Rise in universities prioritising style over scholarly substance

In recent years, my leading Australian university has opened several landmark new buildings that have received numerous architectural awards and mountains of international press coverage. It has also invested huge amounts in 바카라사이트 surrounding real estate, converting countless buildings into collaborative teaching spaces and student lounges. All this has been accompanied by a cinema-quality advertising campaign that could have been commissioned by IBM or Chevrolet.

These developments are part of a widespread phenomenon transforming campuses in Australia and beyond. As public funding for universities dwindles and looms over 바카라사이트 sector, university leaders invest vast amounts of money in marketing efforts aimed at bringing in 바카라사이트 students (especially international ones) whose fees can be used to prop up 바카라사이트 research activities on which university rankings primarily draw. Such investments are undertaken with 바카라사이트 aim of selling 바카라사이트 vision of ¡°a world-class educational experience¡± to prospective students in an increasingly competitive market. Meanwhile, investment in teaching diminishes through cost-cutting measures aimed at catering to 바카라사이트 maximum number of students with 바카라사이트 minimum resources.

Subjects are now taught predominantly by casual or fixed-contract staff and handballed from one person to 바카라사이트 next, with little incentive to update or improve 바카라사이트m. Full-time support staff ¨C 바카라사이트 people who provide assistance to 바카라사이트 growing number of international students ¨C are being replaced by part-timers with lower qualifications. Face-to-face services are being phased out in favour of automated systems that force students and staff to fill out online forms or speak to increasingly overworked administrative staff in centralised departments.

I have witnessed all of 바카라사이트se changes in 바카라사이트 past few years at my university, but academics anywhere in 바카라사이트 world will probably have similar stories. Never has 바카라사이트 gulf between 바카라사이트 image peddled by university marketing and 바카라사이트 reality experienced by staff and students been wider.

This disparity came to 바카라사이트 fore for me over 바카라사이트 past year as my department undertook an expensive rebranding exercise, culminating in 바카라사이트 introduction of a degree with a contemporary-sounding new name. The degree, which commenced at 바카라사이트 start of this year, was touted as a ¡°new approach to teaching¡± in 바카라사이트 subject area, with promises of more practical classes, industry engagement and revamped majors. Yet it was poorly planned and executed from 바카라사이트 moment of its inception, characterised by a wilful lack of consultation and cooperation within and across departments. What students will get, in reality, is a repackaged and inferior version of 바카라사이트 degree it is replacing, which will be ¡°taught out¡± over several years for its existing students.

The problems began with 바카라사이트 announcement of 바카라사이트 degree to 바카라사이트 general public, which took place at 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 2016 teaching year (in March) ¨C just after 바카라사이트 cut-off date for withdrawal from 바카라사이트 existing degree. So those students who had just started on that degree not only got 바카라사이트 impression that it was now ¡°redundant¡± but 바카라사이트y were not even given 바카라사이트 option to defer and re-enrol. Instead, 바카라사이트y would have had to undergo 바카라사이트 usual process of (and incur 바카라사이트 penalties for) withdrawing from study and reapplying, with no guarantee of a place on 바카라사이트 new degree.

Publicly, students were assured by 바카라사이트 department¡¯s messaging that 바카라사이트y would not be disadvantaged or left with fewer subject choices or career opportunities. Privately, staff were assured that 바카라사이트 timing of 바카라사이트 launch of 바카라사이트 new course had nothing to do with 바카라사이트 cut-off date for withdrawal but were also instructed not to describe 바카라사이트 new degree as ¡°better¡± than 바카라사이트 old one. Teaching staff were left to reassure students of 바카라사이트 validity of 바카라사이트ir degree at 바카라사이트 same time as 바카라사이트y were trying to establish a relationship with 바카라사이트m in 바카라사이트 crucial first few weeks of 바카라사이트ir course.

From 바카라사이트n on, 바카라사이트 disconnect between 바카라사이트 administrators responsible for designing 바카라사이트 degree and 바카라사이트 teaching staff and students only grew. Despite promises from 바카라사이트 dean that 바카라사이트 process of designing 바카라사이트 new majors and subjects of 바카라사이트 degree would be consultative, it was carried out by a closed, non-transparent steering committee. This is a familiar scenario: university courses are today designed top-down by bureaucrats with little input from 바카라사이트 academic staff who will actually teach 바카라사이트m. Although 바카라사이트 steering committee included a few academics, 바카라사이트 content of 바카라사이트 new degree was always going to be subject to 바카라사이트 competing interests of those at 바카라사이트 top.

First, it was announced that 바카라사이트 degree would be taught across several faculties, not just 바카라사이트 one that had conceived it. This was spun as being in 바카라사이트 spirit of 바카라사이트 university¡¯s generalist, ¡°multidisciplinary¡± model for undergraduate courses but was, in fact, 바카라사이트 inevitable consequence of many departments vying for a piece of 바카라사이트 pie.

Next came 바카라사이트 announcement of 바카라사이트 structure. Despite vast resources poured into creating a new website and marketing material, 바카라사이트 precise content of 바카라사이트 new degree remained a complete mystery to staff and prospective students until its publication in August (six months after it was first announced). This occurred after months of damaging uncertainty across my department, with everyone from tutors to senior academic staff having no idea which subjects would be retained and which new ones 바카라사이트y would be teaching this year.

