While I clearly wish to work with four different, but related, strands in this blog, I seem to have begun with one in particular; the questions around the New Collegiality. There are various reasons for this but as the blog is here to enable me to respond to things that are happening around me then I guess I have to say this is the area that is probably uppermost in my mind at this particular time.
I cannot fully develop the elements of the New Collegiality, however, unless I do at least set out some of the basic starting points and assumptions that are part of my thinking. That, therefore, is the purpose of this posting. The idea comes from my current work within the University of Birmingham. Here I am Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor for Staffing and in that I role I act as an academic voice within a number of different staffing and student related agendas. There are three in particular that I have focussed on in the last year or so. The first is Equality and Diversity, the second Employability and the third is the development of Performance Development Reviews across the University. It is not my place here to comment on how these have developed or to talk specifically about the University of Birmingham. It is thinking through these agendas that has led me to ask about the more general principles on which staff development (in its widest sense) within the University could be developed.
These more general principles can, perhaps, be labelled as 'performance', 'diversity' and 'innovation'. Let me, therefore, just explain what I mean by each of these and then I will aim to bring them back together at the end of the post to say how they might be combined in the concept of the 'new collegiality'.
Performance can be understood in many different ways within a University context, from the role of individuals (as in a PDR) through the performance of teams, departments, schools (or whatever other structural units are relevant) to the performance of the whole institution. The measures of performance will also change depending on what kind of level is being looked at and the reasons why the measurement is needed. There is no question that all Universities are aiming at 'excellence' and as such some kind of incentive to performance is going to be essential. The real issue, however, is the way in which a particular institution, or sub-section of the institution, is going to understand 'excellence' and therefore how they are going to measure it. I am not, at this early stage, going to set myself limits on what I might mean by performance (I am still reflecting and thinking about the concepts) although I will note that I am currently looking at the idea of performance in terms of essential attitudes or behaviours rather than through specific targets and this, I think, will end up being more in tune with the other features of the overall model.
Diversity is something that we all live with in the modern world and particularly in the University. The equality and diversity agenda tends to assume that we are talking here of specific characteristics, be that gender, ethnicity, sexuality, disability or whatever. I am fully committed to the wider equality and diversity agenda as understood in these terms and would even go so far as to suggest that teams and groups will always work best (perform to their highest standard) when there is a good range of different types of people involved. Diversity, however, can also mean other things. A great deal of work on team building suggests that a research team, a teaching team or any other kind of collaborative arrangement will need a very diverse range of personalities and talents within it in order to deliver whatever it is that is required. In a very different sence, and treating diversity from a completely other perspective, I am also fully committed to interdisciplinarity and cannot see how any contemporary academic study can be undertaken without at least some commitment to an interdisciplinary context. This can also be understood as 'diversity'.
Innovation is the final piece of the jigsaw. Here I am thinking perhaps of the need for a flexible structure, an entrepreneurial attitude and outlook, and the willingness to take risks and to try out new things. Many of the large traditional Universities in the UK do not have a good track record on innovation as institutions, although many of their research staff in particular take the principle of exploring the outer edges of their disciplines in new and innovative ways totally for granted. This can, of course, create internal pressures as researchers and institutions pull in different directions. From the work that I have done within employability, however, and the consequential engagement with businesses that this has led to, I see no reason why innovation and flexibility cannot be introduced much more widely within the University. My guess, however, is that of the three principles that I have outlined this will be the most difficult to persuade many managers to embrace (at least beyond the ideological assent).
Performance (excellence), diversity (equality, teamwork and interdisciplinarity) and innovation (flexibility, entrepreneurialism) are all interrelated. To bring the three together within a particular institution and to maintain a critical tension between all three would demand, I would expect, a focus less on the individual and more on creative, and perhaps ever changing, teams, whether in research, teaching, outreach, student support or whatever area of the University's work we might be talking about. It is this complex, creative approach that I want to give the overall title of the New Collegiality and what I wish to do as this particular strand of the blog develops is to explore different ways in which the individual strands, and their points of overlap and interconnection, can be developed.
Monday 25 February 2013
Wednesday 6 February 2013
Theology and the University, Reflections on Nostalgia
Yesterday evening (Tuesday 5th Feb) John Milbank came to give the Cadbury Lecture here at the University of Birmingham on the theme of 'Theology and the Idea of the University'. I have always enjoyed reading John's work and I actually enjoyed the lecture. My overall view, however, is that while I tend to agree with much of his analysis of the 'problem', I very rarely agree with his particular 'solution'. Last night's lecture was a very clear case in point.
I may have got some of the facts, or points in the argument, wrong so please do take this as a definitive presentation of John Milbank's ideas. However, as I understand it, the main point he wanted to make was that of the three primary characteristics of the University, universality of knowledge, independence of institution and freedom of expression, the first has its roots clearly in the Christian theological tradition, the second in a more secular reaction and the third sat somewhere between the Christian and the secular.
