Response Karwur Ferry (12 September, 2010)

I am very stimulated by the writings Steven Schwartz, who talked about the paradox-the paradox the university, which indicates that there are parties (the UK and Australia) who see the presence and therefore investment in the university as essential for economic growth. These parties also questioned why the campaigns of political parties in Britain are not interested in university issues raised in their campaign. Whereas the position of universities in UK history and well-being not tersangsikan. Schwartz raises the mind of Professor Simon Marginson of the Centre for the Study of Higher Education at the University of Melbourne , to give a reason why political parties are not interested in the issue.

Schwarz as he was steering from Prof. Marginson, said that the university is not anything but a lot of things, sometimes contrary, and therefore in many ways in which it appears paradox-a paradox. He said (in my language) that the university had become torches of modernity in which he became a big container for the emerging and developing innovations (the cauldron of innovation), which at the same time, trapped and fell into the old-style bureaucracy and clerical culture of medieval (culture of the organization / administration of ecclesiastical, who was then the state and religion menyatuh, before the time of renaissance, medieval 15/16, Mediaeval-clerical culture).

This is where Marthen Ndoen gave his notes, that according to Marthen, in SWCU there are two cultures which he called the two-culture split. M Ndoen said: "Actually, on our campus (UKSW) split between those who support their creative thinker and clerical bureucracy-culture type, loan term prof. Schwartz. Mondok Creative thinker usually at the center of the study centers but they are bureaucrats in the palace and progdi faculty. The number of groups is a little creative thinker, but they are the type of pragmatic opportunist bureaucrats enough. These are the always block any changes that occur. Therefore, the provost has begun to disseminate this thought in order to break the flow of fossils in the faculty and progdi pragmatic ".

My note is that the university is creating a paradox-the paradox of history. He created a gap-of-information, with which society changes. Gap information can only be relevant to society that society apabilah be counter-parts in terms of problems encountered as well as ethical boundaries. However, not all people can create a gap in university-of-infornation for the community. He can also simply act as a replicator. This is where the role of creative thinkers at the university, which creates centripetal forces in the campus system.

He may be on him as a creative thinker, outside the mainstream of campus or off-campus. He may be like "John the Baptist who berterik in the wilderness". But he is not wrong to be in front-line changes such as Jesus of Nazareth played. In this case, I do not see the relevance of the dichotomy creative thinker in the Center-Center Study with Faculty / Progdi. There is no relationship at all if they are in the Center's study could play a more paradoxical roles or vice versa. Those are precisely the creative medium in a more mencenghkram organizational settings, but it does not then reduce the role that can be played. In this case Neil Rupidara mencandaranya certainly far more scientifically. Because this area of ​​expertise. I am very menghartapkan Note Rupidara Neil about this.

I see that what we are talking about it is all about leadership at the university, not in the sense of formal leader, but leadership role to be played by a scientist in his field. Leadership role it should go beyond the limits organisasasi, because it is through the ability penetrasinyalah it creates paradoxes.

To give you a note to M. Ndoen, in relation to whether or not an opportunist opportunistic, highly dependent on the consistency he brings the values ​​he fought for the change.

There are a number of things that still need me please register, and I will point out at the next session.

Regards

Ferry F Karwur
Faculty of Health Sciences
Center for the Study of Eastern Indonesia

Dear kak Ferry, om Ten, Petra om, om Theo, and other teman2

Sorry om Fer yes, should take steps to start, when I said I was ready to prepare materials. My material was not finished, still a little read more about "the idea of ​​the university" and write, but there are good I would respond directly from Fer om what has been started. My response is attached, on top of the file om Fer send. I'll add more later, including re-enter some thoughts that I have pour it on my blog.

Regards

Petrarca Karetji back to comment after Neil Rupidara send any response. Here is a response Karetji Petrarca.

Ngomong2 discussion of this paradox college where ya been up to?

