Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

AVUSTRALYA’DA SIYASI BILIMLERIN ELESTIREL COZUMLEMESI: AKADEMIK OZGURLUGUN SINIRLARI VE PRATIK SIYASETE ETKILERI

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE IN AUSTRALIA: LIMITS OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND THE IMPACT OF PRACTICAL POLITICS

Journal Name:

  • Akademik Bakış

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
In the second half of 2008, The Senate Standing Committee on Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (SSCEEWR) conducted an inquiry into academic freedom in Australia. The inquiry released its report in December 2008. Interestingly, this report did not have the same title as the inquiry itself. This paper suggests that the above inquiry was designed to divert attention in order to seek conservative or right-wing support and get academic freedom to be fully scrutinized by the government. The question that needs to be posed here is, how is this government watch of the academic agenda able to provide ‘independent’ environment and autonomy for Australian universities? I argue that universities are homes of flourishing ideas. These ideas most possibly are or need to be diverse in order to grow and create multiple perspectives and alternative solutions to the problematic issues such as socio-political, economical or etho-cultural issues. Although privatization is mentioned in the article in relation to academic freedom, the main purpose of this paper is not to question appropriateness of privatization in terms of education rights for students lacking sufficient money. My aim is to focus on academic freedom in the context of Australian Higher Education and under which conditions it [academic freedom] may be best provided.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
2008 yılının ikinci yarısında İşçi ve İşveren Hizmetler ile Eğitim Senatosu, Avustralya’da akademik özgürlüğe dair bir soruşturmayı inceledi. Soruşturma raporu 2008’in Aralık ayında açığa çıktı fakat ilginç olan su ki raporun başlığı dahi soruşturma ile aynı başlık altında işlenmemişti. Bu makalede yukarıda sözü edilen soruşturmanın muhafazakâr ve sağ-destek toplamak amacıyla dikkati dağıtmak ve akademik özgürlüğün hükümetin sıkıyönetimine girmesi adına tasarlanmış olduğu görüşü savunuluyor. Bu aşamada sorulması gereken konu, hükümet gözetimi altında akademinin (akademik basının) ne denli özgür bir ortamda Avustralya üniversitelerinin bağımsızlığını sağlayabileceğidir. Makalede savunduğum açı; değişik fikirlere ev sahipliği yapan üniversitelerin bağımsızlığının gerekliliğidir. Bu fikirlerin büyük oranda ve olasılıkla farklı olması gerektiği, farklı görüş açıları yaratılarak, etnokültürel, sosyo-politik veya ekonomik vb. gibi toplumsal sorunlara alternatif çözüm üretebilme yetisine katkı sağlayabileceğinden kaynaklanıyor. Her ne kadar akademik özgürlüğe ilişkin olarak özelleştirilmeden bahsedilmiş olsa da, makaledeki asıl amaç özelleştirilmenin ve öğrenci haklarının irdelenmesi değildir. Makaledeki ana hedefim, Avustralya Yüksek Eğitim bağlamında akademik özgürlüğün hangi koşullar altında en iyi sağlanabileceği sorusunu vurgulamaktır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-avustralyada-siyasi-bilimlerin-elestirel-cozumlemesi-akademik-ozgurlugun-sinirlari-pratik-siyasete-etkileri.pdf
  • 32
1-15
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Barrett, Katherine; Greene, Richard. 2010. "Goodbye to Good Research." Governing. Vol. 23,
no. (10).
Bendle, Mervyn. 2007. "Secret Saudi Fundings of Radical Islamic Groups in Australia."
National Observer, no. 72. Pp. 7-18.
Bouroche, Myriam A. 2001. “Academic Capitalism. Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial
University.” Journal of Research Administration.Vol. 11, no. (1). P. 33.
Buchanan, John. 2008. “Values, Research and Industrial Relations Policy: Recent
Controversies and Implications for the Future.” Academy of Social Sciences in Australia.Vol.
27, no. (1). Pp. 30-40.
Calboun, Craig. 2006. “The University and the Public Good”.Thesis Eleven. Vol. 84. Feb. Pp.
