.org.uk/paybacktime). According to the AUT, university income in the UK is expected to rise by 25% over the next three years. Universities UK agreed that it would use a significant proportion of this extra income to address the long-term stagnation of our salaries, which have fallen by 40% relative to comparable professions over the last two decades. However, even after the 2004 industrial action, it seems that the struggle continues for staff to receive fair pay and conditions (as reported in subtext 2, staff can perhaps take some solace in the VC's recent substantial pay, and might even enjoy the extra income vicariously). With the possibility of industrial action, other issues warrant attention, too, such as: the misuse of temporary contracts; proper pay for postgraduates (see letters below); fair workloads; problems with bullying; the prosecutorial proclivities of the university; and larger concerns about promoting equal opportunities. So, although the issue at hand is pay and conditions, the vote is also about trying to win other struggles as well. The deadline for receipt of ballots at Electoral Reform Services is 16 February. ***************************************************** THE IDEOPOLIS - CONTRIBUTED ARTICLE Ruth Kelly's speech to Universities UK last September (see http://tinyurl.com/9j7vp) raised hopes amongst business leaders, and concerns amongst critics, about the increasing trends towards corporate domination of academia. In particular, the 'vision' presented by Kelly of vulture-like 'hi-tech companies and venture capitalists' clustering around ... universities ... feeding off their research' seemed to represent to critics a worryingly one-sided view of the role of universities. These phrases from the speech began to circulate, even featuring in the debates over the prosecution of the 'George Fox Six'. Interestingly enough, however, Kelly articulated her vision in the context of a new concept, that of the 'ideopolis'. Here's the oft-cited passage in full: 'Will Hutton has described the concept of the "ideaopolis" [sic], a term coined by the American political commentator John Judis. This vision is of a complex of hi-tech companies and venture capitalists clustering around a university or group of universities, and feeding off their research' (see http://tinyurl.com/bwzq4 for the original Hutton article). Great stuff so far, the top managers of knowledge parks, regional development agencies, businesses and universities might muse. And indeed, if we look at the writings of John Judis, we can clearly see that it is yet another version of the, by now familiar, 'knowledge economy' discourse of university and innovation based economic growth, one of 'cities of ideas' filled with creative workers from knowledge intensive sectors ranging from entertainment, media, health and personal services to telecommunications, infotech and biotech. However, administrators who have already acclimatised themselves to Kelly's one-sided version of 'ideopolis' as merely an engine of economic growth and accumulation may be in for a shock. For central to the 'ideopolis' as outlined by Judis with Ruy Teixeira is the idea that it generates a political culture that emphasizes tolerance, openness and the public good. Drawing on Richard Florida's 'Creative Class' theory, they argue that the successful post-industrial metropolis creates a higher concentration of cultural diversity and bohemian spaces, a crucible for dissident cultural and political forms. As the new 'knowledge based economies' grow, so do the democratic ideopolitan zones. This all led Hutton in his 2001 Observer article drawn on by Kelly's speechwriters, to conclude: 'the protesters against capitalism at Genoa are not alien beings, as Blair wanted to characterise them; they are the more extreme end of a movement that is happening everywhere - a sense that there is a role for public endeavour and that capitalism should operate within limits'. Thus it should come as no surprise that, if we have this strategy for the academy that envisions high tech corporations and venture capitalists clustering around us and feeding from our research, this may also necessarily be bringing along with it something else, something quite different - a growing and vibrant 'ideopolitan' workforce. Such an ideopolitariat is likely to possess, as part of the new subjectivities required for knowledge based production, a certain set of cultural values including respect for human rights, the environment and the right to organise dissent and protest about corporate abuse of these. If the theorists of the ideopolis are right, this would explain the strong and popular response from the inhabitants of both the University and the City of Lancaster that has arisen in protest against the prosecution of the George Fox Six. It would also explain the widespread expectation and desire for more, not less, democratic governance of the university. Indeed it would only come as