Introduction
10.7340/anuac2239-625X-2987
Articolo introduttivo dei curatori del Forum.
application/pdf
2239-625X
2987
1
en
Filippo M. Zerilli
Anuac
Introduction
Text.Serial.Journal
https://ojs.unica.it/index.php/anuac
6
Forum: Anthropologists Witnessing and Reshaping the Neoliberal Academy
2017-07-18
2017-06-27
2017-07-17
2017-07-18
23-27
1
Filippo M. Zerilli
2017/07/18
10.7340/anuac2239-625X-2987
23
Università di Cagliari, Italy
2239-625X
1
en
27
Introduction
https://ojs.unica.it/index.php/anuac/article/download/2987/2594
6
                                                  2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27




                                                                                              FORUM




Student demonstration against fees and cuts, Aberdeen. Credits: http://anticuts.com/wp-content/uploads /
2015/07/ Aberdeen-student-left-banner.jpg


Anthropologists witnessing and reshaping the neoliberal academy
Edited by
Tracey HEATHERINGTON & Filippo M. ZERILLI

Contributions of
Virginia R. DOMINGUEZ, Sam BECK, Carl A. MAIDA, Martin A. MILLS, Berardino
PALUMBO, Alan SMART, Ger DUIJZINGS, Alexis M. JORDAN & Shaheen M. CHRISTIE,
Boone W. SHEAR, Alex KOENSLER & Cristina PAPA, THE RECLAIMING OUR UNIVERSITY
MOVEMENT.




This work is licensed under the Creative Commons © TRACEY HEATHERINGTON, FILIPPO M. ZERILLI
Introduction
2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27.
ISSN: 2239-625X – DOI: 10.7340/anuac2239-625X-2987
ANTHROPOLOGISTS WITNESSING AND RESHAPING THE NEOLIBERAL ACADEMY              23




Introduction
Tracey HEATHERINGTON
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee
Filippo M. ZERILLI
University of Cagliari


   In the summer of 2016, Anuac hosted a forum dedicated to Anthropolo-
gists in/of the neoliberal academy (Heatherington, Zerilli 2016), featuring
short papers by colleagues across Europe, North America, and beyond. Con-
tributions witnessed unfolding transformations in their universities related
to changing education policy frameworks, declines in funding, the introduc-
tion of audit cultures, and new forms of public-private partnership. As San-
dra Grey has recently described the case of New Zealand universities sub-
jected to rigorous managerial systems, «the picture is one of institutions and
their academics being robbed of the space to be engaged in projects which
are not countable, auditable, measurable or commercializable» (2017: 275).
This suggests profound impacts on the mission of higher education and pos-
sibilities for critical research. Shore and Wright have explained, with particu-
lar reference to studies of institutions in Europe and New Zealand, «under
pressure to produce “excellence”, quality research and innovative teaching,
improve world rankings, forge business links and attract elite, fee-paying
students, many universities struggle to maintain their traditional mandate to
be “inclusive”, foster social cohesion, improve social mobility and challenge
received wisdom – let alone improve the poor records of gender, diversity
and equality» (2017: 1-2). These same pressures have been recognized by the
American Association of University Professors, which recently marked seri-
ous threats to systems of shared governance, organized labour, principles of
social diversity, and the fundamental role of colleges and universities in the
U.S. (Barlow 2017).
   Anthropologists continue to witness – as students, researchers, practi-
tioners, teachers, community advocates and administrators – how the struc-
tural changes impacting higher education and research are affecting the fu-
ture of our discipline, our institutions and our society writ large. Our second
forum proceeds with this important work of participant observation in the


