Anthony Potts
Education Studies
La Trobe University, Bendigo
P.O. Box 199
Bendigo, Australia, 3550
Higher Education
Close up2
Lancaster University
July 16-18 2001
‘An Integral Part of the Local Community’
Politicians’ Perspectives on the Local University
Part I
Introduction
On reading some of the classic literature on the history of universities one is immediately stuck by the importance of key individuals–in a sense Shils’ (1988: 210) patrons-in the establishment and success of universities. Sommerseth (1994: 213) observes that the establishment of academic institutions has always proceeded against a background of active political involvement and opposition from those academic establishments already in existence. Green (1969: 116) notes:
For universities to prosper they had to win favour from the established order. At all stages of their history their studies have been more or less closely correlated to the national needs. If the modern university sees its task as supplying the country with civil servants, administrators and technologists, the medieval university existed to train churchman, canonists, monks and friars, schoolmen and schoolmasters. Yet if the medieval universities required government patronage, they also needed, as do their modern counterparts, sufficient autonomy, to be free of other external pressures. They needed the power to order their own affairs freely. In the early stages they wanted the backing of the Crown, which was freely given, to support the authority of their own officials over often unruly students.
Green (1969-245) goes on to note that ‘throughout history the universities have been more or less closely connected with politics’ and this of course means politicians of various sorts.
This paper examines some key perspectives of selected civic leaders on their regional university. The paper covers issues such as the place of the cities in providing a proper environment for a university, the role of the university, the types of education that should be provided, the place of research, other contributions that the university should make, and should there be more mutual links between the university and other organisations. It is hoped that by exploring these civic leaders’ perspectives that a better understanding of what community leaders want from their universities will be more readily apparent. The discussion in the paper will enable more fruitful and productive dialogue between universities and the general public.
The Literature
European and United Kingdom Examples
Scholars have demonstrated the role of persons of influence whether they are rulers, monarchs, politicians, or other elites in the establishment of universities. For example Ruegg (1992: 18) notes the role played by the monarchs and leading citizens in the Middle Ages in France, England, Spain and Portugal. Frijhoff (1996: 48 and 78) however, cautions that in the Middle Ages some cities refused to become university centres because of the difficulties of controlling rowdy students. Frijhoff (1996: 49) notes that in the period 1500-1800 political power was important in approving the establishment of universities by regional and local communities. He notes the case of the United Provinces where municipalities founded universities and where the Athenaeum in Amsterdam was founded in 1632. Hammerstein (1996: 150) notes that from the late fifteenth century on ‘princes, magistrates, churches, and all those exercising authority, developed a direct interest in their universities’.
Phillipson (1988: 100) observes that ‘for the first three centuries of its existence Edinburgh was a civic university in the strictest sense of the term’ while Rothblatt (1988:124) notes the extensive regulatory powers notes that Edinburgh Town Council had over it. These included controls over finances, building, the appointment of principals, professors, discipline and curriculum (Phillipson, 1988: 100). Phillipson (1988: 100) observes that the wide ranging powers that the Edinburgh Town Council enjoyed over the university were a constant source of dispute between town and gown. Persons of importance–often monarchs–in particular ways also influenced other European universities. For example Leiden’s university was established in 1575 ‘as part of the ritual of celebrations that attended the citizens hard-won victory over the Spanish’ (Grafton, 1988:64). The support the city of Leiden gave to Prince William of Orange, during the war with Spain, led him to request the States of Holland to found a university there. The University of Berlin was founded by King Frederick William III not to celebrate victory in war but, on the contrary due to defeat at the Battle of Jena in 1806 (McClelland, 1988: 186). This had deprived Prussia of its major university in Halle.
Plans for a University of London originated in 1826 when various capital city interests combined to plan for a university which would have some of the status of Oxford and Cambridge (Rothblatt, 1988: 120). Green (1969: 100) notes the role played by civic leaders in the establishment of Britain’s civic and red brick universities. He notes that apart from London and Durham the new universities were the result of the civic initiative and generosity of rich manufacturers, often nonconformist in religious persuasion, who were reluctant to contribute to the traditional institutions (Green, 1969: 100). However, Green (1969: 103) observes that at the same time the growth of the new universities ‘was blighted by the short-sightedness of second-rate academics and municipal politicians’. Green (1969: 130 notes that the advice provided by the local businessmen and administrators, who dominated their councils, often retarded their growth, while their regional character meant that up until 1945 their capacity was not fully realised.
