From Dinavalli at aol.com Thu Jan 1 22:22:40 2009 From: Dinavalli at aol.com (Dinavalli at aol.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 16:22:40 EST Subject: Contribution to the discussion Message-ID: Greetings to all edu-factory friends on New Year's Day, We are writing to contribute our thoughts to the discussion concerning the edu-factory project. As for the title, we agree that "Edu-factory" should appear in the title but we also think that "edu-factory journal" would make it clear that the intention will not be to produce an occasional commentary on universities and knowledge production (which is the expectation that "Edu-factory Notes" evokes). As for the subtitle, "Conflicts and Transformation in the University" we think is a bit too precise and institutional but "Conflicts and Transformation in Knowledge Production" is too vague. Combining precision and vagueness might be best, "Conflicts and Transformation in Universities and Knowledge Production." We recognize the problems noted by Ned Rossiter concerning the way that the editorial board can get caught up in contradictory desires. He raises important issues, but we have an even more elementary issue to pose: what are our rules concerning decision-making? Is it unanimity or majority or somewhere in between or none of the above? As for the zero issue: We agree that the notion of "double crisis" is appropriate (and therefore the language of crisis be retained), i.e., the crisis within the universities should be connected with the crisis of the broader economy. There should be an effort to bring together struggles from around the planet and show how they reflect, shape, and resist the crisis. We offer to collect material from African universities and solicit articles on the subject (how much we can do depends on the deadline). We look forward to working with you all in the New Year! Best, Silvia and George ************** New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ranabir at mcrg.ac.in Fri Jan 2 06:56:46 2009 From: ranabir at mcrg.ac.in (Dr. Ranabir Samaddar) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 11:26:46 +0530 Subject: Contribution to the discussion References: Message-ID: <007501c96c9e$e7bfa960$0b00a8c0@mcrg11> Dear Colleagues, I do not want to begin the discussion anew. But why add the word journal? After all it is clear that this is a journal. Or can we say something like Writings in the Edu-factory? Or, Writings in the Global Edu-Factory? This should be enough, and we need not have the suffix, this would then be unneccesary, also remove the traces of pedantism, which is so characteristic of the world of education! But I shall understand the various constraints and viewpoints, and shall be happy with whatever is decided. / RS Professor Ranabir Samaddar Director, Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group GC 45 (First Floor), Sector 3, Salt Lake Kolkata 700106, India Ph: + 91-33-23370408 Fax: + 91-33-23371523 E-mail: ranabir at mcrg.ac.in; mcrg at mcrg.ac.in Web: www.mcrg.ac.in ----- Original Message ----- From: Dinavalli at aol.com To: agu at listcultures.org Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 2:52 AM Subject: Contribution to the discussion Greetings to all edu-factory friends on New Year's Day, We are writing to contribute our thoughts to the discussion concerning the edu-factory project. As for the title, we agree that "Edu-factory" should appear in the title but we also think that "edu-factory journal" would make it clear that the intention will not be to produce an occasional commentary on universities and knowledge production (which is the expectation that "Edu-factory Notes" evokes). As for the subtitle, "Conflicts and Transformation in the University" we think is a bit too precise and institutional but "Conflicts and Transformation in Knowledge Production" is too vague. Combining precision and vagueness might be best, "Conflicts and Transformation in Universities and Knowledge Production." We recognize the problems noted by Ned Rossiter concerning the way that the editorial board can get caught up in contradictory desires. He raises important issues, but we have an even more elementary issue to pose: what are our rules concerning decision-making? Is it unanimity or majority or somewhere in between or none of the above? As for the zero issue: We agree that the notion of "double crisis" is appropriate (and therefore the language of crisis be retained), i.e., the crisis within the universities should be connected with the crisis of the broader economy. There should be an effort to bring together struggles from around the planet and show how they reflect, shape, and resist the crisis. We offer to collect material from African universities and solicit articles on the subject (how much we can do depends on the deadline). We look forward to working with you all in the New Year! Best, Silvia and George ************** New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ agu mailing list agu at listcultures.org http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/agu_listcultures.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From areality at mail.tku.edu.tw Fri Jan 2 12:59:16 2009 From: areality at mail.tku.edu.tw (Jon Solomon Su Zhe-an) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 19:59:16 +0800 Subject: Contribution to the discussion In-Reply-To: <007501c96c9e$e7bfa960$0b00a8c0@mcrg11> References: <007501c96c9e$e7bfa960$0b00a8c0@mcrg11> Message-ID: <2583D3209F4C441F82D595247CDB81FC@areality22> Dear Friends, I am impressed with the ideas that have been put forth so far. Before these discussions began, I sent a message to the organizational steering committee about some issues that were of concern to me. They are certainly too general, yet I would like to share them with the larger group of the editorial board: The idea of dividing the journal into three sections speaks for itself and certainly responds to a necessity seen in the edu-factory discussions. However, I would like to suggest a further elaboration, since the current section divisions suggest a kind of conventional divide between theory and praxis that sounds a little old fashioned. Instead, I suggest the divisions be conceived around the theme of translation as a form of institutional practice. Hence there are two types of translation, one endogenous, the other exogenous, that correspond to different modes of address, and different types of translation across the edu-factory. The endogenous part of the journal focuses on the epistemological and intellectual aspects of neoliberal restructuring and the possibilities for a radical reorganization of the disciplines so that they can finally