What happened to Social Justice? On the European Higher Education Area (EHEA)

Julia Osborn (January 12th, 2010)

Ten years ago the Lisbon Strategy was introduced to make Europe the most “the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy”. Since the Lisbon Strategy was launched there has been considerable activity in education across Europe. The ‘knowledge’ economy has made higher education (HE) and universities the cornerstone of Europe’s growth and competitiveness agenda. Moreover, in 1999, the Bologna declaration was signed to establish a European Higher Education Area (EHEA) that would make European Higher Education more compatible and comparable, and the Bologna declaration has subsequently become a fully integrated part of the Lisbon Agenda. It is the aim of this article to consider the implications of combining the EHEA (that requires numerical and technical comparison of national education across Europe, which is meant to be non-political) with the requirements of the Lisbon Strategy. In the political context of the Lisbon Strategy the discourse of comparison is anything but neutral as “All political institutions are manifestations and materializations of power” (Arendt 1970), and I will argue the EHEA conveys a specific normative choice among other possible policies for education.

Interestingly, the Lisbon Strategy was initiated at the European Council in March 2000 when many left-wing governments were in power across Europe. The Lisbon Strategy, however, contains a fundamental tension between the pursuit of capitalist growth and the pursuit of social welfare. Moreover, the EHEA's rhetoric of policy comparability, has generated a logic of de-politicisation, and yet many recent European level educational initiatives have displayed the ideological preference of the liberalisation of markets. The result has been a tendency towards a unicentric, technically driven 'de facto' competitiveness agenda emerging as the norm for the EHEA. The recent post by Nathan Coombs (co-editor Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies) on the uprisings in Vienna illustrates the unrest with this politicisation of education, and the need to challenge the prevailing economic model of globalisation. In this post, it is my aim to take issue with the contemporary political agendas of dominance and hegemony that transpire in EU educational initiatives, and the related trend towards a 'universalisation' of education that neglects issues of difference and inequality.

To begin with, its worth noting that education (policy) is fundamental for achieving greater social justice in society, and in this sense is inescapably ’political’. In May 2008 the European Students' Union issued a policy paper setting out their thoughts on what higher education policies should seek to achieve. They argue that “In order to maintain and develop democracy, active citizenship and emancipation of individuals, education remains of key importance”, and that “Instead of focusing on excellence HE should focus on accessibility and retention rates because enlightened societies can never tolerate obstacles for groups and individuals in the struggle against poverty” (2008). The Bologna process contains this rhetoric in calling for strong commitments to a social dimension, the strengthening of social cohesion and the reduction of social and gendered inequalities (Communiqué of the Conference Ministers Berlin 2003:1). However, we need to consider how this view will transpire in practice. Contemporary social democratic thinking, for instance, is increasingly dominant by a new progressive politics that calls for the re-assessment of the concept of social justice in the global age (see Cramme and Diamond 2009). At its core this concept of social justice stresses that equity and efficiency are mutually reinforcing. In response to the challenges of globalisation, demographic change and technical innovation, European educational initiatives have therefore placed greater emphasis on improving efficiency in education. In Bergen (2005) Ministers responsible for HE stated “efforts to introduce structural change and improve the quality of teaching should not detract from the efforts to strengthen research and innovation” (Communiqué of the Conference Ministers 2005:3).

In this political context there are increasing calls for Universities to develop research ‘excellence’. Further, a number of European educational initiatives aimed at strengthening research and innovation have been introduced. In 2003 the Bologna declaration was extended to the Political Science Curriculum, setting out the core areas for the syllabus of political science and stating that “every political scientist should be well trained in scientific methodology” (2003). More recently in Bergen (2005) a third cycle of the Bologna Process covering doctoral degrees was given the go-ahead, and in London ( 2007) Ministers responsible for HE highlighted the importance of aligning the EHEA with the European Research Area (ERA). I argue that this discourse of research excellence conceals a growing “politicisation” of Universities and doctoral programmes. I will now turn to consider the consequences of the hijacking of academia by this political discourse and what concerns this should raise for endeavours to promote social justice in society.

