Exploring Anti-Democratic Practices in University Policy-Steerage, Management and Governance in Malawi: A Critical Theory Approach

<p><b>This thesis draws on Critical Theory as advanced by Critical Theorists in the tradition of the Frankfurt School to explore the nature of anti-democratic practices within policy-steerage, management and governance of university education in Malawi. The thesis critiques instrumental use of reason and neopatrimonial aspects that permeate policy-steerage, management and governance of the university sector in Malawi, and suggests ways of emancipation or social change.</b></p> <p>Two philosophical ideas inform analysis of this emancipatory project: dialectical reasoning as advanced by the first generation Critical Theorists such as Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse and communicative rationality, which is complemented by the theory of the lifeworld as advanced by the second generation Critical Theorist, Habermas. Dialectical reasoning entails understanding things as they are now and what they might be in future, as such, it is a useful idea for emancipation in that it fosters constant questioning (reflexivity) on the part of actors to make things better. Communicative rationality entails that actors seek to reach common understanding and coordinate actions by reasoned arguments, consensus and cooperation rather than instrumental reasoning and is useful for attaining social change (Habermas, 1984, 1987). Data sources comprise global policy debates, policy documents and interviews with selected government policymakers, Malawian civil society, university administrators and leaders of university staff and student unions.</p> <p>The thesis reveals that at international policy-steerage level, university policy-making in Malawi is chiefly orchestrated by the World Bank using its economic power and the global-neoliberal logic. In this logic, Malawi follows the dictates of the powerful World Bank. Thus, the argument presented is that the World Bank’s university policy-steerage in Malawi follows instrumental rationality and is anti-democratic. Instrumental reasoning refers to the deliberate use of the power of reason for social control or manipulation. At university level, the thesis reveals a rivalry relationship among stakeholders which leads to constrained collegial governance. The thesis shows that the neopatrimonial attitude of presidentialism or the big-man syndrome, which permeates the management and governance of universities in Malawi, perpetuates instrumental use of reason and renders the system anti-democratic. At Malawi Government university policy-steerage level, the thesis shows problems associated with the usage of power by state presidents who are also chancellors of public universities. At this level, policy-steerage is interventionist and characterised by both neopatrimonial aspects of the big-man syndrome and patron-client relationships that lead to instrumental use of reason.</p> <p>Based on this Critical Theory analysis, a theory of university management and governance for Malawian universities is presented aimed at achieving emancipation. To achieve social change there is a need to challenge instrumental ways of reasoning and neopatrimonial aspects by employing dialectical reasoning and communicative rationality.</p>

Exploring Anti-Democratic Practices in University Policy-Steerage, Management and Governance in Malawi: A Critical Theory Approach

<p><b>This thesis draws on Critical Theory as advanced by Critical Theorists in the tradition of the Frankfurt School to explore the nature of anti-democratic practices within policy-steerage, management and governance of university education in Malawi. The thesis critiques instrumental use of reason and neopatrimonial aspects that permeate policy-steerage, management and governance of the university sector in Malawi, and suggests ways of emancipation or social change.</b></p> <p>Two philosophical ideas inform analysis of this emancipatory project: dialectical reasoning as advanced by the first generation Critical Theorists such as Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse and communicative rationality, which is complemented by the theory of the lifeworld as advanced by the second generation Critical Theorist, Habermas. Dialectical reasoning entails understanding things as they are now and what they might be in future, as such, it is a useful idea for emancipation in that it fosters constant questioning (reflexivity) on the part of actors to make things better. Communicative rationality entails that actors seek to reach common understanding and coordinate actions by reasoned arguments, consensus and cooperation rather than instrumental reasoning and is useful for attaining social change (Habermas, 1984, 1987). Data sources comprise global policy debates, policy documents and interviews with selected government policymakers, Malawian civil society, university administrators and leaders of university staff and student unions.</p> <p>The thesis reveals that at international policy-steerage level, university policy-making in Malawi is chiefly orchestrated by the World Bank using its economic power and the global-neoliberal logic. In this logic, Malawi follows the dictates of the powerful World Bank. Thus, the argument presented is that the World Bank’s university policy-steerage in Malawi follows instrumental rationality and is anti-democratic. Instrumental reasoning refers to the deliberate use of the power of reason for social control or manipulation. At university level, the thesis reveals a rivalry relationship among stakeholders which leads to constrained collegial governance. The thesis shows that the neopatrimonial attitude of presidentialism or the big-man syndrome, which permeates the management and governance of universities in Malawi, perpetuates instrumental use of reason and renders the system anti-democratic. At Malawi Government university policy-steerage level, the thesis shows problems associated with the usage of power by state presidents who are also chancellors of public universities. At this level, policy-steerage is interventionist and characterised by both neopatrimonial aspects of the big-man syndrome and patron-client relationships that lead to instrumental use of reason.</p> <p>Based on this Critical Theory analysis, a theory of university management and governance for Malawian universities is presented aimed at achieving emancipation. To achieve social change there is a need to challenge instrumental ways of reasoning and neopatrimonial aspects by employing dialectical reasoning and communicative rationality.</p>

