CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …
Tiêu đề
The ivory tower revisited
Tác giả
Chantler A.
Năm xuất bản
2016
Source title
Discourse
Số trích dẫn
10
DOI
10.1080/01596306.2014.963517
Liên kết
Tóm tắt
The corollary of the concept of the ‘ivory tower’, as reflected in the writings of Plato and Newman amongst others, was, paradoxically, the vital importance of the university for wider society. Nevertheless from the mid-twentieth century, the esteem in which a ‘liberal’ university education was held was diminished by rising expectations that higher education institutions would actively contribute to addressing broader socio-economic challenges through ‘knowledge-transfer’, education for employment, and community service. However while this linear conception of universities' ‘third mission’ eroded their ‘ivory tower’ status, the death knell of the ‘ivory tower’ rings in contemporary literature on higher education, which articulates a dialectical view of its historical development in which the university and wider society are synthesised in the ‘engaged university’. With its focus on reciprocal ‘knowledge-exchange’, the co-creation of knowledge through teaching and learning, and civic engagement, the ‘engaged university’ embraces the ‘other’ as intrinsic to its identity. Yet arguably the increasing instrumentalism and democratisation of higher education are irrevocably eroding the academic freedom and institutional autonomy upon which universities' immeasurable contribution to society ultimately depends. © 2014 Taylor & Francis.
Từ khóa
engaged university; higher education; ivory tower; liberal education; neo-liberal reform; society
Tài liệu tham khảo
Arnold M., Schools and universities on the continent, (1964); Barber M., Donnelly K., Rizvi S., An avalanche is coming: Higher education and the revolution ahead, (2013); Barthes R., The death of the author, Modern criticism and theory: A reader; The history of Birkbeck, (2013); Bloom A., The closing of the American mind: How higher education has failed democracy and impoverished the souls of today’s students, (1987); Boyer E.L., Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate, (1990); Broadhead L.-A., Howard S., ‘The art of punishing’: The research assessment exercise and the ritualisation of power in higher education, Education Policy Analysis, 6, 8, pp. 1-14, (1998); Carnevale A., Chea B., Strohl J., Hard times, college majors, unemployment and earnings: Not all college degrees are created equal, (2012); Regions of knowledge, (2011); U-Multirank interim progress report: Design phase of the project ‘design and testing the feasibility of a multi-dimensional global university ranking’, (2010); Securing a sustainable future for higher education: An independent review of higher education funding and student finance, (2010); Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorff L., A triple helix of university–industry government relations, (1997); Ferguson A., Afterword, Bloom, (2012); Fish S., May 16). Aim low. The Chronicle of Higher Education, (2003); Fish S., May 21). Why we built the ivory tower. The New York Times, (2004); Gibbons M., Engagement as a core value in a Mode 2 society, (2006); Goddard J., Reinventing the civic university(Provocation 12), (2009); Goldacre B., Bad science, (2009); Goldacre B., Bad pharma: How drug companies mislead doctors and harm patients, (2012); Grayling A.C., The meaning of things: Applying philosophy to life, (2002); Habermas J., The new conservatism: Cultural criticism and the historians’ debate., (1991); Harkavy I., The role of universities in advancing citizenship and social justice in the 21st century, Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 1, 1, pp. 5-37, (2006); Harper W.R., The trend in higher education, (1905); Hazelkorn E., Impact of global rankings on higher education research and the production of knowledge, (2009); Hegel G.W.F., Lectures on the philosophy of world history; Higher education--business and community interaction survey, (2014); Report to the European Commission on improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions.; Hollander E.L., Saltmarsh J., Zlotkowski E., Indicators of engagement, Learning to serve: Promoting civil society through service learning, pp. 31-49, (2002); Jaspers K., The idea of the university., (1959); Kant I., The conflict of the faculties. (M. J. Gregor, Trans.), (1798); Kwiek M., The classical German idea of the university revisited, or on the nationalization of the modern institution, (2006); Marginson S., (2007); Marginson S., van der Wende M., Europeanisation, international rankings and faculty mobility: Three cases in higher education globalisation, higher education to 2030: Volume 2: Globalisation, pp. 109-144, (2009); (1862); The EDGE tool: Self-assess your support for public engagement, (2010); Newman J.H., The idea of a university, (1905); Education at a glance, (2013); Plato, H. D H.D.P.L., The republic., (1987); Readings B., The university in ruins, (1996); Schleiermacher F., Occasional thoughts on universities in the German sense: With an appendix regarding a university soon to be established, (1808); Schofield M., Plato (427–347 BC), Concise Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, pp. 677-679, (2000); Soley L., Leasing the ivory tower: The corporate takeover of academia, (1995); Teichler U., Burger S., Student enrolments and graduation trends in the OECD area: What can we learn from international statistics?, Higher education to 2030: Volume 1: Demography, (2009); World statistical outlook on higher education: 1980–1995, (1998); Watson D., Hollister R.M., Stroud S.E., Babcock E., The engaged university: International perspectives on civic engagement, (2011)
Nơi xuất bản
Routledge
Hình thức xuất bản
Article
Open Access
Nguồn
Scopus