BibTex RIS Cite

Yirmi birinci yüzyılda üniversite fikri: Hayal gücü nerede?*

Year 2011, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 88 - 94, 01.12.2011

Abstract

Yirmi birinci yüzyılda üniversite kavramı, umutsuz bir biçimde fakirleştirilmektedir. Kavram, üniversite ile ilişkilendirilmek üzere ortaya atılan sınırlı fikir yelpazesinde "fakirleştirilmektedir". Karakteristik olarak günümüzde ortada dolaşan fikirler, kendilerini, üniversitenin ortaya çıkan çağdaş biçimlerini genişletmek ve onaylamakla sınırlandırmaktadır. Üniversite fikrinin artık geniş ölçüde umutsuz olduğu yönünde de "ümitsizce fakirleştirme" yapılmaktadır. Üniversitelerin varsaydığı çağdaş kurumsal biçimlerle ciddi bir şekilde yakın ilişki kurulan durumlarda, üniversite hakkında düşünmek ve tartışmak bazen ciddi bir atmosfere bürünebilmekte, ancak hiçbir alternatifin olmadığı, umursamaz bir tavır benimsenmektedir. Bu nedenle, üniversite hakkındaki fikirler, kapalıdır; bu büyük oranda gönüllü bir kapalılıktır. Üniversite fikirlerinin açık hale gelmesinin gerekli bir koşulu, hayal gücünün iyileşmesidir. Hayal gücünün yaratıcı kullanımı aracılığıyla, makul ütopyalar derlenebilir. Ancak bu tür ütopyalar, makul olsalar dahi, kendi içlerinde inandırıcı fikirlerin oluşmasına yönelik yeterli koşulu taşımazlar. Bu tür bir meşruiyet kazandırma, yaratıcı üniversite fikirlerini yeterlik kriterlerine tabi tutma süreciyle türetilebilir. Etkili üniversite fikirlerini etkili olmayan fikirlerden ayıran ayrıştırıcılar olarak değerlendirilebilecek beş yeterlik ölçütü tanımlanmaktadır. Ekolojik üniversiteye dair bir fikir, beş ölçüt yönünden test edilmekte ve karşılığında entellektüel ve uygulamalı teminat elde edeceği görülebilmektedir. Beş yeterlik ölçütünün yaratıcı fikirleri haksız yere elimine etmeyeceği, bundan ziyade ek üniversite fikirlerinin oluşturulmasına yardım edebileceği de ayrıca irdelenmektedir.

References

  • Barnett, R. (2000). Realizing the university in an age of supercomplexity. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
  • Barnett, R. (2011). Being a university. Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Bhaskar, R. (2002). From science to emancipation: journeys towards meta-real- ity – A philosophy for the present. New Delhi: Sage.
  • Deleuze, G. (2001). Difference and repetition. London: Continuum.
  • Derrida, J. (2004). Mochlos, or the conflict of the faculties. In his Eyes of the university. Right to philosophy 2 (pp. 83-112). Stanford: Stanford University.
  • Dienstag, J. F. (2006). Pessimism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
  • Ecclestone, K., and Hayes, D. (Eds.). (2009). The dangerous rise of thera- peutic education. London: Routledge.
  • Ehrlich, T. (Ed.). (2000). Civic responsibility and higher education. Pheonix, Arizona: American Council on Education/The Oryx Press.
  • Erdinç, Z. (2002). Australia online; borderless university. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 3(4).
  • Gratton, P., and Panteleimon Manoussakis, J. (Eds.). (2007). Traversing the imaginary: Richard Kearney and the postmodern challenge. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • Guattari, F. (2005 [1989]). The three ecologies. London: Continuum.
  • Jacoby, R. (2005). Picture imperfect: utopian thought for an anti-utopian age. New York: Columbia Universtiy Press.
  • Kearney, R. (2007). Foreword. In P. Gratton and J. Panteleimon Manoussakis (Eds.), Traversing the imaginary: Richard Kearney and the postmodern challenge (p. ix). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • McIlrath, L., and Labhrainn, I. M. (Eds.). (2007). Higher education and civic engagement: international perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Malatesta, E. ([1891] 2001). Anarchy. London: Freedom.
  • Maxwell, N. (2008). From knowledge to wisdom: The need for an aca- demic revolution. In R. Barnett and N. Maxwell (Eds.) Wisdom in the university (pp. 1-33). Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Nixon, J. (2008). Towards the virtuous university: The moral bases of academ- ic practice. New York: London.
  • Robins, K., and Webster, F. (Eds.). (2002). The virtual university? Knowledge, markets and management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Sartre, J.-P. ([1940] 2004). The imaginary. London: Routledge.
  • Standaert, N. (2009). Towards a networked university. In R. Barnett, et al. (Eds.), Rethinking the university after Bologna: New concepts and prac- tices beyond tradition and the market (pp. 11-15). Antwerp: UCSIA.
  • Taylor, C. (2007). On social imaginaries. In P. Gratton and J. Panteleimon Manoussakis (Eds.), Traversing the imaginary: Richard Kearney and the postmodern challenge (pp. 29-47). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • Williams, B. (2008). Ethics and the limits of philosophy. London: Routledge.

