Advertisement

Making Visible Collegiality of a Different Kind

  • Mark SelkrigEmail author
  • Ron “Kim” Keamy
  • Kirsten Sadler
  • Catherine Manathunga
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Critical University Studies book series (PCU)

Abstract

The notions of “collegiality”, and the related term “colleagues” are often aligned with the work of academics in university settings, although these terms are slippery and contested. In this chapter, we explore the competing concepts and discourses that frame the notion of collegiality in a neoliberal university during supercomplex times. We offer ways to enact a collegiality of a different kind to buffer the current era of emotional insecurity, while also speaking truths back to the powerful impersonal university machine. We discuss how we have employed arts-informed methodologies to engage “colleagues” to reflect not only on the intellectual cognitive domain of the work we do, but also on the affective, emotional energy that features regularly in and throughout our work.

Keywords

Collegiality Kindness Well-be(com)ing Academic work Neoliberal universities Affective domain 

Bibliography

  1. Barcan, Ruth. Academic Life and Labour in the New University: Hope and Other Choices. London, UK: Routledge, 2013.Google Scholar
  2. Barner, Robert. “The Dark Tower: Using Visual Metaphors to Facilitate Emotional Expression During Organizational Change.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 21, no. 1 (2008): 120–37. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810810847075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnett, Ronald. “University Knowledge in an Age of Supercomplexity.” Higher Education 40, no. 4: 409–22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004159513741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barone, Tom, and Eisner, Elliot W. Arts Based Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2012.Google Scholar
  5. Barrett, Terry. Interpreting Art: Reflecting, Wondering, and Responding. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2003.Google Scholar
  6. Berg, Maggie, and Barbara K. Seeber, The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Breault, Donna Adair. “Van Gogh, Gaugin, and Impressions from Arles: Inquiry’s Potential Within Collegiality.” The Educational Forum 69, Spring (2005): 240–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burnes, Bernard, Petra Wend and Rune Todnem. “The Changing Face of English Universities: Reinventing Collegiality for the Twenty-First Century.” Studies in Higher Education 39, no. 6 (2014): 905–26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2012.754858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Butler-Kisber, Lynn. Qualitative inquiry: Thematic, narrative and arts-informed perspectives. London: Sage, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elizabeth, Vivienne, and Grant, Barbara M. “‘The Spirit of Research has Changed’: Reverberations from Researcher Identities in Managerial Times.” Higher Education Research & Development 32, no. 1 (2013): 122–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greene, Maxine. Releasing the Imagination: Essays on Education, the Arts, and Social Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, Donald E. The Academic Community: A Manual for Change. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
  13. Hil, Richard. “Post Whackademia? Putting the Brakes on the Neoliberal University Juggernaut.” Social Alternatives 33, no. 2 (2014): 64–67.Google Scholar
  14. Jarvis, Adrian. “The Necessity for Collegiality: Power, Authority and Influence in the Middle.” Educational Management Administration & Leadership 40 no. 4 (2012): 480–93. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143212438223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kearney, Kerry S., and Hyle, Adrienne E. “Drawing Out Emotions: The Use of Participant-Produced Drawings in Qualitative Inquiry.” Qualitative Research 4, no. 3 (2004): 361–82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104047234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kligyte, Giedre, and Simon Barrie. “Collegiality: Leading Us Into Fantasy: The Paradoxical Resilience of Collegiality in Academic Leadership.” Higher Education Research & Development 33, no. 1 (2014): 157–69. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.864613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Küpers, Wendelin. “Phenomenology and Integral Pheno-Practice of Embodied Well-Be(com)ing in Organisations.” Culture and Organization 11, no. 3 (2005): 221–32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14759550500204142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leavy, Patricia. Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice, 2nd ed. New York: The Guildford Press, 2015.Google Scholar
  19. Macfarlane, Bruce. “The ethics of multiple authorship: power, performativity and the gift economy.” Studies in Higher Education 42, no. 7 (2017): 1194–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Manathunga, Catherine. “The Deviant University Student: Historical Discourses About Student Failure and ‘Wastage’ in the Antipodes.” International Journal for Academic Development 19, no. 2 (2014): 76–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manathunga, Catherine, Mark Selkrig, Kirsten Sadler, and R. Kim Keamy. “Rendering the Paradoxes and Pleasures of Academic Life: Using Images, Poetry and Drama to Speak Back to the Measured University.” Higher Education Research & Development 36, no. 3, (2017): 526–40. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1289157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Martela, Frank. “Sharing Well-Being in a Work Community: Exploring Well-Being-Generating Relational Systems.” Emotions and the Organizational Fabric 10 (2014): 79–110. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1746-979120140000010012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sadler, Kirsten, Selkrig, Mark, and Manathunga, Catherine. “Teaching Is… Opening Up Spaces to Explore Academic Work in Fluid and Volatile Times.” Higher Education Research & Development 36, no. 1 (2017): 171–86. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1171299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Teaching Heart. 2008. Reader’s theatre scripts and plays. http://www.teachingheart.net/readerstheater.htm.Google Scholar
  25. Tight, Malcolm. “Collegiality and Managerialism: A False Dichotomy? Evidence From the Higher Education Literature.” Tertiary Education and Management 20, no. 4 (2014): 294–306. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2014.956788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vince, Russ, and Warren, Samantha. “Participatory Visual Methods.” In Qualitative Organizational Research, edited by Gillian Symon, and Catherine Cassell, 275–95. London: Sage, 2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Selkrig
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ron “Kim” Keamy
    • 2
  • Kirsten Sadler
    • 1
  • Catherine Manathunga
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Arts and EducationVictoria UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Melbourne Graduate School of EducationThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.School of EducationUniversity of the Sunshine CoastMaroochydoreAustralia

Personalised recommendations