The university of the future: Stiegler after Derrida

Abstract

Higher education has not been spared from the effects of the disruptive aspects of technology. MOOCs, teach bots, virtual learning platforms, and Wikipedia are among technics marking a digital transformation of knowledge. The question of the university, the foundation of its authority and purpose is more than timely; it is urgent to any future philosophy of higher education. Will the university survive in the future and if so, for what purpose? We examine two philosophers, Jacques Derrida and Bernard Stiegler, who take on this challenge. Derrida, writing at ‘the scene of teaching’, proposes new humanities for a university ‘without condition’, one with increasing autonomy to democratize it further. Stiegler takes issue with him on the conditions of the university of the future. Stiegler offers not an ‘anti-Derridian discourse’ but a ‘deconstruction of a deconstruction’ of Derrida. Stiegler’s critique of Derrida on the role of the professoriate and the university of the future expand the fissure between them. In this article, we argue that Stiegler’s reading of Derrida points to the university not as an anachronistic way of knowing displaced by the digital revolution but as vital to a politics of the spirit in a democratic future.     

The Dialectic of Power in the Workings of University Autonomy

I thank you for the honor of allowing me to speak at this symposium on the autonomy of universities. Let me try to discuss with you for a few minutes the dialectic of university autonomy or, more precisely, the dialectic of power in the workings of university autonomy. First, let me try to explicate these terms — dialectic, power, and workings — which I think reflect the reality of university autonomy. Let us begin with "dialectic." I use this term to indicate that autonomy is not a fact of legal or juridical order. University autonomy is not established by edict nor by any other act of authority. The autonomy of a university institution is, first and foremost, an empirical fact. Thus, in the extreme case, every university is potentially autonomous; yet at the same time every university is also potentially and — again, in the extreme case — in a sense correctively subject to an external authority that may at any time negate its autonomy. The reality of the autonomous university is situated somewhere between these two dialectical poles, whatever be the act of law that formally establishes or negates it.     

The promise of uncertainty: Education,postmodernism and the politics of possibility

This article is set in the context of current moves in British education policy towards a fixed concept of 'what works' and a questionable certainty about 'best practice'. The author explores the value of postmodern thinking in challenging these state-endorsed certainties and in opening up new possibilities for research, critique and practice. She identifies four key areas of educational authority to which postmodernism offers a significant challenge: the authority of power/knowledge; the authority of models of learning; the authority of identity; and the authority of language. The author identifies recent work in a postmodern frame which challenges these authorities, and outlines current educational contexts in which postmodern thinking has a valuable contribution to make. In conclusion, she suggests that postmodernism opens a new window on the politics of possibility, offering one of the most powerful contemporary radical approaches to inquiry and critique available to the sociology of education.     

洪堡大学理念：阐释、发展与思考

洪堡大学理念是西方大学史上经典的大学理念之一。洪堡理念,即学术自由、大学自治、教授治校以及教学与科研相统一,自19世纪以来就成为指导大学发展的圭臬以及判断大学成熟与否的定律。从历史源头阐释洪堡理念,从现实世界把握理念时代发展蕴义,对学术自由与学术责任、大学自治与国家干预、校长治校与教授治学、教学科研与服务相统一进行深入探讨以重新阐释并发展洪堡的大学理念,同时透过洪堡理念框架进一步思考大学理念的基本问题,这对更好地把握大学和大学理念的本质以及办好大学具有重要意义。     

Knowledge relations and epistemic infrastructures as mediators of teachers' collective autonomy

This paper examines how teachers' knowledge relations and the profession's epistemic infrastructure shape collective autonomy. Professionals' autonomy derives partially from their responsibility for a specific knowledge base. This responsibility is currently challenged by educational policies and complex knowledge landscapes. Existing research has shown how epistemic policy instruments impact teachers' autonomy. However, less attention has been paid to how professional autonomy is informed by teachers' knowledge relations, and to collective, rather than individual, aspects of teachers' autonomy. Implications include how teachers can define the role of knowledge resources in professional work, and how the profession can navigate epistemic and political landscapes.     

