Corporate models of the university represent a betrayal of a tradition stretching back over 900 years.
That was the argument of Howard Hotson, professor of early modern intellectual history at the University of Oxford, in a lecture on “Educating Homo sapiens�, delivered at the University of Brighton on 2 February as part of the David Watson Memorial Lecture Series.
Ever since the foundation of the University of Bologna in 1088, he argued, universities had always had “a dual purpose�, yet “it was almost invariably the higher purposes, benefiting the community at large, which were regarded as the primary goal of the university; and the immediate goal of educating individual students were regarded primarily as a means to this end�.
Although “the precise ways in which these dual purposes have been understood have gradually altered�, it was quite wrong to “regard universities as ‘shape shifters’, changing their fundamental purposes repeatedly in response to changing social needs�.
ÌÇÐÄVlog
This background, Professor Hotson went on, “put the recent ‘radical shake-up of higher education’...in fresh perspective�.
When Gordon Brown, the former prime minister, took universities out of the Department for Education and “subordinate[d] universities to a new Department for Business, Innovation and Skills�, it was justified in terms which made clear that “business sets the objectives. Science serves them. Skills serve business and science. And universities provide skills.�
ÌÇÐÄVlog
Far from being “just another adjustment which the university must make to changing circumstances�, this represented “the dramatic imposition of a new set of priorities from outside, unprecedented in the 928-year history of this institution�.
Yet “in order to align the university…with their own interests and purposes�, Professor Hotson explained, corporations had “argue[d] that their needs coincide with those of ordinary people. The key to doing so is to propagate the view that ordinary people are just like corporations: single-mindedly devoted to maximising their profit.
“So the ‘radical reform’ of the university,� he went on, “and all the other institutions of society, rests ultimately on the redefinition of the purposes of human life as coinciding with those of the corporation: Homo economicus, like the legal person of the corporation, is a purely selfish and purely materialistic entity, single-mindedly devoted to maximising its material rewards.�
He added that the “battle between the university and the corporation – or between the old conception of the university and the new one – therefore ultimately rests on competing conceptions of the good life for human beings, and therefore on competing conceptions of human nature�.
ÌÇÐÄVlog
Yet despite the obvious power of corporations, Professor Hotson believed there were ways of fighting back. A good start would be “pointing out the obvious: Homo economicus is not an adequate account of human nature� - and was therefore a good basis for neither “a sound economy� nor “a sound educational system�.
He also said that if the foundations of the corporate university were “based on a demonstrably inadequate account of human nature�, the academic community was well suited to “begin dismantling it intellectually, and erecting something more adequate in its place�.
By the end of this process, Professor Hotson predicted, “Homo economicus will evolve into Homo sapiens�.
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to °Õ±á·¡â€™s university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?





