Governments of Australia have, at least since the 1960s, desired the control of tertiary education. From the mid-1960s to 1988 Australia had a binary system of higher education comprised of universities and colleges of advanced education. The latter were subject to much stricter government regulation. One of the main intentions was to have a system of tertiary education which was more attuned to the economic needs of the nation and less expensive than traditional universities. Colleges of advanced education were supposed (...) to be ‘equal but different’. Historians of education have been criticised for concentrating on facts and acts and for ignoring the human and social dimensions of institutional history. This paper redresses some of these shortcomings. The paper focuses on the individual working lives of a group of academic staff in one of Australia's oldest colleges of advanced education. It examines the influence of government regulations at the individual level. The paper investigates how system-wide restraints were reflected in the institutions they were supposed to influence. The issues covered include academic recruitment, induction programmes, institutional history, the use of sanctions and rewards and controls on teaching. (shrink)

The right to teach at university is a distinctive philosophical and legal conundrum but a largely unexplored question. Drawing on Humboltdian principles, the legitimacy of the university teacher stems from their continuing engagement in research rather than possession of academic and teaching qualifications alone. This means that the right to teach needs to be understood as a privilege and implies that it is always provisional, requiring an ongoing commitment to research. Yet, massification of higher education systems internationally has led to (...) the disaggregation of the academic profession with teaching-only positions now increasingly common. University teachers employed to both teach and research face a narrowing set of performative expectations with respect to how ‘research-active’ is defined. This paper challenges these contemporary understandings and, drawing on historical evidence, argues that a broader definition of research and scholarship needs to underpin the basis of the right to teach. (shrink)

Neoliberalism is invariably presented as a governing regime of market and competition-based systems rather than as a set of migratory practices that are re-setting the ethical standards of the academy. This article seeks to explore the way in which neoliberalism is shifting the prevailing values of the academy by drawing on two illustrations: the death of disinterestedness and the obfuscation of authorship. While there was never a golden age when norms such as disinterestedness were universally practiced they represented widely accepted (...) aesthetic ideals associated with academic life. By contrast, neoliberal academics embrace a new set of assumptions and norms that stand in sharp relief to many of the values that were previously espoused. Practices that might have been regarded as ethically dubious by earlier generations of academics, such as grantsmanship, self-justificatory expressions of interestedness and tangential claims to authorship, are now regarded as legitimate and positive virtues in a more aggressive age of hyper-performativity. (shrink)