I personally agree with what is written bung Prof. Neil when introducing writing. Schwartz is developing along the theme of the three posts that seolah2 unrelated, namely the goal of university institutions (the purpose of universities). Bung Neil has asked opinion about what should be the role of universities in Indonesia. It is also interesting what is said and Bung Bung Marthen Ferry, about aktor2 at the university and what it should be against what is actually portrayed as creative thinkers, replicators, and are more directed at cultured clerical bureaucracy (note taker?? I wonder what the translation hehehe) ... Interesting because still struggling internally about what he was thinking "university people" as the role of the university, instead of glasses outside parties who may have (or may not!) harapan2 particular on the role of the university.

Anyone who actually considered stakeholders for universities in Indonesia? Back to the questions and expectations about mate Neil Schwartz's response to the article, from the perspective of who we assess and think about what should be the role of universities in Indonesia, at least UKSW? If indeed the university should have produced a variety of paradoxes ... and let's say there are already many new paradoxes in SWCU, how paradoks2 is communicated so as to give color to others who need it? For example ... hasil2 exposure Maluku workshop will be what next? Do SWCU itself has focused on the field of marine or minimal social issues surrounding coastal communities?

Maybe we can expand the response from other teman2 in this mailing list, and that input from non-university teman2 precisely very needed ... Or?

Post Petrarca Karetji respond, Theo Litaay then give his opinion as well. Here is the opinion of Theo Litaay.

Dear All;

As a university course are required to meet the needs of society in the form of information that can be utilized by the public. In addition the community also expects there are new innovations that provide solutions to community problems. Other types of information that is expected of course is inspirational ideas that can be developed by the communities themselves.

Universities must realize that the problems faced by society is a very complex problem. Therefore the only solution that one would not be able to answer the needs of the people above. Thus, an interdisciplinary approach is a separate requirement. Nevertheless, it is where lies the problem because no little experience to find that the habit of working in the box itself is still happening.

Problem "box" there are two types: boxes and boxes of scientific institutions. It should be interdisciplinary and inter-institutional approach.

In SWCU interdisciplinary-research process is going through some of the activities that had lasted long enough. Particularly through the research community-based management of biosecurity. In this research biosecurity becomes an issue which is the entry-point for discussion of development is quite complex. With the signing of new cooperation on May 17, 2010, then this activity will continue until the year 2019, with more and more researchers who will be involved.

Cooperation has now continues with the formation of the Pacific Institute for Sustainable Development in North Sulawesi. Meanwhile, this year will also continue development of this research program to the Moluccas in collaboration with the provincial government. In August 2010 will be held an international seminar in Ambon.

Him where? if according to the government's biggest problem right now is food security. At this writing, I'm listening to the presentation Deputy Agriculture Minister in Seminar on Biosecurity and Food Security in Manado. Indonesia is a very big challenge. Demographic pressure and land use leads to reduced agricultural land. In connection with it needs to be answered with the intensification in order to improve agricultural productivity.

I would be concerned, the issue of food security is then answered by opening up the government food estate in Merauke project. Population Merauke only 148 thousand people, whereas if the food estate opened there (1.6 million hectares) is required workers 1.2 million people. This can cause what is called Dr. Ferry Karwur as genetic displacement or ethnic displacement, so that from an anthropological angle could be a tragedy. That is why now in the research that we conducted also gave attention to this area, including mengeksposenya internationally. So rather than research for the sake of research but there are also elements of advocacy.

Similarly first note I hope to enrich our discussion.

regards,
TL

Discussion of the more interesting when the originator of the idea of ​​online seminars, Neil Rupidara, again gave a long response titled University: Wisdom Keeper Agent, Agent Updates. The file can be downloaded at the following link | University Garda Policy Update Agent |

University: Wisdom Keeper Agent, Agent Update

PSKTI colleagues whom I respect,

This is our first online seminar in the scientific community. We've often discussed about many things, based on the material or the stimulation of ideas that is posted by one of us. The idea of ​​online seminars this alone I do not know how originated, but it suddenly appeared in one meeting PSKTI decision some time ago. Questioning the answer without the background, I think this idea should be welcomed. Therefore, when the opportunity is in Quezon City early last April and was asked by a pack of chairman of the Center, De Heer Mangimbulude, I gladly accepted the challenge to begin the task of this valuable forum.

