Abstract
The chapter delves into a particular manifestation of human cultural activity, that is, educational life, from the perspective of the governing choice cube metaphor. More specifically, the chapter concentrates on the implications of choice cube for the decision-making system at a university. The argument is inspired by the 2018 amendment of the Polish Higher Education Act to conform to the guidelines of global institutions such as UNESCO, the World Bank, or the European Commission. The chapter opens with a discussion of the geometric attributes of education. Having demonstrated how the structure of cube is reflected in language as a fundamental symbolic vehicle of social communication (Chaps. 4 and 5) and how cubic structure reflects cultural forms of organisation in the broadest sense of the word (Chaps. 6 and 7), I finally come to discuss education along the same lines in this chapter. The argument then proceeds to cover institutional aspects of the university system, both in respect to the internal network of relations among members of academia and decision processes occurring therein. However, the implications which arise from the discussion are actually broad and are seen as having an international appeal, given the globalisation of contemporary higher education. The chapter closes by addressing ratings, impact factors, and prestige as the key parameters regulating the contemporary academic sector.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
On the relationship between language and culture see also Kövecses (2015, p. 74), who argues as follows (emphasis added): ‘The relationship between culture and language can be dealt with if we assume that both culture and language are about making meaning. This view of culture comes closest to that proposed by Clifford Geertz (1973, p. 5), who wrote: “Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun. I take culture to be those webs, and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretative one in search of meaning.” In this spirit, I suggest that we approach both culture and language as “webs of significance” that people both create and understand.’
- 2.
See Lennox (2007) for a brilliant interdisciplinary account of information as the basic unit of organisation in science and biology.
- 3.
In the scholastic tradition of higher education we have well-recognised triangular and square-based forms of knowledge organisation, known respectively as trivium and quadrivium. The former includes grammar, dialectics, and rhetoric, while the latter covers music, arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy. The spatialisation of the educational experience in terms of geometric configurations is also popular in modern-day accounts of university systems. For example, Grudowski and Lewandowski (2012, p. 401) argue for a hexagonal architecture of quality in higher education, by pointing out the following vertices: (1) employers, (2) central authorities, (3) regional authorities, (4) academic teachers, (5) administration staff, and (6) doctoral students.
- 4.
For more on the contemporary state of the art regarding social and technological networks and their applications, especially the linking of an educational network with Carl Linnaeus’ botanic, hierarchical taxonomy, see Kamola and Arabas (2018).
- 5.
- 6.
The notion of hypercube is purely hypothetical in this chapter and stems from the concept of cube as a basic-level category of description. Whether hypercube lends itself to more than just a metaphoric device for the argument unfolding needs to be examined in the prospective research along with the investigation of the empirical grounds for the notion. All in all, so far it seems that cubic architecture is confined to social forms of organisation based on the commonality of values, beliefs, and goals. The question remains to what extent the external, global context of education hypercube is cognitively salient enough to enable the analogous geometric account as a social form of organisation. The difficulties of this kind arise when the immediate national context is brought with respect to education cube. In other words, it is challenging to think about the higher education system in a given country to form a socially perceptible conceptual complex, not to mention transnational frameworks. It seems that the average social awareness of education cube is instantiated by the human capability to indicate examples of places where higher education occurs, such as particular universities, colleges, polytechnics, and so on.
- 7.
Certainly, the list is far from exhaustive, but it must be recalled that this chapter is intended as preliminary research into the theoretic/conceptual foundations of modern university decision-making, so further discussion is hoped to develop as part of a more comprehensive investigation.
- 8.
Cf. the concept of the common good in Hardt and Negri (2012) in relation to other forms of social organisation, such as family, corporation, or nation.
References
Antonowicz, D. (2015). Między siłą globalnych procesów a lokalną tradycją: Polskie szkolnictwo wyższe w dobie przemian. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika.
Balzer, W. (2010). Lean Higher Education. Productivity Press.
Barnett, R. (2012). Imagining the University. Routledge.
Bernardi, C., & Ghelfi, A. (2010). We Won’t Pay for Your Crisis, We Create Institutions of the Common! Edu-factory Journal, 0, 108–118.
Bourdieu, P. (1988, 1984). Homo Academicus (P. Collier, Trans.). Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (2005, 1979). Dystynkcja: Społeczna krytyka władzy saṃdzenia (P. Biłos, Trans.). Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Calella, G. (2011). The Factory of Precarious Workers. In C. Solomon & T. Palmieri (Eds.), Springtime. The New Student Rebellions (pp. 89–103). Verso.
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Issues in Higher Education. Elsevier.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2004, 1980). A Thousand Plateaus (B. Massumi, Trans.). Continuum.
Enders, J., & Jongbloed, B. (Eds.). (2007). Science Studies. Public-Private Dynamics in Higher Education: Expectations, Developments and Outcomes. Transcript Verlag.
Garfield, E. (2006). The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. JAMA, 295, 90–93. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.1.90.
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books.
