Abstract
AbstractUniversities in Aotearoa New Zealand are increasingly espousing a democratic ideology that has much in common with some social justice elements of the internationally agreed Sustainable Development Goals. This trend, however, also relates to the more international ‘universal’ characterisation proposed by Trow in 1973 in the context of university massification, that emphasised universities’ role in helping societies to adapt to social and technological change, and their development from elite institutions. In exploring our democratic turn this article suggests that remnants of elite characteristics persist in our universities in the projected identity of our academics, and in our limited willingness to adapt our teaching to our changing roles. The article argues that such elitism may limit the role of university teaching in achieving social justice, and goes on to explore if future democratisation depends on the professionalisation of university teaching.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference49 articles.
1. Academic Quality Agency (2023). Who we are, Retrieved from https://www.aqa.ac.nz/about-us/aqa
2. Allison, L. (2023). A ban on sexualised behaviour would be more or less a ban on life as we know it. Times Higher Education, 2540, 41–42.
3. Australian Universities Accord (2022). Review of Australia’s Higher Education System - Terms of Reference, retrieved from https://www.education.gov.au/australian-universities-accord/resources/terms-reference
4. Bai, L. (2006). Graduate unemployment: Dilemmas and challenges in China’s move to Mass Higher Education. The China Quarterly, 185, 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/S030574100600008
5. Bathmaker, A. M. (2015). Thinking with Bourdieu: Thinking after Bourdieu. Using ‘field’ to consider in/equalities in the changing field of English higher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2014.988683