Reform and Redesign: A Review of the Changing Role of the Public Purposes in R&D and Technology Institutes (Working Paper 17)

As the globalization of knowledge has taken hold over the past decade, and as governments around the world review their new roles in support of the production of knowledge, several factors have shaped the context in governments’ approach to public research. Arguably, none has been more affected by these pressures for reform than government scientific and technology laboratories or institutes. Often ignored in the re-shaping of national systems of innovation, these organizations play an important role in advancing national economic and social objectives. This paper, by reviewing examples of reforms underway in several countries, including Canada, France, Germany, the UK, Japan, USA and Latin America, will argue that government research and technology institutes — often historically surrogates for industrial research — are gradually re-defining their mandates to meet the new pressures of globalization as well as satisfying growing public demands for increased relevance and efficiency in responding to citizens’ and industry needs.

From Where Do We Teach? Potential Positions in Public Education

This thesis is a conceptual examination of the positions from which we teach in public education. As it is philosophical in nature, it takes no qualitative or quantitative data. It offers a review of selected relevant literature and an analysis of personal and professional experience, with the intent to pose critical questions about teaching and learning. The framework of this thesis represents the following contentions: First, from its inception, public schooling served capital by preparing skilled labour for emerging industrial markets. This history is the hegemonic shadow that hangs over public education today. Second, movements toward the standardization of funding, curriculum, and evaluation support the further commodification of public schooling. The “accountability” that standardization offers, the “back to basics” that it aims for, is counter to the potential that public education might critically inform citizens and seek social justice. Third, movements toward the privatization of public schooling under the guise of “choice” and “mobility”, brought on by manufactured crisis, serve only to widen socio-economic inequities as capitalist neoliberal interests seek profit in both the product of public schools and in schooling itself. If we recognize and understand the power of public education to inform vast numbers of citizens who will, in turn, either maintain or reform society, we must ask: What do we want public education to be? What are the effects of continuing down historically conventional and increasingly standardized paths? What do progressive pedagogies offer? How might teachers destandardize their pedagogy and pursue equitable opportunities for marginalized students? How might students name themselves and their world, that they might play a part in its reimagining? For whom do we teach, and under what conditions? From where do we teach, and why? For educators to ask these questions, and to employ what they discover, will necessitate taking substantial risks. It will necessitate taking a stand and cannot be done alone. Teachers must seek out the collaboration of their students. They must offer students the time and the space to find their own voices, to create their own selves, and to envision previously uncharted paths on which we might walk together.