2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27
24                                         TRACEY HEATHERINGTON, FILIPPO M. ZERILLI (EDS)


evolution of the neoliberal academy, from the perspective of diverse subject
positions and national contexts. We are interested not only in the outcome
of research and scholarship in the anthropology of higher education, but also
in documenting the changing conditions of our everyday work in the acad-
emy, as well as the movements taking shape to resist and channel neoliberal
initiatives that affect us. Snapshots of current academic contexts across the
U.S. are provided by contributions from Virginia R. Dominguez, Sam Beck,
Carl Maida, Alexis M. Jordan & Shaheen M. Christie, and Boone W. Shear. In
addition, Martin A. Mills offers a perspective from Scotland, Berardino
Palumbo discusses developments in Italy, Alan Smart provides insight from
Canada, and Ger Duijzings reflects on an institution in Britain, while Alexan-
der Koensler & Cristina Papa discuss comparative examples from Northern
Ireland and Italy. Taken together, these grounded commentaries represent
more than the sum of the parts. Like the essays contained in our 2016 forum,
they are also evidence of the collective spirit of our discipline, which is fun-
damentally self-reflective and engaged. We are also pleased to reprint the
2016 Manifesto from the University of Aberdeen, Reclaiming Our University,
which seeks out a new model for the public university in the twenty-first
century.
   Documenting the erosion of the tenure system in the U.S., Dominguez ex-
plores the pivotal principle of academic freedom. Although protected by Eu-
ropean constitutional law (COE 2006), and written into the statutes of some
state systems, the right to freedom of academic research and teaching is in-
creasingly jeopardized by emerging procedures of administrative control and
sanctions, as well as obligations and limitations associated with privately
sponsored projects. Koensler & Papa (this forum) argue that the unspoken
purpose of transformations in academic administration is the making of a
new, docile subject: the “flexible academic person”. This recalls Jon Mit-
chell’s crucial point that «the transformation of subjectivity is not a “soft”
project, but the hard edge of neoliberalism» (2016: 90). Yet academics are
anything but docile, and diverse scholarly projects address challenges to the
core values of the university. In the Auckland Declaration on the Purpose of
the University in the 21st Century, for example, an international collabora-
tion of students and academics from China, Canada, New Zealand, Australia,
Malaysia, Singapore, USA and European countries affirm the principle of
higher education as a public good, and the necessity for institutions, re-
searchers and educators to remain autonomous actors in order to fulfil man-
dates as «critic and conscience of society» (Newfield et al. 2016). Identifying
a «new social contract for higher education», they insist,


                                        2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27
ANTHROPOLOGISTS WITNESSING AND RESHAPING THE NEOLIBERAL ACADEMY                      25

      Universities’ responsibilities to societies must always take precedence over
      their accountability to their funders. Constraints and conditions on funding
      must not be used to compromise their educational autonomy, academic free-
      dom, or social responsibility (ivi).

   Drawing on experiences with educational theories and practices in U.S.
public universities, both Beck and Maida stress the fundamental value of
learning as an engaging engaged, transformative social practice in their con-
tributions to this forum.
   However, “learning away from neoliberalism”, as Boone poetically sug-
gests in his essay, is a route cobbled with paradoxes and contradictions. Ne-
oliberal restructuring cannot be easily refused or reversed; neither should it
be conceived as a monolithic, teleological process. In fact, Palumbo argues
that despite evidence of the limits and damages produced by the recently es-
tablished university audit system in Italy, it is better than relying on the
“backward”, “tribal” evaluation and recruitment practices that have previ-
ously held sway in Italian social anthropology. On the other hand, neoliberal
processes do not necessarily transform all universities into institutions that
operate according to the logic of profit seeking: as Smart contends in his
commentary, the Canadian academy works rather as an economy of prestige
that nonetheless serves the production of private profit, like the State itself.
The contradictions and opacity of the university business model and dis-
course is also at the core of Mills’ contribution, according to which: «the eco-
nomic dynamics at work in these changes are far more unclear, and the
rhetoric of neoliberalism and “business” hides considerable confusion, sug-
gesting that it is something of a red herring» (Mills, this forum). And if the
business model is far from being as efficient and worthwhile as it pretends to
be, on the other hand «the movement for engagement is both part of this in-
tegration [into the market economy] and a movement of resistance against
the neoliberal political economy» (Beck, this forum). Duijzings adopts a dif-
ferent kind of voice in his “ethnographic dispatches” that offer a perspective
on the transformation process at a well-known institution in UK. His vivid
account suggests that university teachers and professors, students, adminis-
trative staff and blue collar service personnel are all atomized categories of
persons in the university who are rigidly classified, hierarchically organized,
and most importantly kept separate one from the other, as though they were
living in different, often conflicting professional worlds. It is this implicit so-
cial division that undermines their capacity to resist structural violence,
whereas a coordinated coalition might assert an alternative to the prevailing
university model.