a shock and a sudden learning process for those who may be migrating from corporate to university management, and who like Ruth Kelly's speechwriters may have engaged in a process of filtering out the main content of the concept of the ideopolis, being left with only the thin neo-liberal dregs of the idea. Larry Reynolds ***************************************************** SENATE REPORT Senate of 18th January was exceptionally short - all done and dusted within an hour. The meeting opened with the VC reporting items of 'good news'. The first was that the 'Bowland Trust' has awarded the university a £5 million 'unencumbered donation'. We didn't learn anything more about the source of the money or what it would be used for. The VC presented this to Senate as an entirely positive outcome, although it is seems that York and Lancaster were competing for the money and that York has won the bulk of the donation. In addition, it was reported that the Hesketh Collection of rare books and manuscripts is to be housed in the University Library for the next decade. There was a short report on the 'Low Wood' gathering - senior managers met at this rather nice hotel in the Lakes to bond and discuss strategy last week. Topics for discussion included 'staff experience', 'student experience', 'core values', 'research focus', 'performance indicators', and 'the new planning framework' (though see editorial for more background). Reports will shortly be posted on the web. Lancaster Ideas Festival will be held on 17 March 2006. Instead of the old inaugural lectures, professors will be given 15-minute slots to present their big ideas. Open to all members of the university. Two internal restructurings were (briefly) discussed and approved. IEPPP is to lose its 'E' as its four environmental sociologists and associated research staff and postgraduates leave to join Sociology. And a new Biomedical Sciences Unit is to be created within the Dept of Biological Sciences, which will both be separate entities for RAE submission purposes. The main item - more for report than discussion - was the outcome of
the long and controversial passage of the proposals on corporate governance
that concern the restructuring of Council and Court (the cause of the
Court rebellion last term). In response to an 'exhausting and exhaustive
consultation process' (Fiona Aiken) a number of concessions have been
made, including: [Eds: subtext invites comment as to whether these concessions are sufficient
to allay worries that the corporate governance plans still represent a
threat to the university's 'core values'.] WALLUPS' WORLD From: Prof. Nigel Wallups, Vice-Chancellor, Lune Valley Enterprise University To: Hon. Bill Rammell, Minister for Higher Education Dear Bill, Oh the frustrations of being a dynamic, forward-thinking VC in the hide-bound world of the English university system! Honestly Bill, what is it with academics? I announce a major deal with an international company, a world-leader in its field, and do I get any thanks for it? Do I vegemite! Admittedly, the company concerned, Bombs-R-Us (mission statement: 'Clearing the ground for reconstruction') and its subsidiary, Friendly Firearms (slogan: 'Everyone can use a Friendly Firearm'), might not be to everyone's taste, but to listen to the squeals of the tree-huggers you'd think I'd signed a contract with the Prince of Darkness himself. I keep explaining that Bombs-R-Us is a responsible weapons manufacturer which scrupulously observes its own voluntary code of conduct. It only sells weapons to those countries which can afford to buy them or where the sale is underpinned by an Export Credit Guarantee. Anyway, most of its business is done with the UK government so there's little chance of our expertise being used in reckless military adventures. But no, the 'intellectuals' have got it into their heads that the regrettable, if unavoidable, killing of civilians by heavy ordnance is wrong, and I point in vain to page twenty-seven of the company report where, beneath a glossy picture of smiling amputee children at play in a crater, the caption clearly reads 'Using our advanced 'dropsafe' targeting and delivery system minimises collateral damage'. I also ask them what the alternatives are? Well, I would if we had a forum for such a discussion - but luckily we don't have a permanent space for the purpose. (By the way, I'm only too happy to advise on the best way of turning a debating chamber into a suite of executive offices if Tony decides to proceed with 'Plan B'). I suppose they'd rather their skills were used to improve living conditions in the developing world - designing safe water and sustainable energy programmes and the like. But as I said to my PVC - 'Do these people have any idea of the difference in budgets between the MoD and the Ministry for Overseas Development?' Some of the staff are worried that the military tie-in will alienate a section of our customer base (or 'students' as