There are
in fact two viable and desirable alternatives to the current triad paradigm of
institutional service units (universities/colleges), government finance
(state/federal) and union labour representation. Higher education and research do not need to
be provided and are not sustainable under the triad, and are better
served under the professional and cooperative service paradigms.
Cooperatives
immediately avoid the negative perceptions (and tendencies) associated with
professions such as social and economic elitism, institutionalization,
diminished civic responsibility, and undemocratic decision-making structures. As such, they might also be more readily and
constructively integrated with the existing paradigm.
Cooperatives
are functionaries like the current or professional paradigms and share a common
legal status. They can be of the worker or social benefit variety, or an
original design specially tuned to higher education. They conduct business in the social economy,
where higher education ought to be located.
They engage shared governance and one vote per member representation,
with membership composed of academics, students, and general citizens rather
than government bureaucrats and institutional administrators. They temper price and profit concerns by
focusing on civic duty and responsibility, not individual or institutional
gain.
The full
complement of financial, labour, ethical, and service relationship advantages
offered by the professional alternative are reproduced in an academic
cooperative. For instance, cooperative
higher education operates on the current rate of tuition alone, abates
exploitation of core labour (academics, teaching and research assistants), and
improves the academic/student relationship.
Cooperatives
are more likely to avoid other perceived and potential negative effects of a
formal profession, such as: an extreme shift in the power base of higher
education; institutionalization of the service; professional elitism; dramatic
increases in the price of service; inadequate stewardship; and insufficient
membership disciplinary action.
These
distinctions provide further material that might recommend one of the three
available paradigms over the other.
Successful
teacher owned and operated educational cooperatives have demonstrated the
possibility and utility of this service paradigm in elementary and secondary
education. There are presently at least
90 in the US, with exceptional examples found in Wisconsin and Minnesota
(School for Urban Planning and Architecture (Wisconsin) and Minnesota New Country School).
As is the
case with the professional alternative, these coops eliminate, redistribute,
and contract for the required services of elementary and secondary education,
including (but not limited to): student transportation and food; evaluation;
curriculum development; record keeping; human resources; admission and
registration.
No comments:
Post a Comment