In our last post, we outlined some of our concerns with Principal Deane’s Bicentennial Vision, giving him a failing grade for his analysis. But perhaps we were being too harsh? We know that in the past, the Principal has demonstrated a keen sense of critical analysis, including in an interview with University World News published less than one year ago, where he critiqued the very model of education he is now promoting.
Here, we put these two versions of the Principal’s vision for Queen’s in conversation, an exercise that demonstrates how the Bicentennial Vision fails to live up to the ideals he has previously espoused. Readers are encouraged to remind the Principal of this by email. Please share your responses (anonymously) with QCAA by cutting and pasting them here.
QCAA will use your feedback to help facilitate information sharing and hold the administration accountable.
Bicentennial Deane: “Should Queen’s Bicentennial vision include a significant increase in STEM enrolments, or, alternatively, a shift towards STEM in the distribution of existing enrolments, it will be nevertheless incumbent on all of us to give thought and action to the reformulation of curricular models in order to successfully produce graduates with both an understanding of science and technology, and the human, social, and cultural frame within which those things have effect and meaning.”
University World Deane: Echoing studies, Deane still believes that a liberal arts education equips individuals for the rapid transformation that is occurring in the workplace. However, he cautions that supporters of the humanities have, unwittingly, weakened their own position by couching the defence of the liberal arts in instrumental terms meant to impress neoliberal politicians and business leaders: critical thinking, self-assessment of information and the like.
Bicentennial Deane: “If growth in STEM is academically defensible (as it is), and also one of the few levers available to us to ensure the university’s future sustainability, it is difficult to see the predisposition of students towards those subjects as anything but a great opportunity.”
University World Deane: “‘The essence of [Queen’s] has been linked to the liberal arts, with 50% of the institution given over to the [faculty of] arts and sciences,’ Deane said in a tone that bespoke his career as an English professor.”
Bicentennial Deane: “So long as Queen’s derives the bulk of its income from government-funded and government-approved programming, and so long as government controls tuition levels as well as total enrolment in approved programs of study, the sustainability and therefore the future of the university is not properly in our hands. We can and must work within those conditions to advance our mission as best we can.”
University World Deane: He recalled a conversation he had with a colleague at Universities Canada, the association of Canadian universities, in which the colleague discussed the danger of adopting “the language that the government uses to talk about things.” Instead, this colleague, who now heads a major Canadian university, insisted that universities should defend themselves with their “own” language. “We’ve all sort of colluded in a language about education that privileges the instrumental, neoliberal view that you pointed to,” said Deane. “I think we’ve actually played a role in this, which has been damaging to the cause of universities and potentially to our future.”
Bicentennial Deane: “[T]he time is surely right for the arts, social sciences, and humanities, in particular, to ponder the lineaments of a possible future defined not by alienation from and reaction against that drift [to STEM], but by a recognition of their continuity with it. As part of the present visioning process, therefore, we should convene colleagues from the arts, social sciences, and humanities, to consider positive options. A brilliant future for those fields is in no way incompatible with strength and growth in areas such as engineering, business, and science.
University World Deane: Queen’s was not, Deane underscored, undertaking a thorough curriculum review that could gut the humanities…. He responded to my question about whether literature and other liberal arts courses could be reduced to little more than feeder courses that stream into STEM, by admitting that there is “pressure” for this to happen.
Bicentennial Deane: “Employment outcomes are increasingly important, with a noticeable increase in enrolment in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) programs, which students perceive to have better career prospects.”
University World Deane: “It’s been a growing problem of long standing. Governments want to see from institutions that kind of concentration. Good heavens, I mean, the premier makes this very clear all the time … that it’s the university’s relationship to the labour market that justifies where the support will be placed.
Bicentennial Deane: “It is also the case that growth in these areas will have a beneficial impact on university resources, government funding on a per student basis being considerably higher in STEM subjects than in others. This is a very significant consideration, because the overall projection for support from government in the coming years is otherwise bleak and unpromising.”
University World Deane: Queen’s University’s budget crisis can be managed, Deane believes, by restructuring ancillary functions.
Queen's Coalition Against Austerity 