7-43.
Crown, James T. 1969.American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 74, No. (4). Pp. 424-426. Book
Reviews: The Rise and the Fall of Project Camelot: Studies in the Relationship between
Social Science and Practical Politics. Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz. Cambridge, Mass.:
M.I.T. Press, 1967. Pp. 385.
Dennis, Carina. 2005."Australian scientists protest at loss of funding board." Nature . Vol.
436, no. (7050). Pp. 155-156.
Eisfeld, Rainer; Pal, Leslie A. 2010. "Political Science in Central-East Europe and the Impact
of Politics: Factors of Diversity, Forces of Convergence." European Political Science. Vol.
(EPS) 9, no. (2). Pp. 223-243.
Gelber, Katharine. 2008. “Academic Freedom in Australia.”
http://www.australianreview.net/digest.2008/12/gelber.Html. (2011, Nov 11).
Giroux, Henry A. 2008. “The Militarization of US Higher Education after 9/11.” Theory,
Culture and Society. Vol.25, no.(5). Pp. 56-82.
Heinz, J.P; Lauman, E.O; Nelson, R.L. &Salisbury, R.H. 1993. “The hollow core: Private
intersts in national policy making.” Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Helden, Paul Van. 2010. "Managing academic research." EMBO Reports (11). no. 9.
September. Pp. 648.
Huntington, Samuel. 1998. "'One Soul at a Time': Political Science andPolitical Reform."
American Political Science Review Vol. 82, no. (3).
Just, Richard, E. & Huffman, Wallace, E. 2009. “The Economics of Universities in a New
Age of Funding Options.” Research Policy. Vol. 38. Pp. 1102, 1116.
AKADEMİK BAKIŞ DERGİSİ
Sayı: 32 Eylül – Ekim 2012
Uluslararası Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler EDergisi
ISSN:1694‐528X İktisat ve Girişimcilik Üniversitesi, Türk Dünyası
Kırgız – Türk Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Celalabat – KIRGIZİSTAN
http://www.akademikbakis.org
15
King, J.E.& Kriesler, Peter. 2008. "News from down under." On the Horizon (Bradfrod) Vol.
16, no. (4). Pp. 289-292.
Lockman, Zachary. 2004. "The History of Politics of Orientalism". New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Lowry, Richard C. 2007. “Political Economy of Public Universities in the United States: A
Review Essay.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly, Fall: Vol. 7, no. (3). Pp. 3003: 324.
McKnight, David. 2004. "Clear Thinking, Dogma and the Warr on Terrorism." Pp. 95-101.
Melleuish, G. 1998. “The Packaging of Australia: Politics and Culture Wars.” Sydney:
University of New South Wales Press.
Ness, Tanberg and McLennon. 2009. "Interest groups and state higher education policy." San
Diego , CA.
Nice, D. 1984. "Interest groups and policy making in the American states." Political
Behavious. Vol. 6,
no. (2). Pp. 183-196.
Norton, Paul. 2008. “Illiberal students attack academic freedom – with more than a little help
from their big mates.” http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/10/10/illiberal-students-attackacademic-
freedom-with-more-than-a-little-help-from-their-big-mates/. (2011, Nov 11).
St. John, E. 2004. Book Review: “Derek Bok. 2000. ‘Universities in the Market Place: The
Commercialization of Higher Education’. NJ: Princeton University Press. 256 Pp.” in Review
of Higher Education Vol. 27, no. (4). Pp. 591- 593.
Talhami, GhadaHashem. 2007. “Cities of God and Nationalism: Mecca, Jerusalem, and Rome
as Contested World Cities.” (Book review). Middle East Policy, Summer. Vol.14 (2), p.170
(3) [Peer Reviewed Journal]
Tanberg, David. 2009. "Interest groups and governmental instituions. The politics of state
funding of public higher education." Educational Policy.
Tandberg, David. 2010. "Politics, Interest Groups and State Funding of Public Higher
Education." Research in Higher Education. Vol. 51, no. (5). Pp. 416-450.
Powell, Eve Troutt. 2006. "Academic Freedom after September 11." Middle East Policy. Vol.
14, no. no. (2). Pp. 166- 170.
Venne, Jean-Francois. 2011. "A forced merger between Qubec's three research funding
agencies." University Affairs. Vol. 52, no. (5) Pp. 31-32.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com