Knowledge and Power in Cambridge University - Case Study Example

Knowledge and power in Cambridge University Introduction Throughout the history, power and knowledge in public institutions have always been inseparable. This is particularly with regard to the fact that the production of knowledge often requires a significant amount of power, money and sometimes political influence (Foucault, 1977). Consequently the institutions that are concerned with the production of knowledge such as the University of Cambridge have always depended on a particular legal framework as well as a material base that enable the institution to perform its work and deliver services to its stakeholders. Many researchers have concurred that knowledge is always a product of power. Power and knowledge have always been intimately connected in the institutions of higher learning. Universities all over the world are practicing under the power relations of their societies. For example a number of research activities in the universities are often funded by the industries as well as political institutions holding power. There are a number of cases at the University of Cambridge where the relationship between power and knowledge is displayed. For example knowledge and power have been significantly used together to enhance the freedom of individuals as well as assert discipline on the members of the University community. The use of new technologies in public institutions and particularly in the universities and colleges has significantly reshaped the relationship between power, knowledge and learning. The current information explosion driven by rapid adoption of internet all over the world has led to more questions regarding the relationship between power and knowledge. On the other hand, the new knowledge acquisition methods have also significantly changed the relationship between the learners and the sources of knowledge. With regard to the relationship between power and knowledge, University of Cambridge has developed an institutional framework that manages the relations of power in the university. For example although the private donors can not directly influence the key academic appointments, they usually fund various academic posts or faculties and this only means that the study programs at the university are determined by those wielding power. On the other hand, the knowledge produced is often a product of the university procedures. This paper uses Cambridge University as a case study to analyze the relationship between knowledge and power in public institutions. The links between Power and knowledge in public institutions Power and knowledge are often used hand in hand in public institutions to enable the administrator achieve total control. Some of the mechanisms that are popularly applied to ensure control in institutions such as schools and universities include individualization and isolation, use of time tables and punishment. The use of time tables at the University of Cambridge is one of the manifestations of knowledge and power relationship. Generally timetables are increasingly being used in public institutions particularly in schools to as a way of coercing the members to act with discipline of the institutions (Steve, 2000). To control the various activities taking place in the institution, time management is critically important in any public institution. This is often achieved by controlling the operations of the individual members of a particular public institution. This is because the lack of an effective time management can significantly affect the operations of an educational institution like the University of Cambridge. Consequently the use of timetables has created discipline both among the staff and the student body. Many authors concur that the notion that effective time management using time tables is an important technique that has increasingly been applied in many public institutions to manipulate bodies into adopting particular forms of actions. Consequently every member of the university community is expected to adopt their bodies to ensure that they carry out their individual tasks within the time allocated by the rules of the institution. This is often based on the belief that human bodies are docile and can effectively be manipulated and disciplined to act in particular ways. Discipline at the University of Cambridge has also been achieved through the use of confinement. For example, the learning is often confined in class rooms and lecture halls. This particularly helps in the management and supervision of the activities taking place within the University premises. The theory of architecture of control in educational institutions is largely based on the premise that the lectures and the institutional staff must always observe the students to ensure that they carry out their academic duties in line with the rules and regulations of the respective institutions. By using closed classrooms, the instructors and teachers are given an opportunity to observe their students and make sure that they strictly follow the required rules (Argyris, 1996). Another important case that effectively highlights the relationship between knowledge and power at the University of Cambridge is the design of the learning spaces and lecture halls. Most of the classrooms are designed and furnished in a way that allows the person holding power in the classroom such as the lecture to see everyone. According to Goode (2005), the isolation of the students in their respective classrooms is often used as a way of ensuring that they are not affected by the external factors during their learning processes. For example the instructor’s desk is often raised. Many other academic institutions have always used the architecture of control to enable their administration ensure discipline in the institutions by combining tutoring and surveillance. In public institutions such as schools, surveillance is an important way of enforcing discipline and power. By using classrooms, the power to observe is significantly applied. Schools just like the other public institutions often transform their members into docile objects for easy management and coordination of their activities. Like many other public institutions, the University of Cambridge has also designed a set of rules and regulations that stipulate the