In social science, for instance, intellectuals face increasingly subversive pressures towards technocracy and professionalism. Moreover technical and rationalist intellectualism may be more strongly influenced by ideas that is widely acknowledged. I note a quote by Keynes, “Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist” (Keynes 1973: 383). Keynes made the remarks in relation to the instrumentalist policy advise given to governments, but I believe it neatly summarise the problems of modern technically-specific academia. Moreover, it has traditionally been the role of intellectuals to analyses the decisions of politicians in relation to the fundamental social problems of society. Intellectuals and academia have been the guardsman of heterogeneous perception of culture, knowledge and power. The extending of Bologna to the Political Science Curriculum appears to have reduced the importance of critical analysis towards our social systems. I will, therefore, now turn to the critical analysis to assess the impact of trans-national higher education policies for principles of social justice such as equality. In doing so I will endeavour to show the contemporary relevance for critical thought and political theory.

Briefly, to reiterate, education is linking to the current hegemonic project. The Lisbon Strategies “growth and competitiveness” agenda links education to the political discourse of ‘academic excellence’. In HE there transpires a market view of citizenship, in which the individual is seen as an economic maximiser governed by self-interest. The individual is responsible for their own well-being. In this context, education is a ‘service’ to be delivered on the market, and European political initiatives in HE (inspired by the ambiguous ‘egalitarianism’) have viewed equality as mostly a question of access. I argue this is an impoverished conceptualisation of the social role for HE. Instead a more holistic approach to HE policy is necessary if as a society we are serious about the political, cultural and affective dimensions of educational equality.

To illustrate this point, Ministers responsible for HE, meeting in Bergen (2005) stressed the need for appropriate conditions for students so they can complete their studies without obstacles related to social and economic background (2005:4). The problem is that equality of access or market participation itself will not transform the social conditions of students within HE, and many students may pursue their studies alongside social and economic disadvantage. Instead, to ensure better living conditions for students who face deprivation, Universities, college departments might need to consider their moral responsibilities, against their desire for economic dynamism. Firstly, if social justice is to be pursued through ‘equality of access’ then the development of scholarships based on Positive Discrimination will be more necessary. Secondly, Universities could consider the role for HE in promoting a more socially 'just' society. Here Universities would seek to promote a broader definition of "equality" such as 'equality of condition' which involves the equal enabling and empowerment of individuals (Lynch and Baker 2005).Indeed, it appears that many important policy debates, that took place at the national level in the late 20th century, and that were designed to deal with the issues that hindered the development of a more socially 'just' society have been lost in the move to trans-national European education.

In conclusion, as Europe contemplates the future of the EHEA in 2010 and further development of trans-national higher education policies, perhaps it needs to ask what are the consequences of the demise of academia, and innovation in research; and what good it will do the economy to disregard the talents of those facing social disadvantage in the name of the “economic race for competitiveness”.

References

Arendt, H (1972) On Violence, in Crisis of the Republic. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Communiqué of the Conference Ministers responsible for Higher Education (Berlin 2003) "Realising the European Higher Education Area".

Communiqué of the Conference Ministers responsible for Higher Education (Bergen 2005) "The European Higher Education Area - Achieving the Goals".

Cramme, O and Diamond, P (2009) Social Justice in the Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.

EPSNet (2003) 'The Bologna Declaration and Political Science Curriculum. Statement by the Executive Council': http//www.epsnet.org/mem_only/kiosk-plusl/open_espnet.htm

Keynes, J.M (1973) The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan.

Lynch. K and Baker, J (2005) ‘Equality in condition: the importance of equality of condition‘, Theory and Research in Education 3 (2) 131 - 164.

European Students' Union
http://www.esib.org/index.php/documents/policy-papers/334-policy-paper-qthe-future-of-higher-educationq

Julia Osborn is a PhD candidate in the Department of Politics and International Relations, Royal Holloway, University of London.