Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 30, No. 8. 1967.

Lecturer to sacrifice academic future in NZ

Lecturer to sacrifice academic future in NZ

Sirs,—It is not a pleasant business to have to see the troubles of Asian Studies thrust again upon the readers of Salient whom I am sure in this time of crisis have enough problems of their own! But in a world of increasing troubles about what we can do so little, many of us could still do a great deal toward saving Asian Studies at Victoria—once we make up our minds.

Some of us may not think that what is or is not being done about Asian Studies here has much bearing on our own lives. But what really is at stake here is nothing less than the student's as well as the scholar's right to know. If Asian Studies is successfully strangled at this university, we may be quite certain that the same methods will be applied elsewhere.

A key statement in the Brookes-Janaki Report quoted by Salient was that "one reason the university introduced the Asian Studies programme was to enable a substantial (bold letters mine, WJH) proportion of undergraduates in relevant faculties to acquire some informed awareness of the major cultures of Asia..." This statement simply does not bear examination if for no other reason than scarcely more than one-tenth of one per cent (0.106%) does not constitute a "substantial" pro-portion of any group in any-body's language. Yet 51 undergraduates (that being the number currently enrolled in the "expanded" interdisciplinary programme financed by the Asian Studies Centre budget) is all we have now at more than three times the cost per student three years ago! Not only that, the total enrolment in Asian Studies has been further reduced this year from last year's 73 to this year's 63 (if we include the Political Science Honours Seminar offered by Professor Janaki).

Although courses bearing upon Asian topics have a long time been taught and are being taught at this university quite independently of the Asian Studies Programme (for example an Indian lecturer has just joined the Philosophy Department to teach Eastern philosophies). Asian Studies certainly should not and cannot take the credit for this.

But not only has the programme (despite the fine words) been more than trebled in cost and then reduced in the number of students, but the degree course in Asian Studies has been abolished. Next year no more courses will be offered by the Centre with the now planned abolition of the Stage III course.

The reduction in student intake for courses covered by the Asian Studies budget can be attributed to four principle causes:

(a)the general uncertainty caused to students by the phasing-out programme given such undue prominence by the University Calendar;
(b)the transfer of Asian Studies I to the History Department which meant that chiefly history students would now be interested — contemporary Asia being more or less dropped;
(c)Colombo Plan students being either discouraged from or forbidden to take Asian History I (could this be because some people are fearful of reinforcing an Asian identity which embarrasses the rich white nations in United Nations vote?):
(d)history students being advised not to take Asian Studies III.

The biggest obstacle Asian Studies has faced at this uni-yersity has been a commit-tee of the Professorial Board known as the Asian Studies Committee or the Brookes Committee. Like a similar Committee (the Aikman Committee in Pacific Studies) the Brookes Committee has both stultified as well as been hostile to the growth of Asian Studies at this university. The Aikman Committee has also failed to develop a viable Polynesian studies programme which is inexcusable in New Zealand. The reasons for the failures of both Committees are not hard to find. They are more institutional than per-sonal — few having the strength of character to trans-cend their institutional role.

As there are limited funds available for the behavioural sciences and the humanities each university department head must get as much as he conscientiously can for his own department. A committee in charge of one discipline made up of the heads of other disciplines is very much like appointing the foxes to guard a pullet. After the initial sparring among the foxes the pullet can be expected to be torn apart by the most rapacious foxes. It is natural that Jealous department heads will see that they get their share of lecturers and money formerly allocated to Asian Studies. The American "interdisciplinary" formula is the convenient rationalisation for this process. We could do the same for Political Science by dissolving it into the various other disciplines by establishing a Political Science Centre. We could let the History Department take up the Ancient Medieval, Modern and Contemporary Political Histories, Geography annex Political Geography. Economics take on Political Economy. Philosophy take on Political Philosophy. Sociology take on Political Sociology, and so forth. What incredible gall!

Meanwhile fewer students study less about Asia and, what is still worse, those few students who do show promise will be snapped up by foreign universities, never to return. Surely Victoria University and the New Zealand taxpayer deserve better than the financing of New Zealand's brain drain.

I have decided to sacrifice my own future academic career in New Zealand to expose the circumstances and some of the events that have led to this unhappy situation. I would invite fellow academics, unafraid of the disapproval of their Department Heads, students unafraid of their teachers, and a public unafraid of anybody to join with me in forming a Right To Know Council which will have as its main and immediate object the getting of both Asian and Polynesian Studies off the ground at this university. The more general end of the Right To Know Council (in which all members would be equal regardless of background or social status—even Professors and top administrative staff are invited if they can accept equality with their students and interested members of the public) will be genuine university reform.

Those interested in the formation of a Right To Know Council please contact Mr. W. J. Hall by phone at the Asian Studies Centre or by letter at 150 Raroa Road.

William J. Hall

Lecturer in Asian Studies.