I don't know if it will be helpful to you or but your comments made me think of:
what are the key goals of the mission statement
what kind of society is it appealing to with these goals in hopes of transforming
that society into something that it either is not and hopes that it will become or
believes it is whether in fact it is or not. My own prejudice is with the former and
not the latter since I believe that is where the university as an institution of the
state will find its power/knowledge is in the hunger of the society. University can
easily be seen as agents of transformation used by the state to produce a certain
kind of individual that society needs or thinks it wants... unintended consequences
aside.
And of course I use the words "needs" and "wants" loosely here but in the spirit of
D&P.
Sheila
Diane Westerhuis wrote:
> I would like to invite comment on a problem I am struggling with in my
> thesis, which is a study of the socio-technological change in \"the university\"
> in a society \"we may properly call the network society, characterized by the
> preeminence of social morphology over social action\" (Castells, 96), which
> others label the postmodern society.
> I have two approaches - looking at ideology and purpose, using the mission
> statement as data, and attempting to understand the subjectivity of the
> institution, the self conscious perspective of the subject, the institution of
> the university.
>
> My problem is when dealing with the \"morphology\" or shape of the society,
> how do we understand the centrality of subjectivity to the organisation of
> social and political relations? I have difficulty analysing subjectivity in this
> study of the university as an institution, and its relation to the state.
> any comments or reflections would be appreciated.
>
> Diane Westerhuis
> School of Psychology and Sociology
> James Cook University
> Townsville, North Queensland.
> Phone (07) 4781 4808
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: http://web.horde.org/imp/
what are the key goals of the mission statement
what kind of society is it appealing to with these goals in hopes of transforming
that society into something that it either is not and hopes that it will become or
believes it is whether in fact it is or not. My own prejudice is with the former and
not the latter since I believe that is where the university as an institution of the
state will find its power/knowledge is in the hunger of the society. University can
easily be seen as agents of transformation used by the state to produce a certain
kind of individual that society needs or thinks it wants... unintended consequences
aside.
And of course I use the words "needs" and "wants" loosely here but in the spirit of
D&P.
Sheila
Diane Westerhuis wrote:
> I would like to invite comment on a problem I am struggling with in my
> thesis, which is a study of the socio-technological change in \"the university\"
> in a society \"we may properly call the network society, characterized by the
> preeminence of social morphology over social action\" (Castells, 96), which
> others label the postmodern society.
> I have two approaches - looking at ideology and purpose, using the mission
> statement as data, and attempting to understand the subjectivity of the
> institution, the self conscious perspective of the subject, the institution of
> the university.
>
> My problem is when dealing with the \"morphology\" or shape of the society,
> how do we understand the centrality of subjectivity to the organisation of
> social and political relations? I have difficulty analysing subjectivity in this
> study of the university as an institution, and its relation to the state.
> any comments or reflections would be appreciated.
>
> Diane Westerhuis
> School of Psychology and Sociology
> James Cook University
> Townsville, North Queensland.
> Phone (07) 4781 4808
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: http://web.horde.org/imp/