There are intense Taylorist pressures in society at this time and the current UK government is playing to that tune. It is a pity.
As for how academic institutions think yes, they have to consider their bottom line. That means weighing up the costs and likely gain for each of their activities. No institution can run an activity at a loss for too long and it is always hard to argue for cross-subsidy from profitable to unprofitable courses, especially in the transparent costing regime that now exists (where departments and courses have to pay for the internal institutional resources they use and then break even or generate a surplus against other institutional activities). However, it is important to remember that not all courses cost the same to run. Chalk and talk, like Media Studies, History and many other social science and humanities subjects, are relatively cheap to run, especially in those institutions without strong tutorial based traditions (that means most new Universities). Other courses are far more expensive, sometimes by multiple factors. These include the creative arts, film and TV, medicine, architecture, mathematics and engineering. But the fees institutions can charge are not really variable, although the gearing employed by HEFCE/SHEFC to calculate the annual grant is subject sensitive. That goes some way to paying these extra costs but not all the way. It is then a political decision whether to subsidise certain subjects to ensure they survive. Currently creative arts subjects are getting a relatively good deal. In Scotland we have no student fees so the situation is very different to the rest of the UK. However, it is not a bed or roses even for the students. The unit resource per student here is falling in comparison to the UK and will fall further if UK fees rise and Scotland sustains free Higher Education at the point of delivery. This will be bad news for both institutions and students north of the border as we will struggle to compete with the UK market, losing our best staff and, eventually, students - who will follow quality, even if it costs more. Personally I do not know what the solution for this is expect wholesale reform of the system both sides of the border. I don¹t like the idea of students running up massive debts and am comfortable with the redistributive aspects of paying for education through general taxation. However, as mostly middle-class kids benefit from HE access the question then is from whom is the money being redistributed and to whom? In this context a graduate tax system (as is run in Australia) might actually be fairer and more redistributive in favour of traditionally disadvantaged socio-economic groups. It is a difficut issue to untangle and I wonder if there ever was a golden age of Higher Education? Best Simon Simon Biggs Research Professor edinburgh college of art [email protected] www.eca.ac.uk www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ [email protected] www.littlepig.org.uk AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk From: Corrado Morgana <[email protected]> Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:58:15 +0100 To: 'NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity' <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] naughty boy A recent radio4 article..some minister discussing the cost of education.The gist: If a student can¹t afford an education then they should look for courses which will guarantee an income after the course. AAARRGGGHH!!! Educational institutes as we know are businesses, they will taylor their courses to those that make money and get students-art courses and especially media arts related courses are being chewed up and mauled by increased student targets (international and national) lower funding and critically for this argument, higher student fees. If students who cannot afford courses are vectored towards courses that will generate employment, such as was mentioned apprenticeships, my fear is that this will create a more taylorised and stratified class system-I think most have heard this before. Those less well off will end up doing apprenticeships while the other more well off will enter the more academic and creative Ostuff¹ [trust funds and old boy networks help]. This is a pattern I¹m see in arts education already. I came from an immigrant, council housed, NHS, breadline family and ended up going through further education the year before student loans were introducedSphew, would never have been able to otherwise have completed or even started an arts education.. the other options would have been a welding apprenticeship and the steelworks, all noble but the equivalent of a slow painful death for me at the time. (computer salesman nearly killed me as well!) The art scene that I mix in is largely not trustafarian and wealthy. Bright, intelligent and academic, a healthy mix of social backgrounds We might end up filling Britain¹s deficit of plumbers and bricklayers-some whose Ohobbies¹ might be art; some who genuinely contribute, create and evolve Oart¹. But implicit taylorisation worries me, as does Sennet, for other reasons Rant over.. C -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Simon Biggs Sent: 19 August 2009 8:20 AM To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] naughty boy Hi Alan I wasn¹t trying to address that argument just questioning whether education and work ethic are enough to facilitate a meaningful life. Yes, decent health care is important. A degree of financial security highly deslirable. The US spends more of its GDP on health care (16%) than any other country in the world and yet is the only OECD country not to have some form of universal care. The outcome of that is that average US life expectancy is lower than the OECD average (even lower than the UK¹s whose NHS costs 8% of GDP and has taken such a battering in the US media recently). What Obama is trying to do with US health care looks way overdue and only sensible. Those arrayed against him look like selfish big business protecting its bottom line at the expense of the people. Mind you, everyone admires American teeth ;) Best Simon Simon Biggs Research Professor edinburgh college of art [email protected] www.eca.ac.uk www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ [email protected] www.littlepig.org.uk AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk From: Alan Sondheim <[email protected]> Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:15:26 -0400 (EDT) To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected]> Cc: Theory and Writing <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] naughty boy It's not instrumentalist; it's more fundamental. If you're crazy with stress because of bad health care, little or no income, you just don't function well. If you have students, I assume you're full time - my two courses at SVA won't even pay the bills (adjuncts get next to nothing). I have nightmares over this, migraines, etc. In other words there has to be a modicum of feeling you're not going to lose your apartment or your teeth, you're going to have some sort of stability somewhere. I don't have that - it doesn't sound like 'naughty boy' does either. - Alan On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Simon Biggs wrote: > I always feel guilty seeking to justify to students why they should persist > with completing their degrees, whether BA, MA or PhD so I don¹t. They > often say they want a degree so they can get a decent job and balance that > with their creative practice. They say they see me, with a job and an > artistic career, as a role model. I point out to them I left school at 15 > with no qualifications - to be a hippy. Other than being an artist and > coincidentally securing various positions because of my artistic activities, > including my current one, I have never had what I consider a real job in my > life. I¹m just a good for nothing artist at least in the eyes of the taxi > driver or plumber I often encounter (people with real jobs). It seems that > being good for nothing can be more rewarding than being socially useful. > > I find it a worrying that people judge themselves by whether they are > gainfully employed or not. Everyone has something to contribute. We live in > societies, both poor and wealthy, that historically have tolerated > significant percentages of their populations being what, in todays terms, we > would consider economically inactive. However, economic inactivity does not > mean a lack of productivity. There are so many ways that people can > contribute value to themselves and those around them without getting a job. > I never wanted a job anyway! > > We should not allow an instrumentalist view of life to become paradigmatic, > especially in creative practice. That is the death of the artist. > > Best > > Simon > > > Simon Biggs > Research Professor > edinburgh college of art > [email protected] > www.eca.ac.uk > www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ > > [email protected] > www.littlepig.org.uk > AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk > > > > From: Alan Sondheim <[email protected]> > Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity > <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:25:23 -0400 (EDT) > To: Theory and Writing <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] naughty boy > > My degree's in english, which has been useless all > these years; Azure's is in environmental conservation from NYU (mine's > from Brown). She hasn't been able to get work; I teach from time to time, > part-time, and the stress is incredible; I think about suicide, running > away with Azure, etc. etc. > > > Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 > > > | current internet text file: http://www.alansondheim.org/qf.txt | Alan Sondheim Mail archive: http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ | Webpage (directory) at http://www.alansondheim.org | [email protected], [email protected], tel US 718-813-3285 ! http://www.facebook.com/alan.sondheim _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