法国大学自治演进分析

大学自治是几百年来一直被西方奉为圭臬的大学基本理念。自中世纪以来,法国大学的自治历史可以分为三个阶段,即中世纪巴黎大学自治历史,中央集权制下的自治历史,＂五月风暴＂后的自治历史。从法国大学自治历史进程的分析中可以得出如下结论：控制与反控制是大学自治的主题;通过法律形式保障大学自治;教授会在大学自治中发挥重要作用,建立行政契约制度是大学取得自主权的有效途径。     

The social transmission of knowledge at the University: Teaching style and epistemic dependence

It is argued that an epistemic authority would induce greater influence in transmitting knowledge to students when there is a correspondence between the (authoritarian vs. democratic) style of the authority and students’ perceptions of their relation to the authority (high vs. low epistemic dependence). In two studies it was predicted, and found, that students who perceived themselves in a state of low epistemic dependence towards their teachers were more influenced by a democratic than by an authoritarian teaching style. This difference in appropriation was not found for students who perceived themselves in a state of epistemic dependence towards the epistemic authority.     

中国大学教授委员会制度的本质论析

中国大学教授委员会制度具有突出的自身特点,它的基本类型是二元权力分离适度渗透型,它的基本定位是基层学术组织学术事务的决策机构,它的核心职能是治学。中国大学教授委员会制度的本质是“教授治学”。“教授治学”并不是对“教授治校”的否定,而是目前对中国大学教授委员会核心职能更为准确的表述。“教授治学”的内涵是对学术事务包括学科、学术、学风和教学进行管理与决策。     

Resolving faculty disputes: The education ombudsman proposal

Resolution of disputes in higher education traditionally follow guidelines promulgated by university administrators or in response to faculty union contracts. The parties in the process have a vested interest in the outcomes, which often are more responsive to internal politics of the university than to what is fair and right. Decisions are made that are binding, but justice may not have occurred. Modeled after the government ombudsman system that some nations have for settling grievances of citizens against government functionaries, this article proposes the establishment of an education ombudsman for tax supported universities under the auspices of a state legislature for the purpose of resolving disputes in or with state universities. The education ombudsman would have no decision-making authority but strong recommendation power. As an outsider, he would be free of internal politics at the university and have no vested interest in the outcomes of dispute resolutions other than to serve justice and the public's interest.     

西方大学权力模式的运演及其特色

西方国家大学权力的分配与控制,从中世纪的意大利开始,经由英、法、德而至美国,既因时空不同而有别,又有其变迁传承的内在逻辑。从总体来看,西方大学权力模式的变迁是为适应社会发展和增强自身活力,寻求最优化权力配置、实现自主发展的过程。在调整权力关系、优化权力配置的过程中,逐步形成了以意、法、德三国为代表的政府和教授权力相对强势、院校权力相对弱势的欧陆模式,政府、高校、教授权力相对均衡的英国模式以及院校权力相对强势、政府和教授权力相对弱势的美国模式,表现出学术权与行政权并存,教授治校与教授治学共在,政府有限控制与大学有限自治制衡,校内自主权与校外参与权相结合的四大特征。     

Epistemic constraint and teaching style

An experimental study investigated the influence of informational dependence on information appropriation as a function of epistemic authority’s styles. In a 2×2 design, university students were informed that acknowledging epistemic dependence was related either to academic success or to academic failure, and were exposed to controversial information from an epistemic authority that used either an authoritarian or a democratic style. The main dependent variable was the extent to which participants appropriated the controversial information. Firstly the results showed that students were more inclined to admit that their own academic competence depended on the information delivered by the teachers when epistemic dependence was related to success rather than to failure. Secondly, the admittance of dependence had a different impact on information appropriation according to the authority’s style. Admittance increased appropriation under a democratic style whereas it decreased appropriation under an authoritarian style.     