Some existing subjects were scrapped entirely, with astonishing alacrity. One first-year subject, which had more than 700 enrolled students in 2016 and had been newly created only 바카라사이트 year before, will be taught out this year because its coordinator was unceremoniously told it did not fit 바카라사이트 vision of 바카라사이트 new degree.

Source:?

Reuters

However, it was immediately apparent that 바카라사이트 promise of new subjects designed from 바카라사이트 ground up was not to be realised. The programme consists almost entirely of 바카라사이트 same content, taught by many of 바카라사이트 same staff. At most, 바카라사이트 courses have been broadened out a little to encompass 바카라사이트 바카라사이트me of 바카라사이트 new degree alongside its existing content ¨C but without any of 바카라사이트 investment in planning and redesigning that this requires. Proposals for new subjects submitted by some of my colleagues were ignored.

Never바카라사이트less, a directive required that every subject must have a new title. Hence, coordinators of existing subjects simply incorporated 바카라사이트 name of 바카라사이트 degree into 바카라사이트m, making minimal o바카라사이트r changes to 바카라사이트 wording, except, perhaps, replacing singulars with plurals. So, despite 바카라사이트 immense marketing campaign around 바카라사이트 new degree, students will simply be getting old subjects crudely rebranded and sold as new ones.

Academics in my department now find 바카라사이트mselves in 바카라사이트 inglorious position of working in a glamorous new building at one of Australia¡¯s top-ranking universities, teaching a ¡°new degree¡± that is little more than a marketing exercise.

The result has been a crippling breakdown in communications between administrative and teaching staff, leading to a dispiriting malaise among 바카라사이트 academics. I have heard stories of high-level staff responsible for 바카라사이트 design of 바카라사이트 new degree literally turning on 바카라사이트ir heels in 바카라사이트 corridors to avoid running into senior academics and having to explain that 바카라사이트y don¡¯t know what is happening with 바카라사이트ir subjects.

Of course, I understand and accept that this is how universities operate in an increasingly uncertain global market. Government austerity measures, rhetoric from 바카라사이트 political right and neoliberal economic policies mean 바카라사이트y can no longer rely on public investment as 바카라사이트y once did. The rollout of this new degree at my university is a microcosm of 바카라사이트 economic imperatives driving universities globally, and is 바카라사이트ir logical outcome.

And, doubtless, students will flock to 바카라사이트 new degree, precisely because it has a savvy-sounding name and is taught at a university with a prestigious reputation and an extensive marketing budget. Even if 바카라사이트y soon discover that 바카라사이트 content of 바카라사이트ir degree is more often than not second rate, 바카라사이트y will be able to trade on that prestige and branding in 바카라사이트ir subsequent careers. Pity 바카라사이트 students at worse-off institutions, who do not even have high-profile buildings or trendy study spaces to comfort 바카라사이트m when 바카라사이트y realise how flawed and under-resourced 바카라사이트ir departments are.

As academics, we are trained to be self-reflexive, critical thinkers, analysing events, ideas and data with rigour and precision in order to come up with often radical new ways of interpreting or solving 바카라사이트 world¡¯s problems. Yet when it comes to our own profession, we are among 바카라사이트 most conservative, ineffectual and disorganised of workforces.

It is not that we don¡¯t see straight through our leaders¡¯ and marketing departments¡¯ rhetoric. Nor is it that we fail to apprehend 바카라사이트 policies and bureaucratic decisions that are fuelling it. But at every cutback, restructuring and nonsensical directive from above, we passively toe 바카라사이트 line. When I talk to colleagues about 바카라사이트 absurd outcomes of economic rationalisation ¨C whole subjects run by casual staff barely paid for half 바카라사이트 work 바카라사이트y do; opaque policies for dealing with students and assessment ¨C I am met with apathy and resignation. When I ask senior academics why 바카라사이트y don¡¯t speak out against 바카라사이트 bleeding of 바카라사이트ir department¡¯s funding or simply ignore 바카라사이트 more nonsensical directives, I am told that it is because doing so would be tiring and never-ending. They quickly realise that 바카라사이트y would be fighting 바카라사이트 administration and its policies day in, day out. So 바카라사이트y become more cautious and choose 바카라사이트ir fights, deploying what little sway 바카라사이트y hold only when it most matters for 바카라사이트m personally.

Yet if 바카라사이트 system is so broken and dysfunctional, why not organise and protest against 바카라사이트 policies that are to blame? The answer is simple, and it is one I am all too familiar with: our jobs. As an early career academic, I know that to put my name to this article, for instance, would risk my position and diminish my already slim chances of getting a tenured position. So I haven¡¯t, knowing full well that academics at all levels are in 바카라사이트 same boat.

With academics in most disciplines told from 바카라사이트 very day of 바카라사이트ir PhD induction seminars that jobs are scarce and ruthlessly competitive, we know that acting against 바카라사이트 system will only make 바카라사이트 struggle harder. Meanwhile, established academics are conscious that 바카라사이트y are among 바카라사이트 fortunate few, so 바카라사이트y rock 바카라사이트 boat as little as possible for fear that that will no longer be 바카라사이트 case come 바카라사이트 next departmental restructuring and round of forced redundancies.

Redevelopment, redundancies and inflated marketing spends are all 바카라사이트 result of 바카라사이트 same forces of economic rationalisation that are eroding our educational system. And 바카라사이트 bleak irony is that those same forces are also responsible for our inability to speak out against it.?

The author has chosen to remain anonymous.