Our discussion, the essence of a university or higher education, for me a difficult material. Maybe not all of our member's attention on this issue, even though most of our lives very close contact or are part of the life of this institution. I started using the term institution here, not to mention something of institutional bodies, such as SWCU, PSKTI, but an entity of ideas, norms, rules that have been formed in such a way, growing up in such a disordered and eventually re-organize, guide, restricting the movement of life of its citizens. I talk to university or higher education institution in a single level of abstraction beyond the boundaries of institutional bodies, even as an idea, he can surpass a lot of physical boundaries, such as place and time. We must understand that the university is an idea and later became an institutional model that has become more complex, its many variants. That's one reason I call it a difficult material discussed, because perhaps reach our cognitive model of the university is all around us or refer to only a limited number of literature. In fact, ideas and models of air-old university centuries and come from diverse locational context, socio-cultural, legal, and so on. However, as an institution, the university was bound by the basic ideas, which we also need to dive into it better. For what? Simply put, that the university is not seen as a commercial research institute for example, or an institution skills courses, or simply an arm of government projects, or even sesame educational institution, the university also does not fall together with other primary or secondary, or university as a professional institution, where intellectuals gathered and works, are also still able to differentiate itself from other professional institutions. Lets say for example, FE comrades who want to work in the realm of business consulting, they do not fall together with public professions of business consultants. Likewise FE comrades, they are not just lawyers community. Residents university retains its identity as intellectuals, academics, guided by the mission and values ​​as its parent university. Borrowing the term om Ferry later, grounding the idea of ​​this seminar, the attempt grounding the idea of ​​the university is certainly not an easy task, as our conception of the university is situated in the context of university life in our time, in our place, here and now. There are issues of identity aspirations of the university there. Tensions could arise because of different references about "who we mean by the university?"

However, as a forum to exchange ideas, especially among intellectuals, I think all the trouble of working out the idea that in the end have a place to clarify, deepen, and perhaps developing a stimulation of our conceptual discourse of the university, because it grounds us in understanding the diversity of the university as an entity This historical.

To facilitate this discussion further, I describe the first few thoughts as a stimulant discussion.

The basic idea beruniversitas

Let me invite to start this discussion by referring first to the idea of ​​the nature beruniversitas. Maybe someone will Questioning, for what we already know anyway, at least in the normative we all know what a university. Yes, but I think the commitment of the nature beruniversitas need to be strengthened continuously. I say so because it is in top universities of its leaders not to lose heart talk about their commitment to the basic idea of ​​the university there. It is precisely in our universities are not clear as this university dikemanakan want to move people felt it was no longer talking about the basic stuff. However, we must remember not jemunya SWCU Noto speech pack around this. Mr. Willi was often working out this idea and share it, at least for us as a student at the time.

As noted above, the idea of ​​the university has been progressing in such a manner from time to time. For example in Ancient Greek times we had with the model of Plato and Aristotle academia with his Lyceum mode, or Cicero who began using the term uniuersitas for the first time (Bazan, 1998). Note, prior to that "higher education" is strongly associated with regeneration in the religious community. And then jumped to the 11-12 century, we have Abelard (Univ. of Paris) and Irnerius and trees (Univ. of Bologna), which gives foundation to the university teaching excellence model, in which particularly refers to Abelard teaching model, teachers are accomplished orator figure . Then later in the 19th century, we have a von Humbolt (Univ. of Berlin) with his idea of ​​university research. Post-Humbolt, research began to take a central position in university activities, with the intention of creating harmony between teaching and research. Namun, yang justru terjadi adalah ketegangan antara keduanya, pengajaran di universitas-universitas riset tidak sedikit yang terkorbankan. Banyak pihak mungkin yang mencoba “merujukkan” kembali keduanya, namun rekonseptualisasi makna scholarship dalam kehidupan universitas yang dilakukan oleh Boyer (1992) menjadi pijakan penting bagi misalnya universitas-universitas riset di Amerika untuk membangun research –teaching nexus yang lebih baik. Tentu masih banyak nama lagi yang seharusnya bisa kita rujuk untuk memurnakan pemetaan atas proses transformasi gagasan beruniversitas dari awal mula hingga hari ini, yang harus dipandang sebagai terjadinya proses penyempurnaan dari waktu ke waktu, dan merespon perubahan-perubahan signifikan pada lingkungan sekitar universitas.