The first of Britain’s new type of universities established in the 1950s and 1960s was situated at Keele and was largely the result of Lindsay and Horwood, while the University of Essex was the result of a recommendation of the County Council in 1959 (Green, 1969: 140-141). Shattock (1994: 105) claims that when the English ‘New Universities’ were established the Universities Grants Commission took special notice of the case presented by the local community and its ability to raise private capital. He notes that communities founded Promotions Committees composed of prominent local individuals-the York University Committee was headed by the Archbishop of York, Lancaster’s by the Early of Derby, Warwick by Lord Rootes, a major industrialist, (Shattock, 1994: 105). In the case of Warwick University its Promotion Committee was composed of industrialists, trade unionists and local politicians who had very definite views on the need to establish a university (Shattock, 1994: 110). These person ‘engaged in furious argument with academic members of the Planning Board whose priority was for the university to aim at international standards of research’ while those on the Promotion Committee wanted a university that would firstly contribute to the local economy and to the social and intellectual life of the area (Shattock, 1994: 110). Wilson (1995: 59) notes that the effective gift of the site by the Lancaster City Council ensured the location of Lancaster University in that City. Palomaki (1997: 311-315) notes a somewhat similar situation in Finland with the founding of a university in Vassa.
North American Examples
The establishment of universities in North America also attests to the importance of civic leaders in their foundation. For example, from the beginning of the University of Chicago local businessmen and clergymen were active supporters (Shils, 1988: 212). The businessmen endowed many professorial appointments (and in areas where there was unlikely to be any personal or other economic return) and they provided building funds (Shils, 1988: 214-216). It was wealthy persons who made possible the successful establishment of the University of Chicago in its first quarter of a century and they made a great difference till well after 1945 (Shils, 1988: 214-216). Shils (1988: 213-219) suggests that these individuals did do because of a sense of civic duty. According to Shils (1988: 217) these businessmen:
Regarded trusteeships of universities and colleges as evidence of their probity, reliability, and soundness in judgement and decision. They regarded trusteeships as a heavy responsibility. In many cases they had very little understanding of the idea of a university; they understood little of the nature and necessity of far-reaching autonomy in academic matters. They took their trusteeships so much to heart that they regarded themselves as responsible for everything that went on in the university under their care.
Stevenson (1988: 154) suggests that the idea for New York University appears to have resulted from the meetings of a small but influential literary society called The Club, which comprised three lawyers, three Columbia College professors, two ministers, two merchants and a medical doctor. They were interested in civic betterment and raising the cultural standards of New York City (Stevenson, 1988: 154). Bender (1988: 23) writes of how during the 1890s the President of Columbia University, Low, transformed it from a small college into a major research university. Low was not an academic but moved smoothly between the civic and academic world, coming to the presidency of Columbia after serving as reform mayor of Brooklyn and leaving to become mayor of New York City in 1901 (Bender, 1998: 23).
It was not just in the large cities of the United States that civic leaders were instrumental in the establishment and fostering of universities. As Barlow (1998: 149) notes the whole university tradition in America had a heavy rural bias. McGiffert (1964: 3) observes that a number of factors were important in rural American towns desiring a college or university and one of the main ones was ‘self-respect’. This was coupled with the rivalries of competing communities whose leaders believed that a college or university would enhance the cultural standing and prestige of the town, increase the population and bring a variety of rewards (McGiffert, 1964: 4). McGiffert (1964: 5) notes that in America colleges and universities along with gaols, hospitals and the location of the state capitals were the rewards of politics.
Australian Examples
Today Australia has a unitary system of higher education with thirty-seven universities. Until 1937 all of Australia’s universities were located in the state capital cities. This was partly due to the pattern of settlement that saw population growth concentrated on the coast.
Commencing in 1937 the first of Australia’s universities was located in a rural area of Australia. New England University College (a university college of the University of Sydney) later to become the University of New England was established in Armidale in northern New South Wales. The University owes its foundation largely to the work of farmer, grazier and foundation member of the Country Party who held the rural electorate of Armidale for twenty-two years and the Education Ministry under various governments for a period of twelve years – a period greater than any other minister of Education in the history of New South Wales State Governments (Godfrey and Ramsland, 1997: 611). Drummond (1959: Preface) notes that the establishment of the university was connected with efforts to decentralise educational provision in New South Wales. Drummond (1959: xi-xxi) is at pains to acknowledge the assistance he gained from leading citizens of Armidale and northern New South Wales in his efforts to establish the university.