The Idea of the University in the Twenty-First Century: Where's the Imagination?*

Year 2011, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 88 - 94, 01.12.2011

Abstract

The concept of the university in the twenty-first century is hopelessly impoverished. It is "impoverished" in the limited range of ideas that have come to be associated with the university. Characteristically, the ideas currently in circulation confine themselves to extending and endorsing contemporary emerging forms of the university. It is also "hopelessly impoverished" in that the idea of the university is largely now without hope. Where it seriously engages with contemporary institutional forms assumed by universities, thinking and debate about the university can sometimes adopt critical tones but takes on a shrugging-of-the-shoulders attitude, a sense that there is no alternative. Ideas about the university have closed in, therefore. This closure is largely self-imposed. A necessary condition of an opening of ideas of the university is a recovery of the imagination. Through the creative use of the imagination, feasible utopias can be gleaned. However, such utopias, even if feasible, are not in themselves a sufficient condition of the formation of credible ideas. Such legitimation can be derived from subjecting creative ideas of the university to criteria of adequacy: five criteria of adequacy are identified, which can be seen to act as discriminators, sorting efficacious ideas of the university from non-efficacious ideas. One idea, that of the ecological university, is tested against the five criteria and can be seen in turn to gain intellectual and practical warrant. It is further argued that the five criteria of adequacy will not unduly eliminate creative ideas but rather can act to help in the generation of additional ideas of the university.

References

  • Barnett, R. (2000). Realizing the university in an age of supercomplexity. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
  • Barnett, R. (2011). Being a university. Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Bhaskar, R. (2002). From science to emancipation: journeys towards meta-real- ity – A philosophy for the present. New Delhi: Sage.
  • Deleuze, G. (2001). Difference and repetition. London: Continuum.
  • Derrida, J. (2004). Mochlos, or the conflict of the faculties. In his Eyes of the university. Right to philosophy 2 (pp. 83-112). Stanford: Stanford University.
  • Dienstag, J. F. (2006). Pessimism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
  • Ecclestone, K., and Hayes, D. (Eds.). (2009). The dangerous rise of thera- peutic education. London: Routledge.
  • Ehrlich, T. (Ed.). (2000). Civic responsibility and higher education. Pheonix, Arizona: American Council on Education/The Oryx Press.
  • Erdinç, Z. (2002). Australia online; borderless university. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 3(4).
  • Gratton, P., and Panteleimon Manoussakis, J. (Eds.). (2007). Traversing the imaginary: Richard Kearney and the postmodern challenge. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • Guattari, F. (2005 [1989]). The three ecologies. London: Continuum.
  • Jacoby, R. (2005). Picture imperfect: utopian thought for an anti-utopian age. New York: Columbia Universtiy Press.
  • Kearney, R. (2007). Foreword. In P. Gratton and J. Panteleimon Manoussakis (Eds.), Traversing the imaginary: Richard Kearney and the postmodern challenge (p. ix). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • McIlrath, L., and Labhrainn, I. M. (Eds.). (2007). Higher education and civic engagement: international perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Malatesta, E. ([1891] 2001). Anarchy. London: Freedom.
  • Maxwell, N. (2008). From knowledge to wisdom: The need for an aca- demic revolution. In R. Barnett and N. Maxwell (Eds.) Wisdom in the university (pp. 1-33). Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Nixon, J. (2008). Towards the virtuous university: The moral bases of academ- ic practice. New York: London.
  • Robins, K., and Webster, F. (Eds.). (2002). The virtual university? Knowledge, markets and management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Sartre, J.-P. ([1940] 2004). The imaginary. London: Routledge.
  • Standaert, N. (2009). Towards a networked university. In R. Barnett, et al. (Eds.), Rethinking the university after Bologna: New concepts and prac- tices beyond tradition and the market (pp. 11-15). Antwerp: UCSIA.
  • Taylor, C. (2007). On social imaginaries. In P. Gratton and J. Panteleimon Manoussakis (Eds.), Traversing the imaginary: Richard Kearney and the postmodern challenge (pp. 29-47). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • Williams, B. (2008). Ethics and the limits of philosophy. London: Routledge.
There are 22 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA74EF93TP
Journal Section Literature Review
Authors

Ronald Barnett This is me

Publication Date December 1, 2011
Published in Issue Year 2011 Volume: 1 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Barnett, R. (2011). Yirmi birinci yüzyılda üniversite fikri: Hayal gücü nerede?*. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 1(2), 88-94.

Yükseköğretim Dergisi/TÜBA Higher Education Research/Review (TÜBA-HER) does not officially agree with the ideas of manuscripts published in the journal and does not guarantee for any product or service advertisements on both printed and online versions of the journal. Scientific and legal responsibilities of published manuscripts belong to their authors. Materials such as pictures, figures, tables etc. sent with manuscripts should be original or written approval of copyright holder should be sent with manuscript for publishing in both printed and online versions if they were published before. Authors agree that they transfer all publishing rights to the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), the publisher of the journal. Copyrights of all published contents (text and visual materials) belong to the journal. No payment is done for manuscripts under the name of copyright or others approved for publishing in the journal and no publication cost is charged; however, reprints are at authors' cost.

To promote the development of global open access to scientific information and research, TÜBA provides copyrights of all online published papers (except where otherwise noted) for free use of readers, scientists, and institutions (such as link to the content or permission for its download, distribution, printing, copying, and reproduction in any medium, without any changing and except the commercial purpose), under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND3.0) License, provided the original work is cited. To get permission for commercial purpose please contact the publisher.