Terlepas dari semua itu, saya kira kita harus memegang beberapa gagasan dasar tentang universitas. Bazan (1998, p. 7) mencatat, “From their birth, the universities relied on a tradition of excellence, and the game has not changed since then.” Superioritas ilmiah adalah orientasi utama sehingga ada di antara para pemikir gagasan beruniversitas yang memandang bahwa olah pengetahuan adalah tujuan utama. Misalnya Meyerson and Massy (1995) mengatakan bahwa the fundamental roles of university are creating, preserving, integrating, transmitting, and applying knowledge .

Focus solely on if this knowledge could potentially issue when the university shut ourselves off from the surrounding environmental conditions, do not care about the needs of the community, although history shows that advances knowledge in the university if there are significant even when he interacts with the external phenomena. So, I see that the university will face significant pressure when it is too focused on himself. However, at the same time, according to the basic idea of ​​the university to work out the science is excellent, I also see that the contribution of universities to outside will be significant only when the focus on science were put on the ambition to pursue academic excellence.

Academic excellence hanya akan bisa dicapai lewat aktivitas pencarian kebenaran “tertinggi” dan karena itu riset adalah kendaraan utama mencapai kebenaran ilmiah tertinggi itu, pengajaran adalah moda delivery-nya bagi pembentukan generasi intelektual baru, dan pengabdian adalah moda delivery bagi kemaslahatan publik yang lain, sekalipun melalui lulusan-lulusannya universitas juga mendifusikan pengetahuan masuk secara tidak langsung ke dalam masyarakat. Terlepas dari mekanisme self-reinforcing dari ketiga sisi ilmiah universitas itu (pak Willi seringa menyebutnya segitiga ilmiah yang bermakna), saya menekankan riset sebagai motornya. Tanpa itu, universitas mungkin hanya menjadi retailer pengetahuan.

Universitas karenanya adalah penjaga kebijaksanaan publik. Ukuran-ukuran kualitas pengetahuan dan etika ada padanya, ditetapkan dan disempurnakan secara kontinu, melalui interaksi keilmuan dalam komunitas-komunitas intelektualnya yang memang kerjaannya berolah ilmu.

Universitas dan kontribusinya bagi perubahan masyarakat

Argumen utama dalam tulisan seperti Schwartz adalah universitas harus terus memainkan peran sentral dalam perubahan masyarakat. Saya kira ini juga argumen utama yang melandasi pendirian dan perkembangan UKSW.

Namun, persoalannya adalah bahwa realitas tidak selalu menunjukkan demikian. Dan, saya menduga itu terutama sangat terkait dengan komitmen universitas pada tradisi ilmiahnya. Maksud saya, ketika universitas hanya melihat tugasnya secara pragmatik adalah mendidik suatu kumpulan orang untuk mengisi kebutuhan lapangan pekerjaan dalam masyarakat, dengan fakta bahwa bundel pengetahuan ilmiah sudah tersedia luas, maka yang akan terjadi hanyalah adopsi pengetahuan yang sudah established, lalu tranfer kepada mahasiswa sebagai target groupnya, lalu menilai apakan mahasiswa sudah siap untuk dilepas ke masyarakat berdasarkan kualitas penguasaan ilmunya. Ini saya kira wajah dominan kita. Atau, kalaupun services bagi masyarakat menjadi sebagian dari aktivitas ilmiah dalam universitas, maka model adopsi dan transfer established knowledge-lah yang mengalami perluasan. Tidak ada inovasi dalam olah pengetahuan oleh universitas dan tidak ada pula inovasi signifikan dalam kontribusi universitas pada kemajuan masyarakat. Kemajuan masyarakat hanya akan ditentukan oleh dinamika adopsi pengetahuan (teori atau model standar) eksternal, pencernaan cepat oleh komunitas intelektual dalam universitas, dan “muntahan” ke luar kepada yang membutuhkannya. Proses ini hampir tanpa refleksi kritis pada konteks setempat. Ruang dialektika ilmiah antara pengetahuan mapan dari luar dengan kenyataan lokal hampir tidak ada. Ini satu persoalan bagi peran universitas dan kualitas kontribusinya bagi kemajuan masyarakat.