Gerd. (2014). Speaking Topics: The Future of Humanity, Business, Technology…And Beyond. http://www.futuristgerd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Futurist-Gerd-Leonhard-2015-Speaking-Topics.pdf
Glüer, K. (2006). Triangulation. In E. Lepore & B. C. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook for the Philosophy of Language (pp. 1006–1019). Oxford University Press.
Grudowski, P., & Lewandowski, K. (2012). Pojęcie jakości kształcenia i uwarunkowania jej kwantyfikacji w uczelniach wyższych. Zarządzanie I Finanse. http://jmf.wzr.pl/pim/2012_3_1_29.pd
Gӓrdenfors, P. (2014). The Geometry of Meaning. MIT Press.
Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2012). Rzecz-pospolita: Poza własność prywatną i dobro publiczne. Linia Radykalna: t. 12. Korporacja Ha!art.
Harvey, D. (1990). The Condition of Postmodernity. An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (2014). Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism. Profile Books. http://gbv.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1742964.
Johnson, S. (2010). Where the Good Ideas Come from. The Natural History of Innovation. Riverhead Books.
Kamola, M., & Arabas, P. P. (2018). Sieci społeczne i technologiczne: Jak zrozumieć, jak wykorzystać (Wydanie I). Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN; NASK.
Kövecses, Z. (2015). Where Metaphors Come From (Kindle Edn). Oxford University Press.
Krzeszowski, T. P. (1997). Angels and Devils in Hell. Elements of Axiology in Semantics. Wydawnictwo Energeia.
Lennox, J. C. (2007). God’s Undertaker. Has Science Buried God? Lion Books.
Lukes, S. (2005). Power. A Radical View. Palgrave Macmillan.
Lyotard, J.-F. (1997). Kondycja ponowoczesna: Raport o stanie wiedzy (M. Kowalska, & J. Migasiński, Trans.). Fundacja ‘Aletheia’.
Marginson, S. (2007). The Public/Private Divide in Higher Education: A Global Revision. Higher Education, 53, 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-8230-y.
McGonigal, J. (2008). Why I Love Bees: A Case Study in Collective Intelligence Gaming. In K. Salen (Ed.), The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning. MIT Press. http://mitpress2.mit.edu/books/chapters/0262195755chap9.pdf.
McMahon, W. (2009). Higher Learning, Greater Good. Private and Social Benefits of Higher Education. The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mrozek, E. (2015). Kolektywna inteligencja i partycypacyjna kultura podejmowania decyzji. In A. Dąbrowski, A. Schumann, & J. Woleński (Eds.), Podejmowanie decyzji. Pojęcia, teorie, kontrowersje (pp. 51–88). Copernicus Center Press.
Münch, R. (2014). Academic Capitalism. Routledge.
Nixon, J. (2011). Higher Education and the Public Good. Imagining the University. Continuum.
Ochnio, M. (2012). Nowe Zarządzanie Publiczne New Public Management—podstawowe cechy modelu. Jego zastosowanie w Polsce. Stowarzyszenie Instytut Zmian. https://www.academia.edu/2130326/Nowe_Zarz%C4%85dzanie_Publiczne_New_Public_Management_podstawowe_cechy_modelu_._Jego_zastosowanie_w_Polsce.
Pearce, D. (2006). Cost-benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments. OECD.
Pór, G. (2008). Collective Intelligence and Collective Leadership: Twin Paths to Beyond Chaos. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 82. http://www.phibetaiota.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/George-Por-on-Collective-Intelligence-and-Collective-Leadership.pdf
Schwartz, B. (2004). The Paradox of Choice. HarperCollins Publishers.
Scott, P. (2015). Higher Education, the Public Good and the Public Interest. In O. Filippakou & G. Williams (Eds.), Higher Education as a Public Good. Critical Perspectives on Theory, Policy and Practice (pp. 41–58). Peter Lang.
Szadkowski, K. (2016). Uniwersytet jako dobro wspólne. Podstawy krytycznych badań nad szkolnictwem wyższym. PWN (e-pub file).
Usher, A., & Meadow, J. (2009). A Global Survey of University Rankings and League Tables. In B. Kehm & B. Stensaker (Eds.), University Rankings, Diversity, and the New Landscape of Higher Education (pp. 3–18). Sense Publishers.
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1994). From Lean Production to Lean Enterprise. Harvard Business Review (March-April), 93–94.
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean Thinking. Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. Free Press.
World Bank. (2002). Constructing Knowledge Societies. New Challenges for Tertiary Education. World Bank.
World Bank. (2004). Tertiary Education in Poland: Szkolnictwo wyźsze w Polsce. World Bank.
Żegleń, U. M. (2007). Filozofia umysłu: Dyskusja z naturalistycznymi koncepcjami umysłu. Umysł: prace z filozofii i kognitywistyki. Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek.
Internet Sites
Retrieved August 16, 2018, from http://www.isp.uj.edu.pl/projekty-w-trakcie-realizacji/-/journal_content/56_INSTANCE_n9v3lSFqAPGx/2103800/135045947
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kuźniak, M. (2021). Education, Geometry, and Choice. In: The Geometry of Choice. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78655-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78655-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78654-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78655-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)