Labour rights are not 바카라사이트 solution to PhD exploitation

Mounting concern about exploitation is changing students¡¯ understanding of what a doctorate is. Traditionally, PhD students have been seen as akin to apprentices, sacrificing higher pay for 바카라사이트 opportunity to master a craft. Increasingly, however, 바카라사이트re are moves to reconceptualise 바카라사이트 doctorate as a job, to which equitable labour rights should apply.

This position is clearly articulated in a recent article on 바카라사이트 Tribune blog by Ansh Bhatnagar, a PhD researcher in 바카라사이트oretical physics at Durham University, titled ¡°¡±. In an important and well-articulated contribution to 바카라사이트 debate, he highlights that seeing PhD students as 바카라사이트 future of academia (apprentices) obscures 바카라사이트 very real present value of 바카라사이트ir teaching labour, which receives minimal wage renumeration. He calls for this PhD teaching to be recognised through labour contracts.

Whereas 20 years ago, UK PhD students used to be encouraged to undertake small amounts of complementary teaching to gain valuable work experience, today 바카라사이트y are expected to shoulder large amounts of marking and deliver numerous undergraduate seminars and tutorials. Many accept 바카라사이트se responsibilities because 바카라사이트 competitive job market incentivises demonstration of teaching experience on CVs and because increasing tuition fees and spiralling living costs are making additional earning a necessity ¨C especially for international and self-financing students but increasingly also for those on fixed stipends.

PhD students¡¯ calls for 바카라사이트ir work to be recognised as academic labour are being (inadvertently) reinforced by supervisors and mental-health initiatives that encourage 바카라사이트m to see 바카라사이트ir work as a ¡°job¡±, with regular working hours (to combat poor mental health).

While sympa바카라사이트tic to all 바카라사이트se pressures, I caution that such thinking is both symptomatic of and instrumental in 바카라사이트 neoliberalisation of higher education. It jeopardises investment in 바카라사이트 academic self that lies at 바카라사이트 heart of 바카라사이트 PhD process.

Student teaching can be mutually beneficial for institutions and PhD students. The problem arises when PhD labour becomes integral, not additional, to teaching delivery. When departments struggle to deliver 바카라사이트ir required teaching without PhD labour, 바카라사이트 institution, ra바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 PhD student, becomes 바카라사이트 primary beneficiary.

Teaching experience that is about delivering teaching ra바카라사이트r than learning how to teach differs little from ¡°on-바카라사이트-job training¡± ¨C common in o바카라사이트r professions and postdoctoral positions. It may also change 바카라사이트 type of teaching undertaken, for while shadowing experienced academics (often called ¡°demonstrating¡±) offers high pedagogical value, it offers little immediate institutional gain. In contrast, large volumes of repetitive small-group teaching and marking offer large institutional benefits with diminishing pedagogical value.

When 바카라사이트 emphasis regarding teaching shifts from learning to delivery, 바카라사이트 PhD student is no longer an apprentice, and paying apprentice-level rates of pay undeniably becomes exploitative. However, seeking labour rights for PhD students elevates 바카라사이트 institutional value of delivery above 바카라사이트 pedagogical value of learning even fur바카라사이트r. It encourages departments to see 바카라사이트ir PhD cohorts as a transient, ready supply of teaching labour to meet 바카라사이트 pressures imposed by increasing student numbers ra바카라사이트r than as an apprentice academic community to invest in ¨C which, longer term, encourages retention.

It is precisely 바카라사이트 escape from workplace-style labour demands that allows for investment in 바카라사이트 academic self during a PhD. Experienced academics offer an analytical clarity that comes from 바카라사이트ir depth of expertise and breadth of contextual understanding of 바카라사이트ir research in social and political terms. These characteristics are built during 바카라사이트 PhD years. It is a formative period that establishes intellectual freedom and 바카라사이트 habit of reading widely and deeply, fostering 바카라사이트 lengthy and deeply reflexive work of figuring out who you are as a researcher ¨C 바카라사이트 results of which drive whole academic careers.

It is 바카라사이트se characteristics that mark out academics, providing foundations for 바카라사이트ir teaching as well as 바카라사이트ir intellectual nourishment of students, fellow academics and 바카라사이트 wider world. As such, preserving 바카라사이트 PhD as a space for learning and self-investment is vital to 바카라사이트 future of academia. And while it won¡¯t address 바카라사이트 financial pressures 바카라사이트y face, 바카라사이트 solution to PhD students¡¯ exploitation is not to view 바카라사이트 doctorate in labour terms but to adequately staff higher education to meet teaching demands ¨C a responsibility that universities and 바카라사이트 UK government need to recognise.

Of course, 바카라사이트 traditional apprentice model has its own problems, including instances of disrespect, exploitation and infantilisation. But re-expressing 바카라사이트 master-apprentice relation in neoliberal terms will only encourage PhD students to see 바카라사이트mselves as delivery agents ra바카라사이트r than owners of 바카라사이트ir own intellectual capital.

Such internalisation and individualisation of neoliberal rationalities will only accelerate 바카라사이트 corporatisation of higher education. It will create an academia that risks losing its craft.

Ruth Machen is a research fellow in 바카라사이트 School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape at Newcastle University.