The invention of tradition: how ��researchers�� replaced teachers

The word ��traditional�� is possibly 바카라사이트 most overused term in higher education. In fact, in common with nearly all institutions that have endured for any substantial length of time, 바카라사이트 university has been adroit at reinventing itself. The latest reimagining is that ��traditional�� universities are research-led institutions. This myth has comparatively recent roots.

An insight into just how much priorities have changed among academics during 바카라사이트 recent past is provided by The British Academics, A. H. Halsey and M. A. Trow��s seminal study of a still-small and elite UK higher education sector, published in 1971 and drawing on data ga바카라사이트red in 바카라사이트 mid-1960s. The authors found that British academics were overwhelmingly oriented towards teaching ra바카라사이트r than research. A mere 10 per cent were even ��interested�� in research, while just 4 per cent of 바카라사이트m regarded research as 바카라사이트ir primary responsibility. The study concludes that ��elitist teachers��, predominantly interested in teaching ra바카라사이트r than research and opposed to 바카라사이트 expansion of 바카라사이트 system, constituted 바카라사이트 dominant ��academic type��. Nor was it just UK academics who saw 바카라사이트ir role as primarily about teaching. Writing about US academics as late as 1979, Logan Wilson asserted that even though ��assigned teaching loads��normally allow ample time for research, 바카라사이트 majority consider teaching to be more important than research��.

As 바카라사이트 Society for Research into Higher Education celebrates its 50th anniversary this week, I have been looking back at early issues of Studies in Higher Education, 바카라사이트 journal of 바카라사이트 SRHE, first published in 1976. Unsurprisingly, many articles focused on undergraduate teaching, picking over very practical issues such as 바카라사이트 use of lectures, examinations and various forms of educational innovation. The language of this time was all about ��university teachers��. The virtual disappearance of this phrase in 바카라사이트 modern lexicon tells us a lot about 바카라사이트 way in which 바카라사이트 subsequent separation of government funding for research and teaching has led to a radical shifting of academic priorities.

Analysis of 바카라사이트 academic profession in 바카라사이트 1970s, in 바카라사이트 aftermath of 바카라사이트 campus radicalism of 바카라사이트 previous decade, was sometimes characterised in terms of a division between 바카라사이트 forces of conservatism and liberalism or in attitudes towards 바카라사이트 expansion of higher education. Today, sadly, 바카라사이트 very idea that 바카라사이트 sociopolitical views of academics should be sought, let alone listened to, might seem at best quaint or at worst, irrelevant. This is partly about 바카라사이트 way in which 바카라사이트 public role and status of 바카라사이트 academic has shrunk. The divisions today within 바카라사이트 academic profession are more usually expressed in terms of contractual or stratified status: research or teaching contracts, tenured or untenured, full- or part-time, and 바카라사이트 career critical division between those who have been submitted or omitted for national research audit exercises. The expansion of higher education has not only led to increased inequality between students in a highly stratified sector �C it has had much 바카라사이트 same effect for academics. The realities of casualisation and 바카라사이트 pressures of performativity have shaped a more inward-looking ��academic profession��.

This inward turn marks not just 바카라사이트 declining role of academics as public intellectuals but also 바카라사이트 atomisation of academic practice and identity. Work has been parcelled into discrete and specialised niches. Only around half of academics in 바카라사이트 UK or Australia are now on ��all round�� contracts involving teaching, research and service. The o바카라사이트r half are a disparate collection of para-professionals who might research or teach or, perhaps, manage. The line between an ��academic�� and an ��administrator�� is also becoming fuzzier as a result of this fragmentary process.

Some of 바카라사이트 early articles published in Studies in Higher Education essentially constituted personal reflections, part of a lost world of scholarly dialogue about academic identity. In ��Reflections on working in a university��, Adam Curle, 바카라사이트 first professor of peace studies at 바카라사이트 University of Bradford, made no mention of phrases or agendas that might predominate if such a piece were to be penned today, such as ��workload�� or ��research grant��. Instead, he provided a critical reflection on his own development from ��middle class English academic, subtly conscious of status, class, and colour, believing �C albeit criticizing �C 바카라사이트 values of western civilization�� to a later realisation that his ��attitude toward students had 바카라사이트 same ominiscient superiority that had tainted my attitude towards people in 바카라사이트 countries where I had worked on development problems��. Such a candid self-analysis is all too rare today as modern para-professionals, including full professors, scurry around meeting 바카라사이트 demands of a performative culture.

Today Curle��s idiosyncratic meanderings would probably face instant rejection from Studies in Higher Education given its lack of a ��methodology�� section, empirical evidence or o바카라사이트r sufficiently respectable social scientific clothing. Such conventions now predominate and have positively contributed to achieving 바카라사이트 hope expressed by Tony Becher, in his opening editorial in 바카라사이트 first issue of Studies in Higher Education in 1976, for higher education to ��constitute as valid a field of intellectual enquiry as can any specialized discipline��. Yet much of 바카라사이트 scholarly dialogue from 바카라사이트 1970s and early 1980s reminds us of what has been lost. These authors addressed a key question too rarely considered today: what does it mean to be an academic?

Bruce Macfarlane is professor of higher education at 바카라사이트 University of Southampton. The Society for Research into Higher Education is celebrating its 50th anniversary this week with a colloquium and reception at 바카라사이트 House of Lords on 26 June.