Tuesday 12 July 2011

Colonies, Satellites, Differences

The following quotation is taken from Elizabeth Laragy’s page on “hybridity” in Wikipedia; the page references are to Bill Ashcroft et al., The Post Colonial Reader. And this blog is an open invitation, particularly to our colleagues in Oshawa, to add their voices to the discussion.

The term hybridity has been most recently associated with Homi Bhabha . In his piece entitled ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences', Bhabha stresses the interdependence of coloniser and colonised. Bhabha argues that all cultural systems and statements are constructed in what he calls the ‘Third Space of Enunciation'. [6] In accepting this argument, we begin to understand why claims to the inherent purity and originality of cultures are ‘untenable'. Bhabha urges us into this space in an effort to open up the notion of an inter national culture “not based on exoticism or multi-culturalism of the diversity of cultures [sic], but on the inscription and articulation of culture's hybridity. ” [7] In bringing this to the next stage, Bhabha hopes that it is in this space “that we will find those words with which we can speak of Ourselves and Others. And by exploring this ‘Third Space', we may elude the politics of polarity and emerge as the others of ourselves”. [8]

I find this citation from Bhabha strangely apt when thinking about the Academic Plan and Trent in Oshawa .  Not because our colleagues in Oshawa have sometimes felt perceived as a colony or satellite of the Peterborough death-star (a perception we all have to address), but because Bhabha’s notion of hybridity raises the kinds of complex questions we need to ask ourselves as we plan Trent’s academic future.  Is Trent in Oshawa an alternative space that eludes “the politics of polarity”?  Do we do things differently in Oshawa than in Peterborough?  If so, how and why?  Does it work?  What is our relationship with UOIT?  How do we respect cultural diversity and cultural differences whilst maintaining the relative autonomy of both campuses?  What role will Oshawa play in Trent’s future mandate?

Difficult important questions we all need to answer.

Wednesday 6 July 2011

Terms of Reference




ACADEMIC PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE  
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Purpose
To develop an Academic Plan for Trent University
Objectives:
·        To meet with all academic departments and to review the unit plans provided by all academic programs as part of the Integrated Planning Process (2009-2010);
·        To set priorities for action in order to achieve the Vision and Mission goals;
·        To make pragmatic recommendations on how to achieve:  increased enrolment, improved retention; and improved employee morale as it relates to the academic enterprise;
·        To develop strategic recommendations regarding academic programming that will ensure academic integrity within the context of financial stability.
Timeframe
The Committee will aim to approve a draft for circulation to Faculty Board (December 9th ), Senate (January 17th ), and Board of Governors (February 3rd ).
Composition
Gary Boire, Chair, Provost and Vice President Academic
Joe Muldoon, Consultant, Director, Office of the Provost and Vice President Academic
Cathy Bruce, School of Education and Professional Learning
Craig Brunetti, Sciences, (Biology)
Jim Buttle, Sciences, (Geography)
Sally Chivers, Humanities (Canadian Studies and English Literature)
James Conolly, Social Sciences, (Anthropology)
Doug Evans, Sciences, (Environmental Resource Science)
Moira Howes, Humanities (Philosophy)
David Newhouse, Social Sciences (Indigenous Studies and Business Administration)
Colleen O’Manique, Humanities (Gender & Women’s Studies and Political Studies)