Persoalan lain mungkin sebaliknya, universitas lemah dalam sisi abstraksi teoretik atau konseptualnya, termasuk berdialog dengan bangunan pengetahuan yang sudah ada, karena terlalu dalam melokalisir aktivitas ilmiahnya melalui interaksi-interaksi di aras “teknis” pada persoalan-persoalan dalam masyarakat. Model kasarnya ya universitas cuma proyekan doang. Dugaan saya yang mungkin terjadi dalam konteks ini adalah juga replikasi model di atas, tetapi berdasarkan pengetahuan lokal yang dibangun. Jadi solusinya, lokal untuk lokal, dari satu konteks ke konteks lain. Universitas lupa bahwa di sekelilingnya telah tersedia peta pengetahuan yang kepadanya pengetahuah lokal yang dibangunnya bisa didialogkan untuk mengatasi kesenjangan-kesenjangan baik pada aras teoritis maupun operasional dari model pengetahuan lokalnya. Extending the academic field of the university, itu mungkin hal yang harusnya dilakukan.

Hal-hal ini menunjukkan lemahnya universitas berefleksi ilmiah secara terbuka dan kritis. Jika itu adalah wajah kita, maka bagaimana kita mau berbicara universitas sebagai engine kemajuan masyarakat? Tanpa repositioning yang tepat, saya kira peran universitas yang sebetulnya strategik akan tergantikan oleh lembaga-lembaga lainnya. Dan, karenanya “lirikan mata” politisi pada universitas pun akan makin kurang.

Kembali ke bagaimana universitas berkontribusi bagi kemajuan masyarakat, mari kita lihat data berikut. Top universities dan medical centres di AS menghabiskan 24.4 miliar dolar per tahun (data 1997) untuk aktivitas riset dan pengembangan. Dari situ, mereka menghasilkan 11.784 penemuan baru serta 3.224 paten (1998). Jadi ada sekitar 200 teknologi baru dihasilkan setiap minggu. Hasil seperti itu dimungkinkan karena topangan dana hibah riset dari pemerintah AS sekitar 12 juta dolar per tahun (1999) (Gross, Reischl, dan Abercrombie, 2000). Nah, ini kita baru bicara temuan-temuan “keras”. Kita belum bicara temuan-temuan “lunak” yang terdistribusi lewat interaksi social di dalam dan luar kampus melalui warga universitas yang mendeliver hasil-hasil olah pengetahuannya.

Bagaimana kita melihat dan memerbandingkan itu dalam kenyataan kita? Sederhananya, seberapa besar komitmen usaha universitas, baik itu waktu, tenaga dan pikiran para intelektualnya, serta dukungan physical resources yang memadai, untuk produksi pengetahuan baru kembali ke dalam masyarakat?

Masalah governansi universitas

Dalam pancingan diskusi yang saya lontarkan pertama kali, kemudian di sambut pertanyaan-pertanyaan lanjut oleh bung Petra, implisit di dalamnya adalah berbagai keruwetan dalam tata kelola aktivitas ilmiah dan pendukungnya di dalam universitas. Bung Theo juga mengajukan pendapat soal pentingnya penataan sistem beruniversitas. Om Ferry menyoal isu kepemimpinan dan bersama bung Ten menyoal pula human resources dan implisit di dalamnya soal organisational culture atau climate dalam universitas. Saya kira kita semua punya concern yang sama yang perlu kita diskusikan lebih jauh dalam soal-soal ini, bagaimana tata kelola universitas memungkinkan aktivitas-aktivitas ilmiahnya menghasilkan inovasi gagasan ilmiah dan praktis yang berkelanjutan dan terdeliver secara kontinu ke target groups yang membutuhkannya. Di sinilah titik kita bisa menjawab atau membuktikan bahwa universitas benar merupakan engine kemajuan: dia memroduksi pengetahuan, mendelivernya, dan mendorong terjadinya perubahan-perubahan dalam masyarakat.

