Keskustelu yliopiston uudesta palkkausjärjestelmästä - akateemisten arvojen murtaja vai toiveiden täyttäjä?

There has been a change in university´s position in society during the last of decades from traditional university to result-based university. Result-based is considered as a steering mechanism. The context in this study is the period when the New Salary System was introduced. In the New Salary System salary is based on the performance appraisal made by the supervisor. The purpose of the study was to understand the discussion of the New Salary System and how this discussion should be interpreted. The research task had two parts. In the first part the objective was to identify how the academic work was conceptualised. In the second part I analyzed how one related to the New Salary System and how this was interpreted in relation to representation of academic work. The research material consisted of webblogs from the year 2005. Webblogs were located in the internet and one had free access to them. Mostly employees from Finnish universities wrote to them. Besides the salary system writers discussed the university and the academic work. Two different ways of talking about the academic work were found in research material. In the first one the academic work was based on community and in the second one on individuality. When community was emphasized writers discussed also science and research and academic traditions such as peer review. When individuality was emphasized writers discussed individual performance and the importance of salary according to one´s performance. The analysis shows that the New Salary System was opposed and supported. Opposition was based on arguments for the traditional university; peer review, truth, academic profession, academic community and university’s autonomy are the most important arguments. Supporters used arguments such as the need to make individual´s performance visible and breaking the existing power structures.

From a "Student" to a Lifelong "Consumer" : Constructions of Educability in Adult Students' Narrative Life Histories

The focus of this study was to examine the constructions of the educable subject of the lifelong learning (LLL) narrative in the narrative life histories of adult students at general upper secondary school for adults (GUSSA). In this study lifelong learning has been defined as a cultural narrative on education, “a system of political thinking” that is not internally consistent, but has contradictory themes embedded within it (Billig et al., 1988). As earlier research has shown and this study also confirms, the LLL narrative creates differences between those who are included and those who fall behind and are excluded from the learning society ideal. Educability expresses socially constructed interpretations on who benefit from education and who should be educated and how. The presupposition in this study has been that contradictions between the LLL narrative and the so-called traditional constructions of educability are likely to be constructed as the former relies on the all-inclusive interpretation of educability and the latter on the meritocratic model of educating individuals based on their innate abilities. The school system continues to uphold the institutionalized ethos of educability that ranks students into the categories “bright”, “mediocre”, and “poor” (Räty & Snellman, 1998) on the basis of their abilities, including gender-related differences as well as differences based on social class. Traditional age-related norms also persist, for example general upper secondary education is normatively completed in youth and not in adulthood, and the formal learning context continues to outweigh both non-formal and informal learning. Moreover, in this study the construction of social differences in relation to educability and, thereafter unequal access to education has been examined in relation to age, social class, and gender. The biographical work of the research participants forms a peephole that permits the examination of the dilemmatic nature of the constructions of educability in this study. Formal general upper secondary education in adulthood is situated on the border between the traditional and the LLL narratives on educability: participation in GUSSA inevitably means that one’s ability and competence as a student and learner becomes reassessed through the assessment criteria maintained by schools, whereas according to the principles of LLL everyone is educable; everyone is encouraged to learn throughout their lives regardless of age, social class, or gender. This study is situated in the field of adult education, sociology of education, and social psychological research on educability, having also been informed by feminist studies. Moreover, this study contributes to narrative life history research combining the structural analysis of narratives (Labov & Waletzky, 1997), i.e. mini-stories within life history, with the analysis of the life histories as structural and thematic wholes and the creation of coherence in them; thus, permitting both micro and macro analyses. On accounting for the discontinuity created by participation in general upper secondary school study in adulthood and not normatively in youth, the GUSSA students construct coherence in relation to their ability and competence as students and learners. The seven case studies illuminate the social differences constructed in relation to educability, i.e. social class, gender, age, and the “new category of student and learner”. In the data of this study, i.e. 20 general upper secondary school adult graduates’ narrative life histories primarily generated through interviews, two main coherence patterns of the adult educable subject emerge. The first performance-oriented pattern displays qualities that are closely related to the principles of LLL. Contrary to the principles of lifewide learning, however, the documentation of one’s competence through formal qualifications outweighs non-formal and informal learning in preparation for future change and the competition for further education, professional careers, and higher social positions. The second flexible learning pattern calls into question the status of formal, especially theoretical and academically oriented education; inner development is seen as more important than such external signs of development — grades and certificates. Studying and learning is constructed as a hobby and as a means to a more satisfactory life as opposed to a socially and culturally valued serious occupation leading to further education and career development. Consequently, as a curious, active, and independent learner, this educable but not readily employable subject is pushed into the periphery of lifelong learning. These two coherence patterns of the adult educable subject illuminate who is to be educated and how. The educable and readily employable LLL subject is to participate in formal education in order to achieve qualifications for working life, whereas the educable but not employable subject may utilize lifewide learning for her/his own pleasure. Key words: adult education, general upper secondary school for adults, educability, lifelong learning, narrative life history