大学教授的教学观念及其对大学的影响

大学教授与学者的区别，是其有教学观念，而大学教授的教学观念又对大学的发展直接产生影响。大学教授教学观念的基本特征有：高深学问观，传知高足观，培养专才观。教学观念的文化类型有：知识本位的学科教学文化，经验本位的学院派教学文化，活动本位的创新教学文化。对大学的发展和影响表现在：以学术权威为核心的显性影响，以集体权威为主干的隐性影响，以教授为中心的校园文化影响。     

The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors

There is a growing body of research on teachers' pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), yet most of it has focused on subject-matter-bounded (specific) PCK and involves teachers in the general classroom (elementary and secondary grades). This study explorers the kinds of interpretative frameworks that university professors use in constructing and implementing PCK. The basic purpose of this study was to better understand the “generic” nature of PCK among exceptional university-level teachers. It analyzes generic PCK in professors across several fields (biology, business, education, kinesiology, music, nursing, special education, and speech communication). Data were obtained from phenomenological interviews with 10 university professors, all of them experienced teachers and recognized by their peers and administrators as eminent. The results emerged from qualitative analysis of the data, and indicate that these professors not only construct and use generic PCK in very similar ways but also that they apply generic PCK in ways that reflect Rubin's (1989) notion of “pedagogical intelligence” and Porter and Brophy's (1988) insights on good teaching. Five generic PCK components emerged: knowledge about (a) the subject matter, (b) the students, (c) numerous instructional strategies, (d) the teaching context, and (e) one's teaching purposes. In addition, the results problematize the traditional “scholar-teacher” dichotomy in higher education.     

The Public's Image of University Professors

The basic purpose of this study was to evaluate the public's image of university professors compared to other professional groups. A questionnaire was administered by telephone to a random sample of 150 residents of a southern metropolitan area. Respondents were asked to evaluate seven professions on : (1) social standing (prestige), (2) honesty and ethical standards, (3) importance to society and nation, and (4) interesting and challenging occupation. Overall ratings indicate that university professors were rated significantly lower than doctors, dentists, pharmacists, and clergy, the same as lawyers, and higher than bankers. Cross tabulations of respondents by income, age, education, and sex revealed that there were no significant differences in the ratings of university professor on the basis of the characteristics indicating that this relatively low opinion of professors is a view shared by all subgroups of respondents.     

Neoliberalism as exception: the New High-Quality School project in Shanghai

ABSTRACT

Drawing upon Aihwa Ong’s concept of ‘neoliberalism as exception’, this paper explores how the education authority in Shanghai capitalises on neoliberal knowledge, techniques and logics to address local challenges. Through the creation of ‘new high-quality schools’ that is accompanied by a new assessment system, the authority hopes to persuade parents to choose non-elite schools instead of prestigious schools that excel in academic performance. The neoliberal strategy of school choice is supported by the policy of school autonomy for educators to go beyond test scores to promote holistic development in students. The paper underlines the indigenisation of neoliberalism through policy dynamics where multiple educational stakeholders interact with and mutually influence one another. By highlighting ‘neoliberalism with Chinese characteristics’ in Shanghai, this study demonstrates how neoliberalism coexists with state forms, cultural norms and social practices in a particular locality.     

An Epistemic Frame Analysis of Neoliberal Culture and Politics in the US, UK, and the UAE

Neoliberalism is a loosely knit bricolage from economics, politics, and various forms of reactionary populism that can be envisioned as a kind of epistemic frame in which largely counterrevolutionary forces engage in the creative destruction of institutional frameworks and powers, forging divisions across society that include labor and social relations (Harvey, A brief history of neoliberalism, 2009). Such “creative destruction” implies that neoliberalism is actually a reactionary “catalog of mind” (Robin, The reactionary mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin, 2011, p. 17); that when believers engage in reactions to programs and ideas which represent what Bourdieu (Acts of resistance: Against the tyranny of the market, 1998) called “the left hand of the state” (typically represented by teachers, judges, social workers), one result has been the “involution of the state” (p. 34) and the “destruction of the idea of public service” (Bourdieu, The abdication of the state. In P. Bourdieu (Ed.), The weight of the world: Social suffering in contemporary society, 1999, p. 182). We examine neoliberalism using Shaffer’s (Int J Learn Media 1(2):1–21, 2009) concept of an “epistemic frame” based on the epistemic frame hypothesis that suggests that a community of practice has a culture, and that the collection of values, skills, knowledge, and identity form the “epistemic frame” (p. 4). An epistemic frame has a kind of grammar and structure comprised of people’s thoughts and actions, reinforced by the ways that people see themselves, the values to which they hold, and the epistemology that binds together their agenda. The purpose of our analysis is to create a praxis for what has been termed Regressionsverbot, which is defined as “a ban on backward movement with respect to social gains at the European level” (Bourdieu, Acts of resistance: Against the tyranny of the market, 1998, p. 41). In the form of cases from the United States, the United Kingdom, and the United Arab Emirates, neoliberal initiatives are examined, unpacked, and interrogated.     

