On 18th June, the University of Bristol Business School hosted an enlightening event titled “Engagement & Relevance – Point and Counterpoint”, featuring speakers Professor Martin Parker and Professor Robin Holt. The session provided a compelling discourse on the current state of academia, its evolution, and its impact on both research and teaching. This blog post aims to encapsulate the essence of the discussion, highlighting the key points raised by both professors.
Robin Holt: The Surface-Level Academic Landscape
Professor Robin Holt commenced the discussion by critically analysing the shifting dynamics within academia. He emphasised how the demand for relevance and engagement has transformed the way research is conducted and presented. According to Holt, the pressure to appeal to a broader audience, including media and external stakeholders, has led academics to become increasingly self-conscious. This shift has resulted in researchers selecting topics that are immediately appealing and conforming to dominant discourses, rather than pursuing inquiries driven by curiosity, which can be ‘edgy’ and which require sustained and critical engagement.
Holt pointed out that this trend has fundamentally altered the nature of academic work. Researchers are now more concerned with making a quick impact and moving on, rather than delving deeply into their subjects. This surface-level approach, he argued, is detrimental to the intellectual virtues of patience, discipline, and meticulousness that academia traditionally championed.
Furthermore, Holt highlighted the impact of this shift on students. The educational environment now pressures students to present themselves in ways that attract external validation. As a result, the university is no longer a sanctuary for deep, disciplinary learning but a platform for students to prepare for external scrutiny. Holt’s critique underscored a profound concern: the university’s changing ethos, driven by the imperatives of engagement and impact, might be eroding its foundational values.
Martin Parker: The Enclosure of the University
In contrast to Holt’s perspective, Professor Martin Parker provided a historical and structural analysis of the university’s role. Parker acknowledged the dual nature of modern universities as both public actors and enclosed institutions. He traced the historical roots of universities, noting that they have traditionally been centres of power reproduction, initially serving the church and later various state functions.
Parker argued that the mid-20th-century vision of universities as beacons of social change and protest was an anomaly. The current trend, where universities act as enclosed entities catering to specific audiences and producing graduates with market advantages, is a return to their traditional role. He pointed out that despite their expanded social presence, universities have erected boundaries around themselves, focusing on specific types of education and research that often do not engage with broader societal issues.
Using the example of the Bristol Pound, a local community currency, Parker illustrated the challenges of integrating non-traditional subjects into academic research. Despite its significant economic and social implications, the Bristol Pound was not seen as a viable subject for academic inquiry within the conventional economic discourse. This example highlighted the disconnect between academic research priorities and real-world problems.
The Path Forward: Broadening the Scope of Engagement
Both Holt and Parker converged on the idea that universities need to rethink their approach to engagement and relevance. Holt warned against the attention seeking dominating many current academic practices, while Parker emphasised the need for universities to broaden their engagement beyond traditional boundaries.
Parker shared his experience with various engagement projects, noting the enriching and diverse perspectives they brought. He advocated for a more inclusive approach to engagement, one that recognises and incorporates different shapes and sizes of problems from the world outside the university. Parker’s involvement with the Bristol Ideas project, which fostered a university-like environment for the city through cultural and intellectual events, exemplified this broader engagement.
Striking a Balance
The discussion between Holt and Parker highlighted the complexities and challenges faced by modern universities. While the push for engagement and relevance has brought academia closer to societal issues and vocational needs, it has also led to a more means-end approach to research and education which collapses academic activity into distinct projects with explicit goals defined in accordance with pre-existing policy; open discovery is rare. The key lies in accepting both disciplined critique and engagement, not reconciling them, but allowing them to live alongside and to influence one another – maintaining the depth and rigour of academic inquiry while ensuring that it remains connected with the broader public.
Universities must strive to be both crucibles of knowledge and beacons of social engagement: so enclosures, but with holes. By embracing diverse forms of engagement and broadening the scope of research to include real-world problems, they can fulfil their dual role as centres of learning and agents of social change. As Parker aptly put it, universities should aim to be less enclosed and more integrated with the society they serve, fostering a richer and more meaningful exchange of ideas.
The University of Bristol Business School is committed to enhancing research engagement. If you are interested in discovering more about our initiatives and projects, visit our research page.
With many thanks to Robin Holt and Martin Parker for their insights and contribution.