As ever John provided a clear and detailed exposition of the history, or genealogy, of the 'university' as an idea and an institution. It was the question of universality, however, that formed the bulk of the lecture and John traced this back, not to the University as such, but rather to the idea of the Cathedral school as an arena for the widest range of possible disciplines. It is only when we include God within the preview of what that universality of knowledge, or study, might include that, according to John, we can really talk about 'universality of knowledge' at all. This suggests, therefore, that theology must have a role within the University and John went on to argue, drawing on the tradition of Newman's 'Idea of a University', that it ought to be possible to explore a theological reading of history, sociology, literature, biology and even maths. He did acknowledge, however, that this would probably be best done in the modern world within the context of a Christian (or other faith based) institution.
I am very certain that I do not share John's view of what 'theology' is or could be (although that is a discussion for another day). I am also unsure whether any 'theological' understanding of, say, science, might have a place within the contemporary University. What concerned me, however, about the kinds of solutions that John was presenting for the contemporary University is that they did not seem to take account of where Universities are in the real world. John did use the word 'nostalgic' and one of the questions from the floor suggested 'romantic', although this was clearly rejected by John. There is, however, always a sense with John's 'solutions' that we have to look back into history, usually pre-reformation Christian history, and lift something from that time and space into the present, that we can only go forward by looking back. Of course we can all learn from history, and I would be among the first to suggest that we should explore all the different possibilities and potentialities that exist in our past, but this could never be a blueprint for the future.
In these notes I am presenting one strand on what I have called 'the new collegiality', a new future for the University. It would be easy to see this also as mere 'nostalgia' for a lost past. The use of the term 'collegiality' in my title certainly suggests that that is where I want to go. That, however, is not the case. We are in a different space, a new space. We cannot go back to models from the time when Christian (or even religious) discourses were dominant. We cannot go back to Newman's context of the mid-nineteenth century (although I would, and will, argue that there is much we can learn from this time). Nor can we go back to the cosy 'collegial' ideal of the 1960s, or whatever period we care to choose. That does not mean, however, that we have to accept the status quo or that there is nowhere else to go. In these notes I do want to present a clear vision, based on where I believe we have got to and where we need to go forward. Theology may have a place in that vision (alongside many other disciplines) but will certainly not be my own starting point, at least not in the way John Milbank understands 'theology'.
I may have got some of the facts, or points in the argument, wrong so please do take this as a definitive presentation of John Milbank's ideas. However, as I understand it, the main point he wanted to make was that of the three primary characteristics of the University, universality of knowledge, independence of institution and freedom of expression, the first has its roots clearly in the Christian theological tradition, the second in a more secular reaction and the third sat somewhere between the Christian and the secular.
As ever John provided a clear and detailed exposition of the history, or genealogy, of the 'university' as an idea and an institution. It was the question of universality, however, that formed the bulk of the lecture and John traced this back, not to the University as such, but rather to the idea of the Cathedral school as an arena for the widest range of possible disciplines. It is only when we include God within the preview of what that universality of knowledge, or study, might include that, according to John, we can really talk about 'universality of knowledge' at all. This suggests, therefore, that theology must have a role within the University and John went on to argue, drawing on the tradition of Newman's 'Idea of a University', that it ought to be possible to explore a theological reading of history, sociology, literature, biology and even maths. He did acknowledge, however, that this would probably be best done in the modern world within the context of a Christian (or other faith based) institution.
I am very certain that I do not share John's view of what 'theology' is or could be (although that is a discussion for another day). I am also unsure whether any 'theological' understanding of, say, science, might have a place within the contemporary University. What concerned me, however, about the kinds of solutions that John was presenting for the contemporary University is that they did not seem to take account of where Universities are in the real world. John did use the word 'nostalgic' and one of the questions from the floor suggested 'romantic', although this was clearly rejected by John. There is, however, always a sense with John's 'solutions' that we have to look back into history, usually pre-reformation Christian history, and lift something from that time and space into the present, that we can only go forward by looking back. Of course we can all learn from history, and I would be among the first to suggest that we should explore all the different possibilities and potentialities that exist in our past, but this could never be a blueprint for the future.
In these notes I am presenting one strand on what I have called 'the new collegiality', a new future for the University. It would be easy to see this also as mere 'nostalgia' for a lost past. The use of the term 'collegiality' in my title certainly suggests that that is where I want to go. That, however, is not the case. We are in a different space, a new space. We cannot go back to models from the time when Christian (or even religious) discourses were dominant. We cannot go back to Newman's context of the mid-nineteenth century (although I would, and will, argue that there is much we can learn from this time). Nor can we go back to the cosy 'collegial' ideal of the 1960s, or whatever period we care to choose. That does not mean, however, that we have to accept the status quo or that there is nowhere else to go. In these notes I do want to present a clear vision, based on where I believe we have got to and where we need to go forward. Theology may have a place in that vision (alongside many other disciplines) but will certainly not be my own starting point, at least not in the way John Milbank understands 'theology'.
Friday 1 February 2013
Introducing myself
There are many things that I could write about, and much that could be written. My aim here is to focus on four things that I think might generate some comment.