they insist on calling them). But I've been talking with our marketing people and they assure me that weaponry is 'sexy' - 'Look at the video games they play and the films they watch, VC, it's shoot-em-ups like Advanced Warfighter that rattle their GameCubes!' Well, must end here - my secretary reminds me that I have to find a broom-cupboard at the north end of campus for meetings of the University Ethics Committee. Best wishes, Nigel ***************************************************** NOT IN THE NEWS Cary Cooper was NOT featured in the following media outlets on 26 January: The Guardian, Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman, and the Radio One Thrash Metal Hour. ***************************************************** NOTICE: HACK THE KNOWLEDGE LAB: Technology, Creativity, Social Organisation A
WEEKEND GATHERING FOR COLLABORATIVE AND CREATIVE REFLECTION Continuing the experimental Knowledge Lab project, this weekend will be a conference without presentations or keynote speeches. The aim is to bring together a variety of people - waged and unwaged thinkers, students, activists, hackers - from all over the world for intense discussion sessions rather than serial monologues, on such topics as: the democratisation of nanotech/biotech/infotech; privacy and surveillance; commodification and art; psychedelics and biological 'enhancements'; military/defence involvement in technological development; feminism and technology; enclosures and commons; Indymedia; publishing politics; and more! There will also be a Hacklab, running hands-on workshops on a variety of Free Software applications (from web browsers, email and encryption programs to VJing tools, video editing, and writing code). Find out more at http://www.knowledgelab.org.uk/wiki/SecondKnowledgeLab or email n.moeller at lancaster.ac.uk. ***************************************************** LETTERS Dear subtext, I know that I'm not alone in being annoyed to hear about the Vice-Chancellor's pay increase, especially in a year when his handling of the George Fox Six case has brought this University into disrepute. His disavowal of responsibility for the prosecution stands in stark contrast with U.S. President Harry Truman. He put a notice on his desk that said 'The Buck Stops here', to make it quite clear where overall responsibility - and leadership - lay (see http://www.trumanlibrary.org/buckstop.htm). Perhaps we could have an appropriate one fashioned in the same style for the VC, saying 'The Buck Goes Elsewhere. The Pounds Stop Here'. Name and address supplied + - + - + - + - + - + - Dear subtext, It's depressing to read that facilities for Postgraduates are still a bone of contention. After graduating, I worked for LUSU with Neil Lent on a research project on the opinions of PG students on provision for them and making suggestions for action. We sent out lots of surveys, conducted group interviews, and produced a report which appears to have not been acted on at all, really. At the time, the profile of postgraduates was slowly increasing, as their numbers started to increase, but the excuse that these were new trends that needed time to be reacted to surely doesn't wash now. Even so, I have to slightly take issue with the idea that this is a problem for the University. If, as the correspondent argues, self-interest politics prevent LUSU sabbaticals and undergraduate non-sabbaticals taking necessary action, then it seems a bit unrealistic to blame University House for bowling the Union Council a googly that they have played, as anticipated, by rejecting the call for a PG sabbatical. If a body representing students can't be convinced for the need to have a full-time elected officer to represent these students, then it's hard to go back to the University and say it's their fault. If there's a lack of PF places on Union Council, then in order to show willing, shouldn't postgraduates be co-ordinating people getting elected to the non-JCR places on Union Council and win the fight there? It might not be easy, but when in politics was any worthwhile change easy? I'd have thought a clear policy way forward was to have a thoroughgoing review of elected officer places. It's been nearly 15 years since the last one, so it's difficult to argue that nothing should change since everything else about the student experience probably has. Dave Boyle Pendle 95 PS - well done to the people getting this going; at one time, email debate and critique through Inkytext contributed a valuable service to the University community, and remains a model of how communication without control-freakery can aid decision making and corporate governance. Good to see something filling the vacuum. + - + - + - + - + - + - Dear subtext, I am writing to further highlight the concerns raised by Andre Oboler in subtext 2 regarding the postgraduate experience at Lancaster. I want to focus specifically on the issue of part-time teaching, as postgraduates remain