Beyond the Humanism/Posthumanism Debate: The Educational Implications of Said's Critical,Humane Praxis

The late Edward Said sought to place critique and, indeed, self‐critique at the heart of humanism. While the posthuman critiques surrounding the (im)possibility of humanism in postmodern times tend to focus on human autonomy, rationality, and essentialism, Stephen Chatelier here explores the idea that Said's writing on humanism could help us shift the focus from issues of ontology towards those of practice. Such a move, he argues, prioritizes the ethico‐political aspect of human engagement. Rather than making an attempt to defend Enlightenment or Eurocentric forms of humanism, Chatelier probes two distinct possibilities that arise from Said's democratic humanism. First, he considers to what extent a construction of humanism as practice can enable us to see critical posthumanism as a form of Saidian humanism. Second, he explores how (post)humanist discourse might continue to be of use in precipitating thinking among educators about ethico‐political imperatives of education in an era shaped by complex cultural and political relations and a dominant neoliberal rationality.     

高校办学自主权变迁的实证再研究（一） ——高校办学自主权的内涵辨析及外部学术治理改革现状

已有研究文献表明,现有高校办学自主权的内核制度是院系自治。在当前全球化和国际化影响下,借鉴治理思维,我国高校正在破除“行政化”的本土情境,建立“管办评”分离机制,形成各利益主体可以相对平等地对话与协商的现代大学制度,这是构建我国高校治理结构、推动高校办学自主权落地的基本策略。通过文献分析和对高校办学自主权的内涵辨析后发现,我国现在的高校治理策略缺乏市场维和院系自治维,应该将其纳入新的高校治理结构;法律一维相对弱,也应作为独立的维度进行建构,即我国现代大学治理结构应该包括法律、国家规制与政府行政、社会中介评价、市场、校级管理和院系治理等六维度。从自主权内容上,高校办学自主权实质是高校应该拥有的一系列与学术活动相关的决策权,在结构上可以进一步分解为“提供什么”的战略决策自主权和“如何提供”的生产决策自主权。进一步的实证研究表明,我国呈现由政府全面控制着这些自主权逐步转向持续放权的改革趋势。目前,相对“提供什么”的战略决策,高校在“如何提供”的生产决策方面拥有较多的自主权,高校对学术事务的权力多于资源配置的权力,部属高校较地方高校拥有更多的自主权。     

Modeling and measuring epistemic cognition: A qualitative re-investigation

Since Perry first proposed that students’ beliefs about knowledge and knowing were an important aspect of learning, there has been a proliferation of models of epistemic cognition, and empirical studies of how epistemic cognition relates to learning. Unfortunately, the dominant means of measuring epistemic cognition, self-report instruments, have numerous psychometric problems. These problems prompted us to return to interview methods used by Perry and other seminal researchers, to investigate the degree to which current epistemic cognition models aligned with novices’ and experts’ cognition. Using an exploratory, multiple case qualitative design, we interviewed middle school students and university professors from two domains, biology and history. We found numerous ways in which the current conceptualizations and measures of beliefs about knowledge and knowing may need to be altered. Our recommendations range from the revision of item wordings to a complete rethinking of the very idea of domain-specificity in epistemic cognition research.     

The Control and Management of Higher Education in Great Britain,with special reference to the role of the University Grants Committee and the Committee of Vice‐Chancellors and Principals

Abstract

The claim that students should determine their own curricula is examined. If granted, primacy would be given to the autonomy and self‐ascribed interests of the students. The case for student autonomy is discussed in the context of the theory of philosophical anarchism. The anarchist dichotomy of autonomy and authority is criticised. A brief examination of Kant's account of autonomy leads to a rejection of the strong individualism that characterises that dichotomy. It is argued that the curriculum should be the outcome of the shared autonomy of students and teachers; such would serve the interests of students by maximising the autonomy of all. The curriculum would meet the interests of all students, but would not, indeed could not, represent the self‐ascribed interests of each individual.