排序方式： 共有7条查询结果，搜索用时 265 毫秒
1
1.
Jana Bacevic 《Globalisation, Societies & Education》2019,17(1):78-91
ABSTRACTContemporary changes in the domain of knowledge production are usually seen as posing significant challenges to ‘the University’. This paper argues against the framing of the university as an ideal-type, and considers epistemic gains from treating universities as assemblages (e.g. DeLanda, M. 2016. Assemblage Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press) of different functions, actors and relations. It contrasts this with the concept of ‘unbundling’, using two recent cases of controversies around academics’ engagement on social media to show how, rather than having clearly delineated limits, social entities become ‘territorialised’ through boundary disputes. The conclusion extends this discussion to the production of knowledge about social objects in general. 相似文献
2.
3.
Nick Lewis 《Globalisation, Societies & Education》2019,17(1):11-27
ABSTRACTIn Britain and New Zealand the neoliberal assault on universities has shifted from new public management and funding models to the special status of the public university. The project aims to complete neoliberal business initiated 25 years ago by more fully marketising and financialising universities, starting with ‘unbundling’ and outsourcing and culminating in new forms of privatisation, rent-extraction and rebundling. This paper analyses two documents commissioned beyond government to create political momentum for this project: Avalanche is Coming and The University of the Future. These both capture the zeitgeist of reform while simultaneously creating the university futures that they portend. We examine the market-making work they perform in reimagining and reinventing universities ahead of policy reform. We argue that claims made to support fundamental restructuring of public universities lack substance or evidence. Rather, each is underpinned by different configurations of ideology and self-interest that together envelope universities in new agendas of marketisation, financialisation and privatisation. We suggest that in this latest restructuring of public universities critics should pay more attention to the work of consultancies and think tanks alongside the micro-details of market making. By doing so, they too might reimagine public universities, but for a different political project. 相似文献
4.
Tristan McCowan 《牛津教育评论》2017,43(6):733-748
Unbundling is the process through which products previously sold together are separated into their constituent parts. In higher education, this dynamic has been driven primarily by financial motivations, and spearheaded by the for-profit sector, but also has pedagogical motivations through its emphasis on personalisation and employability. This article presents a theoretical analysis of the trend, proposing new conceptual tools with which to map the normative implications. While appearing to offer the prospect of financial viability and increased relevance, unbundling presents some worrying signs for universities: first, the removal of possible synergies between teaching and research, and between different modes of learning; second, the undermining of the ability of institutions to promote the public good and ensure equality of opportunity; and third, the threat of hyperporosity to the conducting of basic research with long-term benefits. 相似文献
5.
ABSTRACTAs an introduction to the themed issue, this paper interrogates the idea of university unbundling through a critical reading of Ronald Coase’s theory of transaction costs. Coase, who was initially interested in the structure of firms, later applied his transaction cost theory more broadly to anything that might be defined as ‘welfare’. Not unlike other abstract economic theories, in the age of market discipline, Coase’s ideas have been widely employed to regulate the provision of public goods. Read through Coase, the main effect of the unbundling discourse has been to rationalise the university – to make it subject to a logic of efficiency as an end, and ultimately we suspect, to do damage to universities as important institutions for the cultivation of democratic values and socio-economic justice. After a brief summary of the other six papers included in the issue, the paper concludes with a discussion of the possibility of maintaining a public university in light of the neoliberal discourse of unbundling. 相似文献
6.
Mariya P. Ivancheva Rebecca Swartz Neil P. Morris Sukaina Walji Bronwen J. Swinnerton Taryn Coop 《British Journal of Sociology of Education》2020,41(5):608-625
AbstractThe advent of massive open online courses and online degrees offered via digital platforms has occurred in a climate of austerity. Public universities worldwide face challenges to expand their educational reach, while competing in international rankings, raising fees and generating third-stream income. Online forms of unbundled provision offering smaller flexible low-cost curricular units have promised to disrupt this system. Yet do these forms challenge existing hierarchies in higher education and the market logic that puts pressure on universities and public institutions at large in the neoliberal era? Based on fieldwork in South Africa, this article explores the perceptions of senior managers of public universities and of online programme management companies. Analysing their considerations around unbundled provision, we discuss two conflicting logics of higher education that actors in structurally different positions and in historically divergent institutions use to justify their involvement in public–private partnerships: the logic of capital and the logic of social relevance. 相似文献
7.
Aimee Wheaton 《高等教育研究与发展》2020,39(1):67-80
ABSTRACTThe values of higher education (HE) are undergoing a disruptive shift. How the rising cost of higher education is being shared between the student and society is driving many of the changes within HE. External pressures on institutions of higher education include reduced public funding, wider student participation and increased competition. These external pressures are influencing the current environment within HE. Academic capitalism encourages institutions to focus on efficiencies and outcomes. Administrators are increasing in numbers and in influence. Students in HE have more choice and are viewed as customers instead of apprentice learners. These collective changes are influencing faculty employment, working conditions, and teaching practices. Institutions are turning to a tiered faculty system. Academic work is being unbundled as paraprofessionals develop and deliver classes. Tenure’s influence is dwindling and an increasing number of faculty are hired as contingent employees. This article will address the external pressures and changing expectations of universities in Australia, the UK and US, and how changing values are influencing faculty, staff utilization and teaching practices. 相似文献
1