worryingly vulnerable in terms of short-term contracts, inadequate pay and overloading with extra duties. Most of the Part I teaching across the university is being managed by TA's, who form a significant part of the staff structure at Lancaster. Yet the transience of the TA body limits its ability to politicise these issues. As a postgraduate AUT representative, I have been involved in a recruitment drive to unionise as many TA's as possible, motivated by a sense that the real employer/employee relationship at this institution is obscured by a deeply frustrating illusion of institutional philanthropy. The pay for most postgraduates at Lancaster, for preparing and teaching a seminar (which also includes marking all of the essay and exam scripts relating to the seminar, and pastoral duties), ranges between £25 and £33 'per hour'. This fee might sound reasonable when compared, for example, to the salary earned through cleaning. Yet this payment has also to cover the amount of hours spent engaged with the extra duties outlined above. If 'Low Pay' is defined in a Press Room report on UK Poverty as being less than £6.50 per hour, a figure slightly higher than the national minimum wage of £5.05 for workers over twenty-two, then TA's remuneration might best be called 'Ground Level Pay'. It appears I would be financially better off returning to the part-time cleaning jobs in which I was gainfully employed before coming to Lancaster eight years ago! For most postgraduates, working throughout their studies is a financial necessity - their income is frequently beneath what the DSS pay to claimants. Yet there are other ways in which postgraduate labour is elicited. First, there is the (possibly ill-founded) anxiety that that a CV without teaching experience will not be considered favourably in an application for a full-time academic job. Second, and more justifiably, TA's are often encouraged to do this work for the development of their inter-personal skills and confidence. Finally, the paternalistic 'rite of passage' rationale is also used, implying that teaching seminars will enable the transition from postgraduate (child) to academic (adult). As a TA who has been supported by full and part-time members of staff, I have enjoyed teaching at Lancaster, and only wish that my monthly payslip could evoke similar warm feelings. There are certainly benefits to teaching, but why does the necessary development and acquisition of professional and interpersonal skills come at such a price? And this issue has recently been exacerbated by a pay reduction within my own faculty. The Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences has sanctioned a reduction in TA lecture fees from £70 to £25. If departments follow this guideline, it will mean that TA's will lecture for even less than 'Ground Level Pay', as a £25 fee amounts to less than £1.50 per hour, including preparation time. Although ignorant of the vexations of running a department, I would like to politely ask HoD's to refuse to implement any further reductions in TA pay. For all other members of staff, I would like to ask for your support. Ideas, suggestions and strategies on ways to improve the current working conditions of TA's are also welcome. Finally, I would like to urge all TA's to join a union. Perhaps then those at the bottom of the hierarchy will be able to set an example by refusing to collude in exploitation. As Algernon exclaims in Oscar Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest, 'really, if the lower orders don't set us a good example, what on earth is the use of them?' Best wishes ***************************************************** SUBTEXT COMPETITION Finally, this week, subtext again offers a competition: what might be on a new coat of arms for the university? See a picture of the old, but rarely seen coat of arms (and also information about the motto) at http://tinyurl.com/d2jbe, where we learn that: 'The wavy line refers to the river Lune and the two roses are taken from the arms of the Lancashire county council. The open book represents learning and the Lion comes from the arms of the duchy. The quilled pens refer to the learned activities of the university and the rams head, from which the pens protrude, comes from the county of Westmorland. The supporting bull comes from the arms of Cumberland Council and the dragon represents the ancient kingdom of Cumbria. Finally, the flower comes from the arms of the council and the Fleurs de Lis is from the arms of the city of Lancaster.' You might decide a new university coat of arms might reflect the motto, 'Truth: lies open to all', or possibly a new symbol, or combination of miscellany. We welcome your entries. ***************************************************** The editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order) of: Lenny Baer, Steve Fleetwood, Patrick Hagopian, Gavin Hyman, John Law, Maggie Mort, Rhona O'Brien, Ian Reader and Bronislaw Szerszynski.
|