various forms of penalties and punishments that can be used to ensure compliance. Some of the actions and omissions that attract penalties and punishments include cheating in exams, lateness and cases of impoliteness among others. In this regard, nonconformity is always punishable. On the other hand, there is also a system of rewards that is closely connected with punishment. Academic examinations are another important way through which the administration of the University of Cambridge exercises its powers on the students. Like in other institutions of higher learning, examinations are importantly used to transform the learners into objects of knowledge and consequently enhance the exercise of the power of the college on them. Apart from the use of examinations as a means of objectifying and subjecting the learners, it can also be effectively used to individualize each of the members of the institution. In this regard, the individual students are made to become objects of power and knowledge. In academic institutions the relationship between power and knowledge is manifested in a number of ways depending on the groups involved and the goals of the knowledge acquisition programs. In most cases, the powers of the institutions depend on their ability to punish their members while at the same time develop bodies of knowledge that reinforce their power on the human behavior within their institutional communities. Consequently punishment is one of the essential aspects through which the institutional powers have been used to control the creation of knowledge. According to many researchers, knowledge is closely connected with the human behaviors and therefore both the power controlling human behavior as well as knowledge itself can never exist on their own. In the case of Cambridge University, there are a number of techniques and methods that are employed to carry out punishments. This often depends on the knowledge that creates these individuals. On the other hand, this kind of knowledge is often derived from the relationships between power and domination. The use of punishments to control individuals is founded in the belief that human bodies are objects that can modified through punishments to ensure compliance. The modern notion of punishment as used by institutions such as Cambridge University is largely based on the view that the human soul can be created through the use of punishment. The balance between power and knowledge is often used to develop good behaviors in the members of a particular public institution. Like other public institutions, universities are closely related with the wider society and therefore the same power and knowledge strategies that are used to control the outside society are often used in these institutions (Habermas, 1989). Punishments such as expulsion from schools or the issue of poor grades are not intended to cause bodily harm but are rather used to correct the offenders as well as deter the individuals from committing future offences. The power wielded by public institutions is often determined by the nature of freedoms allowed in the given society. For example in the contemporary capitalist society, there is a continuous struggle between different social classes and this often result in more power being given to some public institutions than in more liberal societies. In almost all public institutions, it is often difficult to acquire knowledge without getting the opportunities of taking power. As a result most of the participatory initiatives that take place in the institutions such as the Universities are mostly designed with consideration of the power relations as well as the technical knowledge of the members of the particular group. For example in the case of Universities, the technical knowledge of the members is protected by through the provision of intellectual rights. This consequently gives them the power over their technical knowledge. In the liberal societies, power is often exercised in a number of ways. For example sometimes power can be exercised through antagonism strategies that question some societal structures. The relations of power however depend on the freedoms in the particular society as well as the sources of fragility and strength for the individual members. To achieve social control over their members, most organizations and public institutions often use discipline as a power to normalize the relations and ensure all the members are subjected to equal tasks and opportunities. In this regard the norms of the institution should be clearly set so that any deviation can effectively be measured and the necessary punishment given. In academic institutions such as schools and colleges, discipline is often achieved through the use of both rewards and punishments which to the hierarchical scale of deviation. In most cases, the ultimate punishment is suspension or expulsion. On the other hand, there is also a system of rewards that is closely connected with punishment. Some of the rewards commonly used in public institutions include promotions, better grades and material rewards such as gifts. All these strategies of exercising power work to ensure that the members of the institution who choose to deviate from the stipulated norms are marginalized to make them change and conform to the dominant discourse of knowledge. Conclusion In conclusion, there are a number of ways through which power and knowledge interrelate in public institutions such as academic colleges. Some of the mechanisms that are popularly applied to ensure control in institutions such as schools and universities include individualization and isolation, use of time tables and punishment. References Argyris, C.1996. Organizational learning vol. 2. Theory, method and practice. Reading, Mass. Addison-Wesley. Christensen, T. and Laegreid, P. 2007. Transcending new public management: the transformation of public sector reforms. Aldershot : Ashgate. Goode, L. 2005. Jurgen Habermas: Demoncracy and the public Sphere. London: Pluto press. Foucault, M. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The birth of the prison. London: Penguin. Habermas, J.1989.The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: MIT Pres Steve F. 2000. The Governance of Science: Ideology and the Future of the Open Society. Buckingham: Open University Press. Read More