leave behind their colonial, anthropological, capitalist, gendered, etc...legacy. This mode of address is addressed to the specialist involved in the production of knowledge within the existing university structure. In other words, this part of the journal takes thought as a specific mode of sociality--one that is open, like all other modes of sociality, to cooperation and contestation, to social movements. Within this part of the journal, it will be permitted and even necessary to engage the use of jargon and specialized terminology that may be inaccessible to the layman outside the University as well as the many non-specialist workers within the University. Yet the allowance for jargon does not obviate the need for translation on many different levels. In the endogenous project, such translation occurs principally between disciplines and/or national/regional contexts. The necessity of these translations calls upon us to ask how can we use the University to transform the relation between language, value and regions? The exogenous part of the project engages various exciting alternatives outside the University, on its edges, or on its various underpaid "invisible" labor. It shows how the promise of the University as a social commons has been betrayed by the historical forms of enclosure and the new forms being consolidated by new hegemonies; it proposes actually existing subjects of struggle or emergent social forms as an alternative. Within this part of the journal, the principal mode of address should be in a format that is highly accessible to a wide variety of non-specialists. Here, the principal mode of translation occurs between different forms of subjectivation and creative attempts at resistance. The common link between the two types of address/translation is to be found in the idea of translation as a mode of subjective technology rather than a synthetic step towards objective knowledge--displacing "the body of knowledge" in favor of the "knowledgeable body" involved in a process of social transformation. An explicit division of sections according to different modes of translation (rather than theory versus praxis) would have the additional benefit of implicitly opening up the journal's use of global English as a lingua franca-really, an implicit model of translation-to the socially-transformative possibilities discussed in the edu-factory. I think it is extremely important that the journal adopt an aggressively self-aware approach to the possibilities and limitations inherent in the use of English as a model of translation, or else risk being trapped in the contradictions contained therein. Unless these contradictions are addressed from the outset as an integral part of the journal's self-understanding and self-organization, it is likely that the journal will succumb to implacably opposed understandings of globalization and Imperialism seen between the North and South (or East and West). I think the name of the global autonomous university project should be changed to global common university. I hope the above suggestions are helpful. My admiration goes to all those who have organized this project. Warm thoughts, Jon Solomon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jerel at endlessalgae.org Sat Jan 3 11:30:07 2009 From: jerel at endlessalgae.org (Jerel Hinson) Date: 3 Jan 2009 05:30:07 -0500 Subject: Happy New Year! Lets make it Motivational Posters themed! Message-ID: Happy New Year! --------------------------------------------------------------- Jerel Hinson Rofl Motivational Posters - http://www.roflposters.com - archnoma From info at edu-factory.org Fri Jan 23 04:23:26 2009 From: info at edu-factory.org (info at edu-factory.org) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 04:23:26 +0100 Subject: draft of the call Message-ID: <4979382e.32d.1547.1109255586@webmaildh4.aruba.it> Dear all, We've written a draft of the call for the zero issue of the journal, based on the rich list debate in the last weeks. In order to improve and facilitate our collective work, we've put the draft in a wikipage (you can find below the details). We tried to write a simple and provocative call: everyone is welcome to improve and change it directly in the wiki. Best, edu-factory collective http://www.wikispaces.com/site/signin Username: edufactory Password: may1968 Click on link edufactory, and then 'edit this page'; after the changes, click on 'save' and then 'sign out'. Theme for Zero Issue: The Double Crisis of the University and the Global Economy The zero issue of the new transnational journal edu-factory will critically interrogate the proposition that the present is a time of crisis. What are the connections between the global economic downturn and the ongoing transformations of the university? In mainstream analysis, the current economic situation is referred to as a global financial crisis, as if a distinction could be drawn between finance and the productive economy. The notion of crisis has also been long deployed to describe the changes to higher education under neoliberal conditions that seem to be mutating with the present economic instability. What are the mutual implications of these two senses of crisis? Does it make sense to speak of a double crisis of the university and the global economy? Is it possible to isolate the current predicament as pertaining only to economics as if it doesn?t extend into other spheres of human activity? How can we question the current use of the category of crisis, rethinking it to open spaces and times for new institutional forms and new kinds of social relations? edu-factory seeks articles that engage the following themes: - The implications of the economic downturn for universities (academic employment, higher education export, research degree recruitment, etc.) - Shifts in the production of knowledge and/or the organization of such production around innovation - Effects of the economic meltdown across higher education settings in different global contexts - Student debt in an era of credit crunch - Universities and finance (the contribution of the higher education sector to the current economic 'meltdown') - Ranking systems ? the relations between league tables and credit rankings - The place and role of conflicts and social movements in the nexus of universities and economic transition - Temporalities of ?crisis? ? does the model of the cycle still apply to economic rhythms and/or those of struggles? - The return of economic determinism as an analytic key for understanding the current moment and its dangers for struggles against sexism, racism, heteronormativity, neo-colonialism, islamophobia - Autonomous education in a time of ?crisis?