Abstract
This chapter uses Foucault’s conceptions of power/knowledge and resistance to dispute the efficacy of approaches commonly used in neoliberal universities to support people from diverse backgrounds to become productive scholarly writers. It argues that because these approaches do not take account of the genealogy of universities and the disciplinary knowledges they develop, maintain and refine, they are likely to increase, not decrease, exclusion. The chapter uses Foucault’s concept of ‘self-writing’ to argue that emerging academics need support, not to follow other people’s rules, but to self-consciously ‘care for’—and create—themselves as academics/writers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For example, by building institutional marae (Māori spaces), providing Muslim prayer rooms, supporting the Rainbow Tick initiative, displaying multi-lingual signage, and so on.
- 2.
The terms Mode 1 and Mode 2 Knowledge originated in the work described in Gibbons et al (1994).
- 3.
The term massification is used deliberately here. In economic terms massification is a strategy used by luxury companies to extend sales of their product or service into broader ‘mass’ markets. In the 1970s less than 10% of young people participated in university-level study: today participation rates sit at around 50% in most ‘developed’ countries.
- 4.
- 5.
As Khylee Quince, a Māori law academic, recently put it in a news media article: “Māori have been given an invitation to the dance, where the venue, playlist and menu are set by the hosts, and the hosts are unlikely to look like them or share their values or experiences. …. There’s a world of difference between …. saying ‘you are welcome here’ and ‘this was designed with you in mind’” (Quince 2020).
- 6.
For example, the ‘rules for success’ outlined in the ‘how-to’ guides described above.
- 7.
For an example of this in play, see Stewart’s account of how ‘diversity’ discourses in education act as a mirror to the mainstream, reflecting the mainstream back to itself, effectively strengthening the mainstream, as opposed to creating space for diverse others to ‘be’ themselves (Stewart 2021).
- 8.
In New Zealand this process is known as the PBRF (Performance-Based Research Fund). The UK’s process is called the REF (Research Excellence Framework) and the Australian equivalent is the ERA (Excellence in Research for Australia).
- 9.
In New Zealand now it is very common, almost mandatory, to hold pōwhiri to begin events in a wide variety of different contexts, including academic conferences. The word pōwhiri, commonly translated into English as ‘welcome ceremony’, is a set of rituals of encounter that take place before formal Māori hui or meetings. However, when these rituals are used in non-Māori contexts, the significance and meaning they would have in Māori contexts is usually not apparent to most of the audience (see: Stewart et al. 2015).
References
Ball, S. (1998). Performativity and fragmentation in postmodern schooling. In J. Carter (Ed.), Postmodernity and the fragmentation of welfare. London, UK: Routledge.
Ball, S. (2012). Foucault, power and education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Barnett, R. (2018). The ecological university: A feasible utopia. London, UK: Routledge.
Berg, M., & Seeber, B. (2016). The slow professor: Challenging the culture of speed in the academy. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
Blackmore, P. (2018). The excellent and inclusive university: An institutional framework. London UK: The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. Available at: https://www.lfhe.ac.uk/.
Burchell, G. (1996). Liberal government and the techniques of the self. In A. Barry, T. Osborne, & N. Rose (Eds.), Foucault and political reason (pp. 19–26). London, UK: UCL Press.
Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things: An archaeology of knowledge. London, UK: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: Volume 1: An introduction (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage.
Foucault. M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Harmondsworth UK: Penguin.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 (C. Gordon, Ed., C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper, Trans.). New York, NY: Pantheon.
Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. In H. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (pp. 208–226). Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Foucault, M. (1997a). Self writing. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Ethics: Subjectivity and truth. The essential works of Michel Foucault 1954–1984(Vol. 1, pp. 207–221). New York, NY: The New Press.
Foucault, M. (1997b). Writing the self. In A. Davidson (Ed.), Foucault and his interlocutors (pp. 234–247). Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, UK: Sage.
Gilbert, J., & Calvert, S. (2003). Challenging accepted wisdom: Looking at the gender and science question through a different lens. International Journal of Science Education,25(7), 861–878.
Godfery, M. (2018). Maui Street. Wellington NZ: Bridget Williams Books.
Grant, W., & Sherrington, P. (2006). Managing your academic career. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies,14(3), 575–599.
Hay, I. (2017). How to be an academic superhero. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Irigaray, L. (1991). This sex which is not one (C. Porter, Trans.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Irigaray, L. (1987). Is the subject of science sexed? Hypatia,2, 65–87.
Keller, E. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lloyd, G. (1993). The man of reason: ‘male’ and ‘female in Western philosophy. London, UK: Routledge.
O’Keefe, T., & Courtois, A. (2019). ‘Not one of the family’: Gender and precarious work in the neoliberal university. Gender, Work and Organisations,26, 463–479.
Olssen, M. (2002). The neo-liberal appropriation of tertiary education policy in New Zealand: Accountability, research and academic freedom. Palmerston North, NZ: The New Zealand Association for Research in Education [NZARE ‘State-of-the-Art’ Monograph no. 8].
Peters, M., & Barnett, R. (Eds.). (2018). The idea of the university: Volume 1—A reader. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Polese, A. (2018). The Scopus diaries and the (il)logics of academic survival. Stuttgart, Germany: ibidem Press.
Quince, K. (2020, September 5). Māori are invited to the dance—But told to leave their culture at the door. Stuff. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/122665719/mori-are-invited-to-the-dance--but-told-to-leave-their-culture-at-the-door.
Readings, B. (1997). The university in ruins. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sartori, D. (1994). Women’s authority in science. In K. Lennon & M. Whitford (Eds.), Knowing the difference: Feminist perspectives in epistemology. London, UK: Routledge.
Scheman, N. (1996). Though this be method, yet there is madness in it: Paranoia and liberal epistemology. In E. Keller & H. Longino (Eds.), Feminism and science (pp. 203–219). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Spivak, G. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271–313). Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
Standing, G. (2011). The precariat: The new dangerous class. London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Sternberg, R. (2017). Psychology 1011/2: The unspoken rules for success in academia(2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Stewart, G. (2021). Smoke and mirrors: Indigenous knowledge in the curriculum. In B. Green, P. Roberts, & M. Brennan (Eds.), Curriculum challenges and opportunities in a changing world: Essays in transnational curriculum inquiry. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stewart, G., Tamatea, K., & Mika, C. (2015). Infinitely welcome: Education pōwhiri and ethnic performativity. MAI Journal, 4(2), 91–103. https://www.journal.mai.ac.nz/sites/default/files/MAIJrnl_2015_V4_iss2_Stewart.pdf.
Wellmon, C. (2015). Organising Enlightenment: Information overload and the invention of the modern research university. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Woodthorpe, K. (2018). Survive and thrive in academia. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gilbert, J. (2021). Becoming an Academic Differently: On Not Following the Rules. In: Stewart, G.T., Devine, N., Benade, L. (eds) Writing for Publication. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4439-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4439-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-33-4438-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-33-4439-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)