A Conversation Starter: Academic Work and Social JusticeāFor Whose Freedom Do We Labour?
Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom . (Einstein, 1938)
This book is based on one simple, foundational belief. Education, truly, is the practice of freedom . Made famous by Brazilian scholar Paulo Freire (1993, 2000) and embraced by educators all across the world (see, for just some examples, Giroux, 2010; hooks, 1990, 1994) this oft-cited declaration captures three powerful, related beliefs that underpin all of the arguments advanced across this book.
First, education can change lives. Research across eras, across nations, within and across cultural or political borders and boundaries has shown us time and time and time again that educational experiences and outcomes impact directly upon high-stakes variables such as rates and forms of employment/unemployment; physical and mental health; social and emotional relationships; risk-taking behaviour and, of course, financial and physical security (Bell, 2016; Keddie, 2012). When we look back over the ways in which classrooms have evolved in the past 200 years we may notice that some chalk boards have given way to white boards, or tablets, or various forms of āimmersive technologiesā but patterns of success and failure remain tied to variables including gender, cultural background, language, ability, socio-economics and so on (hooks, 1994; Leibowitz & Bozalek, 2015; Motta, 2012; Rizvi, 2009; Rowan, 2017). Some people have technologically enhanced learning environments. Others have no learning environments at all. Thus, in words attributed to William Gibson, āThe future is already here. Itās just not very evenly distributedā (OāToole, 2012, n.p.).
This brings us to the second foundational point for this text: education never has been, and never can be, a neutral act (Giroux, 2010, p. 719). Educationās transformative potential is not always (nor even usually) realised in ways that advantage the full population. Even where school is compulsory, secular, and/or free, people, en masse, do not simply benefit from āgetting an educationā in the way that most infants, for example, will benefit from nutrition or from sleep. Rather, as Richard Shaull writes:
Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom , the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world . (in Freire, 2000, p. 34)
It is axiomatic to say that, for many people across the world, education has served, directly and indirectly, as a mechanism for social reproduction rather than for any form of social transformation. At various times, and in various locations, some groups of people have been denied access to even the most basic of education, or educated in ways that sought to position them into pre-determined, acceptable, socially, politically, religiously sanctioned roles linked to the differences among us. Some of these have been acknowledged above: gender, race, class, and religion; physical ability, geographical location, age, sexuality. Individually and in multiple combinations these differences have shaped the kinds of educational opportunities provided to various people and, by extension, the freedoms they would likely enjoy. As Shields reminds us:
Regardless of how ethnicity or socioeconomic status (SES) are determined, there is no doubt that children from certain minoritized ethnic groups and/or from impoverished social classes generally fail to perform in school to the same levels as other children (Bishop & Glynn, 1999; Reyes, Velez, & PeƱa, 1993). (Shields, 2004, p. 111)
This pattern is not seen only in schools. Higher education has been characterised by limited access and limiting curricula and, as a result, has offered limited benefits to a diverse population. In the words of Brennan and Naidoo (2008): āResearch on the role of universities has indicated that universities have played multiple roles, sometimes advocating democracy and taking truth to power and at other times colluding in the maintenance of unequal social and political relationshipsā (p. 297). This, again, is a high-stakes scenario given that āgraduates tend to live longer, are less likely to be involved in crime, more likely to be engaged in politics and in their local communities, and tend to be less racist or sexist. Insofar as graduates possess such characteristics, there are implications for the whole of societyā (Brennan & Naidoo, 2008, p. 295).
This leads to point number three. If the transformative power of education is accepted, and if evidence regarding the links that exist between type/quality/length of education and the length, quality, and even fact of life is also accepted, then university educators are confronted with an unavoidable challenge. Indeed, every person with any responsibility for developing, designing, delivering, or enabling any kind of educational experience in any kind of higher education environment should be able to answer the essential question:
- For whose freedomāin whose interestsādo we, now, labour?
This question provides the motivation and structure for this book: a book that explores some of the understandings, perspectives, and dispositions that can enable critical analysis of academic work , and support powerful decision-making guided by a commitment to educational and social justice . Bringing together conversations about teaching with research relating to social justice and student experiences of higher education, the book crosses the artificial but often powerfully enforced boundaries between research, teaching, and service and is written to, for, and about diverse academics, be they employed in full-time, part-time, continuing, or casual appointments. It speaks to those university teachers who struggle with the challenge of responding to an increasingly broad set of employment demands and increasingly specific sets of criteria for determining our āimpactā, relevance, or quality as teachers and researchers, while also trying to follow an educational agenda associated with creating teaching and learning environments characterised by social justice , and genuine respect for our student populations. Fundamentally it is a book motivated by authors such as Cornel West who argues: āSocial justice is what love looks like in publicā (West, 2014).
Recognising that university educators are faced with a myriad of choices every day, and that these choices have consequences for our students, our colleagues and ourselves, this book begins with an acknowledgement of the context within which academic work takes place. I then explore the challenges that this environment poses for those who seek to ensure the benefits of higher education are genuinely accessible to a full, diversifying student population. From that basis, I put forward some concepts and ideas, knowledges, and theoretical understandings that can empower the decision-making of diverse academics as we seek to ensure that our work truly does possess liberating potential. The underlying intention is to demonstrate that when academics that impact upon our students, our decisions should reflect not only to the most immediate, or pressing demands on our time, but also (and more importantly) an understanding of, and commitment to, the transformative potential of higher education.
My Academia: Current Academic Terrains
There is little doubt that universities are still associated with the pursuit of impactful research, and purposeful teaching. However, a global, competitive, international economy has seen universities increasingly endorse policies that pursue āmarket friendly and cost-effective achievement of goals relating to research, teaching, and community/industry serviceā (Iqbal, 2013). Working on the front line of what is now increasingly seen as a service industry, academic staff are therefore asked to attract and retain high-quality student-consumers . These are often understood to be students who bring prestige to the university in the form of impressive entry scores, go on to graduate in a timely manner, secure employment quickly, and then permit their successes to be badged as the achievements of a university alumnus. As well as this, academics are also expected to ensure our student-clients report themselves as satisfied with the quality of their educational experiences using the specific mechanisms valued in our individual institutions (Arthur, 2009; Hill, Lomas, & MacGregor, 2003; Kim & Davies, 2014). Iāll say more on this later. Here I make the point that in a context that is described as āstudent-centredā, staff are asked to be āadaptiveā and āresponsiveā to the supposedly new demands of the modern student: expectations often based upon the belief that students today have no wish to be tied down to traditional modes of educational consumption but, rather, need/demand/expect increased flexibility in regards to when, where, and how content is consumed (Margaryan, Littlejohn, & Vojt, 2011).
Conversations about flexibility lead inexorably into considerations of how universities can capitalise upon new/old/familiar/strange technologies to offer a customisable, student-centred exper...