My Summary on the Book What Are Universities For by Stefan Collini
I just finished reading the book What Are Universities For? by Stefan Collini. While it is UK centric and focusses on the Humanities, the general observations
are valid for much of academia. I think it should be a must read for
all administrators, academics as well as PhD students who wish to become
academics.
My attempt at summarising the key points is not going to do justice to the
book. However, I will include a few "quotes" from the book. These are not
verbatim quotes but hopefully captures the spirit of what is intended.
Perhaps this could inspire others who have not read the book to read it.
Undergraduate education is about exposing students to the experience of
enquiry just for improving the understanding of the subject matter (Page 56).
In sports it is assumed that top level teams/athletes receive government
support in exchange for high standards of performance. The rigorous
selection process for these athletes is assumed to be fair (and not viewed as
being "superior"). Universities do not have such advantages (Page 93).
Assurance of curriculum "delivery" being compared to delivering pizza. Student
engagement is as inert as handing over something at the doorstep of their
minds (Page 107).
"Be original - but in the right way" (Page 110) and "Be creative - otherwise I
will beat the hell out of you" (Page 136) which represents the conflict
between expecting innovation but being governed by various
government/management regulations.
"We do not measure it. We judge it" (Page 122) on the obsession of quantitative
evaluations.
The fallacious argument that just because universities have some common
characteristics with a business entity, e.g., a budget,
universities need to be like a business (Page 134).
How university researchers collaborate (e.g., giving ideas to other
researchers) but are treated like a "firm" which protect their ideas (Page 140).
On the focus on improving ones "star ratings" being compared to
hotel/restaurant ratings (Page 160).
Students being told by someone who knows what a particular line of study is
worth pursuing whether at the time they want to or not (Page 186).
The failure student "knows" model where they will pay to study a topic if
there is return on their investment especially in STEM where government gives
various incentives. (Page 186).
If you got this far, I can only emphasise the importance of reading the
book -- there are many more gems there.
are valid for much of academia. I think it should be a must read for
all administrators, academics as well as PhD students who wish to become
academics.
My attempt at summarising the key points is not going to do justice to the
book. However, I will include a few "quotes" from the book. These are not
verbatim quotes but hopefully captures the spirit of what is intended.
Perhaps this could inspire others who have not read the book to read it.
Undergraduate education is about exposing students to the experience of
enquiry just for improving the understanding of the subject matter (Page 56).
In sports it is assumed that top level teams/athletes receive government
support in exchange for high standards of performance. The rigorous
selection process for these athletes is assumed to be fair (and not viewed as
being "superior"). Universities do not have such advantages (Page 93).
Assurance of curriculum "delivery" being compared to delivering pizza. Student
engagement is as inert as handing over something at the doorstep of their
minds (Page 107).
"Be original - but in the right way" (Page 110) and "Be creative - otherwise I
will beat the hell out of you" (Page 136) which represents the conflict
between expecting innovation but being governed by various
government/management regulations.
"We do not measure it. We judge it" (Page 122) on the obsession of quantitative
evaluations.
The fallacious argument that just because universities have some common
characteristics with a business entity, e.g., a budget,
universities need to be like a business (Page 134).
How university researchers collaborate (e.g., giving ideas to other
researchers) but are treated like a "firm" which protect their ideas (Page 140).
On the focus on improving ones "star ratings" being compared to
hotel/restaurant ratings (Page 160).
Students being told by someone who knows what a particular line of study is
worth pursuing whether at the time they want to or not (Page 186).
The failure student "knows" model where they will pay to study a topic if
there is return on their investment especially in STEM where government gives
various incentives. (Page 186).
If you got this far, I can only emphasise the importance of reading the
book -- there are many more gems there.
posted by PK at
4:44 PM
0 Comments