2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27
26                                               TRACEY HEATHERINGTON, FILIPPO M. ZERILLI (EDS)


   This year’s forum is concerned to explore how anthropologists are in fact
actively re-envisioning and reshaping the institutions within which we work.
As Shore and Wright (2017: 18-21) discuss, the corporate university is not
the only model available to us; some academics are now participating in
trust universities, cooperative universities and free universities. These au-
thors conclude that such alternative projects of higher education may not be
viable substitutes for the public university, «however they do illustrate the
advantages of an educational system freed from commercial imperatives…
[and they highlight] a commitment to, and confidence in, higher education as
a vehicle for promoting a better future for all» (ibidem: 21). Such creative de-
termination and collaboration is required to find new paths forward for pub-
lic education. In this forum, we have sought out contributions that look to-
ward a vision for reshaping the neoliberal academy in positive ways. While
all of the essays here contribute understandings that support our scope for
agency, a provocative contribution from Shear on the role of the “solidarity
economy” movement on and off campus in Massachusetts is particularly
apropos in this respect. Similarly, Jordan and Christie document the efforts
of students, academic staff and faculty working together to advocate for aca-
demic freedom in Wisconsin. Each of these pieces supports the argument
that only a genuine collaborative effort of students and teachers can help us
move towards a new academic community envisioning the university «as a
location of possibility from which to locate and advance lines of connection
to egalitarian worlds» (Shear, this forum). This is perhaps best exemplified by
the Reclaiming Our University movement originating at the University of Ab-
erdeen, with its Manifesto providing an anchor to our forum:
     We, scholars, students, staff and alumni of the University of Aberdeen, call for
     fundamental reform of the principles, ethos and organisation of our university,
     in order (1) that it should be restored to the community to which it belongs and
     (2) that it can fulfil its civic purpose in a manner appropriate to our times, in
     the defence of democracy, peaceful coexistence and human flourishing.

   We invite our colleagues around the world to respond and contribute to
this continuing exchange of ideas about the future of the academy. As Aaron
Barlow avers, «We have work to do… We cannot allow decisions about our in-
stitutions to be made without our participation» (2017: 2).
   Like the rest of this Anuac issue, our forum is dedicated to the memory of
anthropologist Ugo Fabietti, whose progressive vision for the future of the
discipline continues to provoke novel intellectual explorations.



                                             2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27
ANTHROPOLOGISTS WITNESSING AND RESHAPING THE NEOLIBERAL ACADEMY                     27



REFERENCES
Barlow, Aaron, 2017, From the Editor: Activism 2017, Academe, 103, 1: 2.
COE 2006, Academic freedom and university autonomy, Parliamentary Assembly Rec-
      ommendation 1762 (2006), Council of Europe, http://assembly.coe.int
Grey, Sandra, 2017, Resistance in the Neoliberal University, in Death of the Public
      University? Uncertain Futures for Higher Education in the Knowledge Economy,
      Susan Wright, Cris Shore, eds, Oxford, UK, Berghahn: 275-295.
Heatherington, Tracey, Filippo M. Zerilli, eds, 2016, Anthropologists in/of the neolib-
      eral academy, Forum, Anuac, 5, 1: 41-90.
Mitchell, Jon P., 2016, Let Our Profs Be Profs, Anuac, 5, 1: 87-90.
Newfield, Chris, et al., 2016, Auckland Declaration on the Purpose of the University in
      the 21st Century, draft statement, Universities in the Knowledge Economy
      project website, http://unike.au.dk/the-auckland-declaration.
Shore, Cris, Susan Wright, 2017, Introduction. Privatizing the Public University: Key
      Trends, Countertrends and Alternatives, in Death of the Public University? Un-
      certain Futures for Higher Education in the Knowledge Economy, Susan Wright,
      Cris Shore, eds, Oxford, UK, Berghahn: 1-27.




2017 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 6, N° 1, GIUGNO 2017: 23-27
