At 02:31 PM 8/09/2001 +1000, Andy wrote:
>Phil, that's a really fine paper.
Thanks Andy --- you're very kind. I'm a bit embarrassed by it by now
because it seems so long ago that we wrote it, and both of us have done so
much in between.
>The first half dealing with the ethical issue of the subordination of
>education to economic rationalist (neo-liberal) political agendas was a
>bit obvious for me, but once I got past the half-way mark, with the
>section on "student-as-client" I really appreciated it. I think I will
>give you email a bit of circulation in Melbourne Uni. I'm sure there will
>be some people who will really enjoy it.
I can send the MS word file as an attachment if you (or anyone else) wants
it. It looks a bit neater.
>Could I make this one suggestion: we should not give the "managerialists",
>the "customer-focus ideologues", "economic rationalists" or whatever you
>call them, the ground outside of education. That is, we know their
>ideology stinks when applied to education, but actually it stinks when
>applied to hospitality and building construction too. That is, the
>relationship academics foster with their students (described by Martin
>Owen) is not something which is unique to education. Whether I'm looking
>for accommodation or trying to get a building put up, I would expect the
>same relationship. Your Bruno is not only lacking in understanding of
>education when he equates it with building construction, he actually has a
>poor understanding of construction as well.
I laughed out loud when I read this. How very true. I had never thought of
it like that. And I agree wholeheartedly.
Thanks.
Phil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 15:49:10 PDT