I am an anthropologist by training, I am Professor of Liturgical and Congregational Studies and have published a Sociological History of Christian Worship. I am Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor (Staffing) of the University of Birmingham. I am Chair of the Heritage and Cultural Learning Hub, that aims to provide digital solutions for galleries, museums, archives and libraries (GLAMs) and a member of the Institute for Research into Superdiversity (IRiS). I was born in Tanzania and collect the sculptures, masks and other art of the Dogon societies of Mali.
I was described recently as a 'connecter'. Although I am not quite sure what was meant by that when it was said, I do know that I have always tended to be eclectic in my interests and am fascinated by what happens when the unexpected are juxtaposed and forced to talk to each other.
At one level this leads to a fascination with diversity. This picks up my anthropological roots of course, but also comes through in terms of the thrill of investigating the many different ways Christian worship (Armenian, Ethiopian, Indian churches as well as contemporary Pentecostal traditions and inculturation across Africa and beyond). It is seen in my most recent book on Discourses of Religious Diversity in Birmingham (and more of that later) and in my strong belief that the modern university has to be based in the celebration of diversity (both of people and of disciplines).
At another level it leads me to want to see theory from one field applied to something entirely other. I am dyslexic and think visually. I rarely work in straight lines and linear rationality or linear narrative seems so unreal. My exploration of multi-touch digital technology is perhaps more theoretical than practical, but it is the possibilities that this opens up for thinking in three or four dimensions, for unexpected and totally surprising juxtapositions and for collaborative research that really gets me excited. Post-modernism, we could say, began to take things to pieces, created intellectual debris without any real focus, or perhaps even any real future. We have to think beyond the post-modern, to the reconstructions, the reconfigurations that are possible, the multi-disciplinary investigations, the excitement of the new and the unexpected.
I love cities, I travel as and when I can. Maps fascinate me (again the visual thinking) and the layers of history and culture that can be seen in the buildings, the street furniture, the signs and the people of the city. I want to use this blog as a kind of exploratory journey through an imaginary intellectual cityscape, to comment on what I am reading, my conversations, my travels, my thoughts, and simply to see where this may lead. I welcome companions on the journey, why else would I blog, but I guess the journey will remain my own.
I have called this the Stringer Quartet. I want to follow four different, but probably overlapping paths, and will make it clear in the titles which thread each post will follow. These four strands, four strings if you like, reflect four areas of my current thinking and for now I will give them the following titles and subtitles.
I am an anthropologist by training, I am Professor of Liturgical and Congregational Studies and have published a Sociological History of Christian Worship. I am Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor (Staffing) of the University of Birmingham. I am Chair of the Heritage and Cultural Learning Hub, that aims to provide digital solutions for galleries, museums, archives and libraries (GLAMs) and a member of the Institute for Research into Superdiversity (IRiS). I was born in Tanzania and collect the sculptures, masks and other art of the Dogon societies of Mali.
I was described recently as a 'connecter'. Although I am not quite sure what was meant by that when it was said, I do know that I have always tended to be eclectic in my interests and am fascinated by what happens when the unexpected are juxtaposed and forced to talk to each other.
At one level this leads to a fascination with diversity. This picks up my anthropological roots of course, but also comes through in terms of the thrill of investigating the many different ways Christian worship (Armenian, Ethiopian, Indian churches as well as contemporary Pentecostal traditions and inculturation across Africa and beyond). It is seen in my most recent book on Discourses of Religious Diversity in Birmingham (and more of that later) and in my strong belief that the modern university has to be based in the celebration of diversity (both of people and of disciplines).
At another level it leads me to want to see theory from one field applied to something entirely other. I am dyslexic and think visually. I rarely work in straight lines and linear rationality or linear narrative seems so unreal. My exploration of multi-touch digital technology is perhaps more theoretical than practical, but it is the possibilities that this opens up for thinking in three or four dimensions, for unexpected and totally surprising juxtapositions and for collaborative research that really gets me excited. Post-modernism, we could say, began to take things to pieces, created intellectual debris without any real focus, or perhaps even any real future. We have to think beyond the post-modern, to the reconstructions, the reconfigurations that are possible, the multi-disciplinary investigations, the excitement of the new and the unexpected.
I love cities, I travel as and when I can. Maps fascinate me (again the visual thinking) and the layers of history and culture that can be seen in the buildings, the street furniture, the signs and the people of the city. I want to use this blog as a kind of exploratory journey through an imaginary intellectual cityscape, to comment on what I am reading, my conversations, my travels, my thoughts, and simply to see where this may lead. I welcome companions on the journey, why else would I blog, but I guess the journey will remain my own.
I have called this the Stringer Quartet. I want to follow four different, but probably overlapping paths, and will make it clear in the titles which thread each post will follow. These four strands, four strings if you like, reflect four areas of my current thinking and for now I will give them the following titles and subtitles.
- Towards a General Theory of Religion (what does it mean to be religious in the contemporary world?)
- The New Collegiality (what shape should the contemporary university - and especially Arts and Humanities - take?)
- The Uses of the Dogon (my reflections on art, museums, anthropology, culture and tourism and the subject of my current writing project/book)
- Post-post-modernism (I have no better title for now, but aiming to get beyond linear rationality to a new way of thinking)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)