The establishment of Newcastle University in New South Wales, another of Australia’s non-metropolitan universities owed much to the ‘work and commitment of many citizens of Newcastle and region’ (Evatt in Wright, 1992: iv). Wright (1992: 5-6) notes that those who attended a public meeting to campaign for the establishment of the University on October 1, 1942 was a list of ‘a Who’s Who of Newcastle’. In their efforts to establish universities in rural and regional Australia citizens realised that high profile campaign leaders were needed. Thus in Wagga Wagga in New South Wales the campaign was led by Merryless, an Oxford University Rhodes Scholar, high profile grazier, skilful media campaigner and experienced lobbyist (Boadle, 1994: 19). Interestingly the establishment of the University of New England was used against him to postpone the establishment of a university at Wagga Wagga. It was pointed out by those who wished to stop the establishment of more rural universities that New South Wales ‘already had a grossly under-utilised rural university at Armidale’ and that ‘universities placed in the country were vastly more costly than those in the cities [with] New England, for instance, [being] relatively the most expensive university yet built in Australia’ (Boadle, 1994: 19).
However, despite initial reluctance to establish non-metropolitan universities in Australia today there are twelve. In many cases these universities have been formed on the basis of previously existing institutions such as teachers’ colleges or colleges of advanced education. The precursors of these often have even longer histories extending to the mid-nineteenth century.
Chipman (1997) notes the reluctance of Australia to establish regional universities compared to overseas cases and observes that many of the world’s great universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, and Yale are located in regional areas. He asks ‘why [Australian] regional universities should be thought to be especially problematic because they are located in non-capital cities is not at all clear’ (Chipman, 1997: 18). He thinks it may be due to the predisposition of Australians to disparage that, which exists outside the capital cities-a phenomenon, he labels ‘urbist’. Chipman (1997: 19) wonders if this ‘is a distinctly Australian prejudice; the metropolitan capital city attitude that if something is really good it must be capital city based’. However, it must be noted that Williams (1975: 9) notes in his writings on England that the country has been viewed ‘as a place of backwardness, ignorance, limitation’.
If one compares the situation in Australian and North American one notes some stark contrasts and yet some similarities. Severino (1996: 291) notes that ‘American public and professional attitudes towards the idea of the urban university have always been ambivalent and confused, if not hostile and resistant, in keeping with tendencies towards metrophobia, or fear of the city and its people’. She believes that the resistance to the concept of the urban university in America is embedded in the rural and small town traditions of colonial, state and land grant institutions in North America (Severino, 1996: 294). She quotes Bender who observes that ‘in the Anglo-American tradition of college antiurbanism, Americans have always idealised the rural college’ (Severino, 1996: 297). At the same time there are similarities in the American and Australian positions with respect to regional universities. Severino (1996: 224) quotes Riseman who noted that many regional colleges were established ‘because small towns aspired to become large towns; the secret to growth was to acquire a railroad, a hotel or a college’. In Australia some of the newer institutes of higher education established after 1965 owed much to their establishment “state political imperatives [rather than a] sober assessment of needs … city-based politicians, campaigning in country towns prior to an election, had a standard proforma promise which ran ‘if it’s got a river promise them a dam; if not, then promise them a CAE [college of advanced education]’” (Chipman, 1997: 10). Part of the popular belief is that leading and ordinary citizens alike in these regional cities and towns are active supporters of a university in their region, town or city mainly due to the alleged economic benefits that accrue from such a presence. More serious research for example, OECD (1984), and populist and advocacy publications put out by Australian interest groups, for example the Cairns and Far North Queensland Higher Education Study (1997) and the McGuiness and Associates Report–Bendigo (1997) supports these notions.
This Paper
The above discussion has identified a number of important themes. These include the importance of powerful and influential individuals in the establishment and growth of universities, the varying motives of these persons, the ambivalence towards the establishment of regional universities in Australia, and some similarities and differences between the position in Australia and some overseas countries.
However, while the literature may provide discussion of the importance of key individuals we have little recent data on what current civic leaders think of their university, its roles and purposes. In fact the literature is almost non-existent. This may be due to a reluctance of researchers to research powerful elites, the difficulties that such research entails or the fact that such individuals are not prepared to be the subjects of such research. But what is know is that if regional universities in Australia are to survive then a sympathetic and supportive public, including important opinion makers and legislators, will be essential. In this respect Colon (1996: 65) notes that ‘having a finger on the pulse of public opinion is vital for elected officials’, while Sacco and Parle (1977: 1) observe how mayors are often seen to be influential in community politics. Benjamin (1993: 47), although writing about Britain, notes the importance of higher education on Britain’s economic and social prosperity is not grasped by the public who have misconceptions and prejudices to be overcome. Benjamin (1993: 277) observes that the success of the higher education system depends on an informed and supportive public. Finally Theus, (1993: 277-279) writing on the American situation (where ‘higher education enjoys relatively positive ratings among the public, although most question whether colleges render good value for the dollar’), notes that ‘the academy must attend to public expectations about institutional performance because the public will be the source of its charter to continue its operations’.