Owning the university
Owning the university
The number of people attending the meeting of FASS faculty and staff with the Mandate Working Group last week was rather disappointing, to say the least: by my count 9 faculty members (myself included), no support staff, and a single student turned up to engage in a dialogue with the 5 members of the Working Group. I find this truly a bit of a puzzle. Were people too busy, not bothered, or somehow of the belief that this was not a useful way to spend their time? I don’t know, and at this point it probably doesn’t matter. But it is a pity, and unfortunately sends a signal that the Faculty is not engaged with Carleton’s requirement to define its identity in the forthcoming discussions with the provincial government, our “brand” for the foreseeable future. The meeting with the much smaller Faculty of Science, I am told, attracted 40.
Quite apart from any financial considerations, universities in Canada and around the globe are in a state of what can perhaps be best described as an “identity crisis”, uncertain of their purpose (advancement of knowledge? vocational?), their audience (other academics? students? the public at large?), and who is ultimately in charge (boards of governors? senior administration? governments? faculty and students?). When you add the economic situation to this volatile mix, it does seem that we are at a significant moment in the history of the university as an institution. These are not easy times, to be sure, but I am worried when large numbers – indeed, overwhelming numbers – simply choose to opt out of engagement and dialogue, apparently preferring the passive approach. Do we not care?
Not that action per se is necessarily the answer. The following day (February 1st), some 500 students from the Ottawa area universities and colleges marched downtown to Parliament Hill to protest rising tuition fees, presumably in full knowledge that the federal government has no jurisdiction over post-secondary education, and thus couldn’t do anything about the matter even if it wished to. But at least they had the satisfaction of having actually done something. I recall my own marching days: first in Toronto against nuclear weapons, about 1967, and then in subsequent years in Ottawa against the American war in Southeast Asia. I don’t think I harboured any illusions that my presence did any actual good – a group of Canadian students protesting outside the American embassy was not going to change U.S. foreign policy – but I felt better for having participated. I also learned how such marches are easily manipulated by small minorities.
What bothers me, I think, is the apparent lack of a sense of “ownership” by those who constitute the “university”: primarily, faculty members and students. The fate of our institutions is all too easily dismissed as someone else’s problem to solve, not ours. To be blunt, if we don’t care about the future of this place, then why should anyone else? And if we do, then it is not enough simply to voice platitudes, participate in demonstrations, or wish for a different and more affluent world; rather, it is necessary to come up with viable responses to the challenges we face, to engage in the discussions which lead to decisions that will surely affect us, and to be a party to the crafting of our own future. We have to invest our time, our energy, and our resources, both intellectual and financial. After all, it is our future that’s at stake.
Some politicians believe that they can get away with almost any kind of behavior because, ultimately, Canadian voters are apathetic and won’t care. It is very sad that they may be right. It would be even more soul destroying if that also turned out to apply to those who populate this country’s campuses.
8 Comments
Dean Osborne,
Students on the day of action were actually fully aware that the federal government can and does have jurisdiction over PSE. You must be aware of the federal institutions of SSHRC, NSERC, and CIHR which fund PSE research in Canada. In addition, the Canadian Federation of Students has been calling for a Federal Post-Secondary Education Act, similar to the Canada Health Act, that would tie transfer amounts to education and create a national education strategy. Before declaring the students ignorant, it might be worth understanding what they are asking for. But, I do agree, they did have the satisfaction of having done something: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/02/02/wdr-glen-murray-students-tuition-rebate.html?cmp=rss
Thanks for your comment, but please note that I haven’t, and wouldn’t, ever call anyone or group “ignorant”. Yes, the federal government does fund research, but they don’t fund teaching or operating costs, except very indirectly. And they certainly don’t control tuition fees, the main thrust of the protest, as can be easily observed from the fact that every province has different fees. I can imagine that the federal (Conservative) government took some wry pleasure in seeing a demonstration on Parliament Hill whose principal target was the provincial (Liberal) government. BTW, I would be the first to agree that it would be much better if PSE were a federal responsibility, but the constitution says otherwise and I am sure that Quebec would never agree to a change. A pity!