Satu hal menarik tentang kepemimpinan universitas, ide dari sebuah buku berjudul Socrates in the boardroom adalah gagasan bahwa pemimpin tertinggi dalam universitas haruslah seorang akademisi terbaik yang tahu secara sungguh apa challenges dan targets menjadi sebuah universitas universitas terbaik. “If an organisation is playing at the highest level,” says Amanda Goodall, “it needs to be led by someone who understands the business at the highest level.” Ini menarik juga untuk didiskusikan, terutama dikaitkan dengan problematika membangun manajemen universitas yang professional.

Terkait dengan soal isu governansi, saya hendak merespon lontaran pertanyaan bung Petra yang meminta tanggapan kawan-kawan seputar aktivitas ilmiah barusan ini di kampus UKSW, terkait pengelolaan pembangunan masyarakat berkarakter kepulauan, misalnya Maluku. Nah, tanggapan saya adalah dengan mengaitkannya pada diskusi kita 2 tahun lalu soal intellectual capital dan bagian yang saya biarkan kosong dari paper saya adalah tentang resource-based strategy dari sebuah organisasi. Jika kita melihat model-model modal intelektual, termasuk yang bung Petra kembangkan untuk diaplikasikan di proyek Revitalisasi Sektor Pengetahuan Indonesia, kita akan tap di atas kapabilitas-kapabilitas organisasi dan jejaringnya, untuk mendorong suatu outcomes yang lebih signifikan. Nah, di situ yang perlu diadakan dan dikembangkan adalah kapabilitas organisasi, termasuk di dalamnya kompetensi sumber daya manusianya. Ini membutuhkan cara yang tepat untuk men-jangkar-kan kompetensi pada wilayah-wilayah keahlian spesifik tertentu, walau kapitalisasinya bisa melintasi batas-batas sektoral, misalnya. Problema kita dengan resource-based strategy kita ya tidak ada strategi, sumber daya dosen di universitas dan para pemimpin di universitas tidak berpikir soal pemosisian kompetensi untuk mendeliver keahlian spesifik dalam menjawab kebutuhan2, baik internal aktivitas ilmiah dalam universitas, maupun eksternal dalam masalah-masalah masyarakat. Karena tidak diposisikan untuk itu, lalu kita ini tergoda untuk mampu merespon semua masalah, celakanya dengan kemampuan yang terbatas. Kalau saja kemudian terjadi shifting kompetensi sehingga dibangun satu pool kompetensi baru, itu baik. Tetapi kalau strateginya hit and run, saya kira kita mengabaikan tradisi ekselensi yang menjadi ciri utama universitas sejak mula berdiri.

Nah, ini mungkin menarik untuk kita diskusikan, juga terkait dengan aspects lain dari governansi universitas, karena di satu sisi tantangan yang datang dari dalam masyarakat itu terlalu banyak, sebaliknya kemampuan dalam universitas itu terbatas. Bagaimana kita menatakelolai interaksi yang terkondisi seperti itu? Jawabannya bisa diduga adalah soal pilihan-pilihan kita, tapi choices yang bagaimana? Apa mekanisme2 utama dalam institusi universitas yang harus segera dibangun (misalnya di UKSW) untuk menjadi fondasi gerak berkelanjutan dari universitas?

Undangan lanjut untuk diskusi

Saya mungkin belum tuntas membangun poin-poin diskusi kita ini, seperti diminta kak Ferry. Namun, sebagai sebuah “awal” (bukan awal karena diskusi sudah sedang berjalan), ya baiklah ini dulu. Saya hanya mencoba mengajak kita melihat kembali pada ide dasar beruniversitas, mencoba melihat persoalan-persoalan dalam governansi universitas, untuk bisa menjawab tuntutan utama universitas, sebagaimana yang juga UKSW cita-cita, menjadi garba ilmiah, radar dan motor perubahan dalam masyrakat. Saya yakin banyak isu akan berkembang kemudian.

OK, mari kita lanjutkan diskusi kita.