Stephen Downes

Alex Usher picks up where he left off, criticizing the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) for applying 'purity tests' to what he calls 'pretty minor differences' (for people not tuned to the dog whistles here, this is the equivalent of calling CAUT a bunch of reactionary and irrelevant leftists). The differences cited - all four, not just the two he keys in on - and in fact quite significant and have been the subject of ongoing dispute within the sector. One of the 'lesser areas' cited by Usher is the issue of performance-based funding, which has been the subject of acrimonious job action in Quebec recently. The other is 'alignment of academic programs with the labour market', which cedes (I guess?) ultimate wisdom on what to teach and study to people most interested in serving short-term business interests. The more serious (to Usher) items concern "taking on research contracts with industry partners" (a practice that has a checkered history, at best) and "restrictive collective agreements often layered with tenure," in other words, a union workplace, which again isn't just a 'purity test' but speaks to the economic well being, working conditions, and basic freedoms of those employed in the sector. It's not surprising to see Usher line up with the banking industry on higher education policy, but it's disappointing.