What Working Group? This is the first time I’ve heard of one. I am a student who would have been interested in attending, so why didn’t I know about it?
We have an email system for a reason, but I feel like FASS doesn’t have a proper listserv. Not to mention that FASS has not truly embraced Facebook or Twitter to reach its audience. Adjust!
I am truly sorry that you didn’t know of this event. The university has undertaken various focus groups with students, and I understand that the overwhelming consensus is that students don’t want to receive a lot of communications cluttering up their E-mail in-boxes, so we do limit this to once a week, on Tuesday mornings. There will be other opportunities to convey feedback to the Working Group. In the interim, here is the link to their web-site, which has some more information and their E-mail address: http://carleton.ca/provost/provincial-mandate-working-group/
I agree that the turnout in FASS for the working group is somewhat depressing. However, there were many FASS students at the Town Hall as well as Graduate Faculty Board and one other meeting that I attended. Like Ayla, I don’t remember getting a notice specially as a student in FASS. I do think the Carleton Community wants to feel a sense of ownership in this institution and I am sincerely grateful for those opportunities that give the impression that the administration of Carleton does care about the opinion of the greater community.
Pam-MA Student-History
Hi John,
I was out of town on a work related trip which I hope serves as a reasonable reason for not being there.
I find it interesting that the first three responses you got to this blog were from students and not faculty. I’m not sure how much to read into that …
I can only speak for myself, and not other colleagues, on the matter of engagement with university issues:
Although I don’t rank high in the academic world, I have been quite active in trying to affect change at the departmental level at Carleton. I must admit though, it has been exhausting and quite frankly demoralizing.
When I first got this job, I naively thought that all academics were eager to participate in debate in discussion. In fact, I thought that is what defined us. I thought no serious academic would get offended if someone asked “Why are we doing X?” or “Have we contemplated Y?” Or suggest that “We should perhaps rethink our assumptions about Z.” I could not have been more incorrect. I have been subjected to, what I consider to be, a fair amount of academic bullying for asking those kinds of questions.
The point here is not to complain, but to let you know that for those of us who have been trying to fight the good fight at the lower levels, it is not easy and it quite often means battling with the egos of senior colleagues who would much prefer it if you shut up, know your place, and support the status quo.
For fear of self-destructing, I have personally had to start rethinking my own relationship with my department. It is difficult to keep putting yourself out there, when most of the time it is a thankless position, and it makes you an easy target for other colleagues’ ego-driven, less-than-collegial behaviour.
I am sure this does not help you in any way, since it must be very discouraging to know that while you and others are putting in long hours to keep the institution afloat, most faculty members just don’t trouble themselves to show up to these kinds of meetings.
The only point I am trying to make here is that, at least from where I am sitting, for those of us who are inclined to be active, engaged, and invested at Carleton, there are no shortage of people who do their best to wear us down.
Hopefully tomorrow will be a better day.
Thanks, Madeline. I am truly sorry that you have had this experience. As academics, we have an enormous amount of freedom in terms of our daily routines and behaviours, both individually and collectively. And sometimes this doesn’t work out as well as one might hope. But please don’t be discouraged. More than 50% of the faculty members currently employed in FASS have been hired in the last eight years, and many of them are, like you, keen to effect change. if we succumb to cynicism and despair, then we lose the battle … and it is much too important to lose. Like you, I hope that tomorrow will indeed be a better day.
Given the previous respondent’s comment, is it possible that we have institutionalized cynicism? Of course, long-term frustration over upper administration’s actions or inaction could easily lead in that direction. I arrived six years ago from another institution where I thought morale was low, and yet being in the smallest and financially most embattled Faculty did provide a collective inspiration for pulling together. That said, we had good turnouts for both the Dean’s annual address and for the last Faculty Board meeting, so the problem may well reside in issues surrounding the mandate committee, perhaps the anticipation that nothing will come out of it or our voices will not be heard. The lack of faculty response to date to John’s intentionally provocative blog is indicative!