Accountability and the social responsibilities of universities

Professor Sonia McKay

Working Lives Research Institute, London Metropolitan University

1

Public or private?

Fee paying?

Affordable?

Accessible?

Ethos – reproduction of class advantage or commitment to

social justice/equality?

Human resource management, rule making and rule braking.

3

To whom/what are universities accountable?

Students

Staff and which staff – academic/non-academic

The university’s governing body

The state

The local community

The wider academic community

The business community

4

What is the mission of the modern university?

Recruit sufficient numbers of students

Meet budgetary expectations

Meet targets – completions

Train young people for work

Encourage critical thinking

Displace youth unemployment

How is social justice interpreted?

How is social justice interpreted?

A junior member of staff is appointed

Allegation of non- compliance with regulations

Staff support

Ready utilisation of disciplinary action

A senior member of staff resigns

Allegation of non-compliance with regulations

Absence of staff support

Reluctance to utilise disciplinary procedure

5

Groups A, B and C Group D and description of tasks: Aim – discuss contradictions

Group A: What is the accountability of universities to their

students?

What is the accountability of universities to their staff?

Might these result in contradictions and if so how can they be

addressed?

Group B: What is the accountability of universities to the state?

What is the accountability of universities to the academic

community?

Might these result in contradictions and if so how can they be

addressed?

Group C: What is the accountability of universities to the

promotion of inclusion?

What is the accountability of universities to the safety of staff

and students?

Might these result in contradictions and if so how can they be

addressed?

Group C: What is the accountability of universities to the

political status quo?

What is the accountability of universities to the promotion of

critical thinking?

Might these result in contradictions and if so how can they be

addressed? 1. Each group should choose a group chairperson and a group report-

back person. These two persons will be responsible for the final task (the

process of selection must take no more than three minutes);

2. Each group should then divide itself into two sub-groups; each should

take one accountability question that their sub-group will discuss and

each should select a chairperson and a sub-group report back person.

These two persons will be responsible for the fourth task (again no more

than three minutes);

3. Each sub-group will discuss the accountability question they have been

given for 15 minutes producing a set of three areas of accountability

identified.

4. The two sub-groups should then come together to jointly discuss, for

another 15 minutes what contradictions there might be between the two

positions they have taken on accountability.

5. The group report-back person will report back the whole student group

on the discussion in Task four (this report back to last no more than 5

minutes.

6