De la teoría y la aplicación lingüística a la construcción de la dignidad y los derechos humanos

La ciencia lingüística no dejó una marca particular, fácilmente identificable en el constructo de dignidad humana consagrado en la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos. Su contribución fue más bien indirecta, inspiradora y principista, pero significativa porque hizo un doble aporte. Primero, se sumó a otras fuentes que respaldaron el discurso de los derechos humanos en la idea de dignidad como rasgo distintivo de los seres humanos. Segundo, contribuyó al razonamiento dialéctico que ese discurso construyó entre semejanza y diferencias para articular las dimensiones de la persona: miembro de la especie, integrante de una sociedad, e individuo autónomo. Sobre lo primero, la Lingüística y la Sociolingüística ofrecieron conocimientos científicos sobre las particularidades de la especie humana que hacen a sus miembros seres dignos de reconocimiento y protección. Enfatizaron nuestra unidad como especie singular (homo loquens, hombre que habla) a la vez que distinguieron nuestras diferencias como individuos y grupos sociales hablantes de distintas lenguas. Así, el estudio científico del lenguaje y las lenguas permitió conocer mejor a sus hablantes, sus facultades y creaciones, y a caracterizarlos como individuos libres, iguales y también cooperativos, en cuanto constructores de sociedades. Sobre lo segundo, estas disciplinas ejemplificaron un discurso elaborado que reconoció nuestra semejanza esencial como familia humana –la facultad del lenguaje— en oposición y a la vez en complementación con nuestras diferencias evidentes como sociedades e individuos hablantes –las distintas lenguas naturales del planeta y las distintas variedades de cada lengua natural—. Articularon los dos reconocimientos en un discurso dialéctico e integrador, que no negó las tensiones entre ellos, pero tampoco las presentó como irresolubles. Las explicó y propuso políticas superadoras, sociales y educativas. De tal forma impulsaron su desarrollo como ciencias y también el discurso de los derechos humanos. From Linguistic Theory and ApplicationTowards the Construction of Dignity and Human Rights Linguistic science did not leave a particular, easily detectable mark in the human dignity construct acknowledged by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Its contribution was mainly indirect, inspirational, and of principle but significant since it made a double contribution. First, it added to other sources supporting the human rights discourse in the notion of dignity as a distinctive feature of human beings. Second, it contributed to the dialectical reasoning the human rights discourse developed between similarity and differences in order to articulate the various dimensions of a person: member of the human species, participant of a society, and autonomous individual. About the first, Linguistics and Sociolinguistics put forward scientific knowledge about the particularities of the human species that make its members creatures deserving recognition and protection. They emphasized our unity as a singular species (homo loquens, speaking man) while at the same time distinguished our differences as individuals and social groups speaking different languages. Therefore, the scientific study of language and natural languages allowed a better understanding of their speakers, their faculties and creations, and their portrayal as individuals who are free, equal and also cooperative as society builders. About the second, these scientific disciplines displayed a complex discourse recognizing our essential similarity as members of the human family –the faculty of language— in contrast with our visible differences as societies and speakers –the different world languages, and the different varieties within each language. Both recognitions were articulated in an including and dialectic discourse, which neither denied the tensions between them nor presented them as unsolvable. Such a discourse explained the tensions while proposing comprehensive social and educational policies to deal with them. In such a way these sciences further their development, and the development of the human rights discourse. Keywords: Linguistics. Sociolinguistics. Educational Linguistics. Dignity. Human Rights. Pandemic

Trust Across Culture and Context

Trust assessment can be difficult during cross-cultural social and professional interactions. Structured interviews were used to contrast how young adults from three culturally distinct samples evaluate trustworthiness: Malaysia (Chinese), an Asian group; Panama, a Latin American group; and the United States, a Western group. The role of context in trust judgments (e.g., school, work, social encounters, encounters with strangers, encounters with danger) on the assessment of trustworthiness was examined. Findings affirm the importance of Mayer’s constructs of ability, benevolence, and integrity—but benevolence and integrity appeared more often than expected in the U.S. sample and less often than expected in the Chinese/Malaysian sample. Hofstede’s power distance variable was frequently cited by the Chinese/Malaysian sample and less often by the U.S. sample. H. A. Klein’s cultural lens model includes affect, cited most by the Panamanians; nonverbal communication, cited least by the U.S. and most by the Chinese/Malaysian samples; and dialectical reasoning, cited most by the Chinese/Malaysian sample and hardly at all by the U.S. sample. The results document the important role of context for assessing trust. These results illustrate the risks of assuming that other cultures make judgments such as trust assessments the way that Western cultures do.