Education under Fire: Middlesex Philosophy Case Study

Every day GoPetition receives thousands of signatures supporting a variety of causes. These signatures are sourced globally from about 75 countries. It is interesting for me as I review the GoPetition signature database to see what social trends are emerging globally. One of the hottest and perhaps saddest trends is "Education under Fire."

Trending signature data from the USA suggests that many state governments are having severe budget problems and the response has been savage cuts to education. New York and California seem to be hardest hit, but no state seems exempt. This has manifested in large volumes of petitions concerning teacher sackings, program axings and even entire school closures. I will have more to say about this in another post. Here, however, I'd like to comment on what's happening in the UK. It appears that the deep sovereign budget crises engulfing Europe have not left Britain unscathed. Indeed it could be argued that the UK is a bigger basket-case financially than a number of the more advanced European states.

The trickle down effect of these sovereign crises, together with the UK budget black hole, is that Universities themselves are facing funding crises of their own. How have educational institutions reacted? In the case of Middlesex University it has been, "Slash and Burn".
 
In perhaps one of the most controversial decisions in recent history, Middlesex University has decided to close its Philosophy programmes. The Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy at Middlesex is widely and internationally recognised as one of the most important centres for the study of modern European philosophy. Moreover its contribution to the literature has been immense.
 
The apparent "evil" of economic rationalism suspected for this move has not been missed by a number of academics. Professor James Williams could not contain himself in a letter of protest, "It is therefore a mistake to cut your flagship academic programme on academic grounds. But it is also a mistake in terms of future sources of funding and in terms of the wider social role of your university. I will be writing to my MP, Alistair Darling, and to Sir Alan Langlands at HEFCE to highlight the failure of your university to fulfill its wider mission as funded by government in relation to excellent research and its dissemination."
 
Professor Gareth Williams has also made pointed comments about the situation in a letter to the university, "I left the U.K. at the height of Prime Minister Thatcher’s decimation of the humanities and social sciences in the 1980s.  Needless to say, I consider your decision to close Philosophy at Middlesex University to be a continuation and a confirmation of the blatant philistinism of those years.  Your decision works for the intellectual impoverishment of the European university system as a whole.  And it condemns the name and prestige of Middlesex University to absolute anonymity and obscurity here in the United States.  In conclusion, I urge you to reconsider your decision."

The depth of feeling about the closure is clearly seen in the signature list of the official student endorsed petition campaign protest. The petition has over 10,000 signatures and has been signed by some prominent academics and philosphers. Please see the links below for more information.

Unfortunately, the "Education under Fire" theme will probably continue to be one of GoPetition's hottest topics of interest. The global financial crisis is not going away soon, and indeed could intensify. In these circumstances it is the Liberal Arts that will suffer. How ironic, that in times when we need clarity of thought, we excise the very thinkers who may help.

Links:

http://savemdxphil.com/

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/save-middlesex-philosophy.html

GoPetition cited as Best Practice example for the adoption of Web 2.0 by Government

Leading Internet consultancy firm e8 Consulting has recommended GoPetition to the Australian Federal Government as a Web 2.0 best practice example.

The Government 2.0 Taskforce engaged e8 Consulting to undertake projects involving analysing the sentiment, barriers and best practice of Web 2.0  in Government, and to provide recommendations to Government regarding how Web 2.0 can be best adopted.
 
The criteria for ‘best practice’ was based on examples:
1. that have proven leadership in making headway in their implementation and have tested relevant boundaries;
2. that have realised longevity of the strategy for utilising Web 2.0, with commitment of infrastructure and resources dedicated to Web 2.0 to realise strategic outcomes;
3. with clear outcomes and benefits that align with the reason for utilising Web 2.0.

A Web 2.0 website allows its users to interact with each other as contributors to the website's content, in contrast to non-interactive websites where users are limited to the passive viewing of information that is provided to them.
 
The characteristics of Web 2.0 are: rich user experience, user participation, dynamic content, metadata, web standards and scalability. Further characteristics, such as openness, freedom and collective intelligence by way of user participation, can also be viewed as essential attributes of Web 2.0.
 
In the report by e8 Consulting, GoPetiton's best practice approach was identified as including the following benefits:
o People are empowered through the petitioning platform;
o In the US and UK, Government agencies are approaching GoPetition to enable their causes;
o GoPetition is able to determine national and global trends in a variety of realms (e.g. politics, environmental concerns, health) from live streaming of signature data.
 
For more information on the report please see the links below.
 
GoPetition will continue to promote leading Web 2.0 strategies to allow our internet petitioning platform to be accessible to all parties in the petitioning process. There are a number of competing interests in the the online petition process: campaigners, targets, signers and the general public are all involved at some level. Data integrity, data protection and data access rights need to be defined and supported. All in the context of a dynamic, scalable and interactive metadata environment. To this end, GoPetition strives to maintain a best practice platform for our Government, NGO, and private clients.
 

Paper and internet petitions may soon be treated equally in Australia

Australia is moving toward an epetition model that will potentially streamline formal petitions at all government levels. While Queensland already has an e-petitioning protocol in place, the Federal Government is now seriously considering this option also.

Such reforms are timely in a social system where politicians are tweeting, blogging and poking, yet most still remain out of reach when it comes to receiving petitions over the internet. Politicians may soon be more accountable if the Government accepts a recommendation from a parliamentary committee that the House of Representatives should treat electronic petitions the same way it treats those delivered on paper.

The committee has also left the door open to Parliament running an online discussion forum, a medium embraced by the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, saying the issue should be investigated after the next election.

But the outspoken Liberal backbencher Wilson Tuckey said he was opposed to the move towards "e-democracy" because it would ''devalue the currency'' of petitions and letters from voters by making them too easily signed and lodged. He quips, ''When you get complaints from a constituent, if they're in their own handwriting and clearly have been written at a kitchen table and an envelope purchased and a stamp applied, they're fair dinkum.''

The move towards electronic petitions will bring the lower house in line with the Senate. But while the Senate accepts online petitions generated anywhere on the internet, the committee recommended the House of Representatives use its own website to give people an opportunity to create and sign petitions.

The petitions committee chairwoman and Labor backbencher, Julia Irwin, said electronic petitions would give people greater access to their representatives. She contends, ''Electronic communications has opened up a brave new world that enables a connection of every citizen to the process of government."

Under the model proposed by the committee, instead of including a signature, all people who want to be included on the petition will need to respond to an email verifying their identity.

Petitions, which date back to the 13th century in Britain, have been on the wane in the Australian Parliament in recent years, where they are often tabled and then promptly ignored. To the end of October more than a quarter of a million people had signed one of 120 House of Representatives petitions.

If it adopts the recommendations, the Australian Parliament would follow in the footsteps of the Scottish and Queensland parliaments, which have already introduced the system. In Scotland, petition signers can add comments on the issue, while the Queensland model requires a member of Parliament to sponsor an online petition.

The Federal Parliament should adopt the software used by the Queensland Parliament, it said. The Queensland Parliament was recently criticised for being unwilling to make its recording of parliamentary proceedings available for software that makes it easier for voters to analyse the performance of MPs.

The key report issued by the House of Representative Standing Committee on Petitions, is entitled, Electronic petitioning to the House of Represenatives (Oct 2009).

I will blog further on the recommendations of the report soon.