pn789. Science, Mātauranga and the destruction of the Humanities. Education no longer a "good in itself"

I agree totally with the letter in the NZ Listener letter (August 28th) from Auckland's Emeritus Professor of English Michael Neill, which I quote or paraphrase below:

Professor Michael Neill

The recent science versus mātaurangi Māori debate is "little more than a philosophical argument about wording, whose outcome is unlikely to have the slightest effect on funding."  Science once embraced all forms of knowledge before it was hijacked in the 18th century and later came to focus on the so-called scientific method.  "This quarrel distracts (us) from a much more serious educational development in our universities, the systematic destruction of the Humanities, not only in Auckland but elsewhere.  ugust 28th) from Auckland's Emeritus Professor of English Michael Neill, which I quote or paraphrase below:

The recent science versus mātaurangi Māori debate is "little more than a philosophical argument about wording, whose outcome is unlikely to have the slightest effect on funding."  Science once embraced all forms of knowledge before it was hijacked in the 18th century and later came to focus on the so-called scientific method.  

"This quarrel distracts (us) from a much more serious educational development in our universities, the systematic destruction of the Humanities, not only in Auckland but elsewhere.  

The Auckland English Department, for example, was once one of the largest and most prestigious in the university, boasting a complement of more than 30 full-time permanent staff. In 2022, it will have fewer than seven. Other Humanities departments, both here and around the country have been similarly affected.

"What this represents is the gradual destruction of any notion of education as a good in itself, and a serious dilution of the universities' statutory role as the 'critic and conscience of society'.

Much the same can be said of the Social Sciences whose department staffing levels have generally atrophied as the more "applied," more "business"-related and more "income-earning" disciplines expanded. 

My old Massey University Social Sciences faculty is now the School of People, Environment and Planning, a title indicative of a need for more obvious relevance and more attractive to funding. Staff numbers are now, on average, a quarter less than they were, and ageing. It seems few are replaced when they retire, and, if Sociology is any indication,  professorial level positions are left vacant. The department has several senior lecturers but no associate or full professors which leaves them less represented and less able to compete within the university system.

Psychology which was once a social science is now a school of its own with "relevant" staff appointments in disaster management, industrial/organisational psychology, capability management and Māori clinical health. Looks good. Very relevant, very applied and very fund-worthy but in direct competition with its old social science buddies.

 I think back to the days when student fees were low and governments were the major source of funding.  When that ended, it would appear the rot set in.

--  ACW