Encouragingly though they have also forced some of us to reflect on what universities stand for, and what could be lost if the cutbacks have too many ramifications for what has until now been considered routine functioning.
The one standout character of universities is that they encourage and expect creativity and freedom of speech. This is freedom to challenge shibboleths and entrenched thinking both within the university itself and in the surrounding society. It can only do this because it is not an arm of government or of any external institution, whether of religious or socio-political origin. Universities are autonomous and they sink or swim depending upon the calibre of their scholarship, and the level of trust they build up in the community for the objectivity of their advice across a broad spectrum of fields.
These ideals will only be achieved in so far as a university stands out as a centre of excellence across a wide range of the humanities and sciences. While there will be limitations, as no single university of 20,000 students is capable of doing this in every conceivable domain, it is incumbent upon a university to cover what may be considered the fundamental requirements for a broad education. This thrust has to come from the leadership and should be maintained rigorously even when some papers have small enrolments. Again, realism is called for, but financial considerations have to be subservient to educational and social aspirations.
There has to be a place for the contributions of staff who do not fit into the mainstream, who are prepared to challenge conventional wisdom. These are characteristics of all universities of international stature, as they bring fresh ideas and competing perspectives to the debating table.
It is imperative that university staff serve as role models for students in their scholarship, their thinking and their ethical behaviour. This should also apply to the university’s leadership, who I would expect to be responsible for the university’s own policy documents. I hope these are not being written by external consultants, since students are reprimanded for buying essays from essay mills.
There is a tendency throughout society to silence voices not speaking in accordance with a single set of ideas acceptable to the governing powers. Unfortunately, universities are not immune to these pressures, if they expect staff to acquiesce to the dominant messages of the leadership.
All such approaches should be shunned if intellectual independence and the ability to hold competing ideas in tension are held in high esteem.
This call to intellectual freedom and diversity sits uneasily alongside a commitment to business practices and the prioritisation of economic goals. Indeed, it may seem like a hark back to a previous era in which university dons thought great thoughts regardless of economic realities.
I am not arguing for that.
But there is a half-way house whereby, within a context of fiscal responsibility, individuals are respected for their contribution to the university and are provided with incentives to perform optimally in an atmosphere of trust and respect.
They must be seen as responsible contributors to the university and its ethos, able to provide input into its priorities and listened to as integral members of a living community of scholars and educators. There is no room for any us-them dichotomy, or division between managers and managed.
The university will flourish when all are equally welcomed as contributors to a living and flourishing community.
For a university to prosper it is crucial that it upholds and respects the expertise that its academic staff bring to it, even when the outcomes of this scholarship challenge the dominant thought forms of the day and possibly of the leadership.
This can be messy for all concerned and yet it is no different from the scientist whose research turns conventional wisdom upside down.
Think of those who dispensed with the geocentric universe or flat earth, or the theory that cholera is caused by bad air rather than by germs.
Or closer to the present day that ulcers are caused by stress rather than by bacteria, work carried out in 2005 at the University of Western Australia.
It is no coincidence that my discipline of human anatomy is often regarded as a leftover from the 19th century or even earlier.
However, I have found it to be exciting as it has been repeatedly renewed with the employment of new techniques and educational approaches, undergirded by research as cutting-edge as any in the biomedical sciences.
Well-established disciplines can be dramatically changed while remaining true to their past.
So it is with universities.
— Gareth Jones is an emeritus professor of anatomy at the University of Otago.
