Last Monday was published on the website of madri + d an interview our new rector, José María Sanz Martínez, interview was conducted in July. Not enter to question the legitimacy democratic "electoral process that led to his charge, nor - for now - the shortcomings and mistakes of his administration.
important thing about this interview is on the one hand, the concrete of the UAM, see how it will continue to materialize the implementation of the Bologna Process and its subsequent turns tuera in our university, and secondly what is still the legitimizing discourse for the whole process of university reform, which has been popularly called " Bologna."
Under the first, in the interview we can draw a clear example of the commodification of our UAM, despite that active and passive have been many voices from the Ministry have tried to deny that there would be a commodification of the university.:
In the eighth question, the president replied: "We must increase the visibility of the University and that means efforts communication, create a structure that is responsible to give visibility to the University, to strengthen its brand and image
[...]" If we change the word " University" by the name of a private company ... violates ! And it is in these moments when it becomes apparent that the public university is mutating as being that of a private company, and therefore is guided by the same key ideas than any other private company. Too bad, because before we had a public university that was trying to teach knowledge, and now only interested in selling "the brand and image ." Concretely
the UAM is also left at the end of the interview a touch of the new draft of Bologna twist, something we could call using computer jargon, "Bologna 2.0 " 2015 University Strategy , and one of its specific manifestation, the creation of the campus of excellence. The problem is that at the time of the interview was still not known much about, or at least not as much as now, we know that we in Spain 15 Campus of Excellence, which will redirect funding public research successes and the way we have here another example of the commercialization, which occurs when a public university again have to worry about their economic performance and based on it grow or keep, rather than the quality of academic services, not to come to value that are creating a select number of universities " elites", better funded and therefore with better skills , while other universities become "mass " least funded and less capabilities.
On the second, the discourse legitimizing for the whole process of university reform, there is a clear example in the first answer of how this process is justified, and that is the end of the university is to "transfer knowledge society and innovation of the university, in some way give back to society in the form of tax knowledge with us finances. "
What is the problem now? That while talking of transferring knowledge to society, behind these nice words appear harsh reality: the transfer of knowledge is not to society but to private companies, because the problem is these people - the system - makes a society that alignment are private companies, and then their interests are the same. This discourse is not new, has been pending Bricall Report 2000, it and a few years old.
What they forget is that every company that you are looking for private financial gain, while the company you are looking to meet their needs, so that the interests of both are conflicting and contradictory. In addition, this type of discourse that denies the obvious if it is to produce a transfer of knowledge from the university - funded by public money - for the personal gain of the minority of large private companies will take advantage of these patents, research now is subordinated to the needs and market development, and that it is not profitable, not interested in developing research.
Finally, something that also should be noted in the interview, which is grotesque, but it's not just about the discourse that legitimizes Bologna, but rather the hegemonic discourse of the liberal right against all types of "bureaucracy " can be found in the response to Question 5, when the rector, asked about the bureaucracy, responded that: " The theme of the bureaucracy is doing great harm to the management of R + D + i in general ." How? The main problem for researchers is the lack of money and public resources to fund projects ! If you look, at no time alludes to the real problem facing the researchers, but blames the bureaucratic problems I + D + i. Another example of discourse that is often used to justify some changes, in this case the reduction of an alleged excessive bureaucracy, while others, often the root causes are ignored. Under smokescreen trying to camouflage the root of any problem.
