Short abstract:

Power BI is a Microsoft product promising to accelerate higher education's ”digital transformation." Using critical discourse analysis of Power BI's marketing and interviews at a large Danish public research university, this paper investigates how Power BI is entangled with neoliberal policies.

Long abstract:

Power BI is a Microsoft data visualization and business intelligence platform currently being used for higher education governance at a range of institutions. This platform promises to accelerate higher education’s ”digital transformation,” enable “data democratization,” and support more “data-driven” and “objective” institutional decision-making. Using critical discourse analysis of Power BI’s promotional materials and interviews with administrators and staff connected to humanities programs that are particularly vulnerable to de-funding and enrollment challenges at a large public research university in Denmark, this paper investigates how the use of Power BI is entangled with the infusion of neoliberal policy agendas in Danish higher education. It emphasizes how students are constructed as discursive objects whose demographic information, academic progress, and workforce participation can be sorted, aggregated, and tracked for meeting performance metrics as well as regulatory compliance. It examines how Power BI’s demographic classification system intersects with broader debates over who belongs in Danish higher education, with disparate consequences for marginalized students. Furthermore, this paper investigates how Power BI is transforming faculty working conditions by intensifying surveillance in the name of efficiency, and rendering faculty and program administrators increasingly responsible for hedging against the vagaries of the post-graduation job market. Ultimately, this paper argues that despite promises of a democratizing digital transformation, Power BI reflects the conditions and constraints of top-down higher education policy in Denmark that prioritizes labor market considerations over the educational needs of students, and contributes to rising corporate consolidation of power over the sociotechnical infrastructure of Danish higher education.

Short abstract:

We argue for re-introducing the university as a relevant object of analysis in STS by exploring the transformative aspect of epistemic virtues. By doing so, we discuss how academic freedom is reactivated through humility, thus enacting the university as an infrastructure of becoming.

Long abstract:

Traditionally, the field of STS considered the scientific laboratory as the central site of knowledge production and technological development. While providing rich analyses on the social construction of scientific knowledge and the role of non-human actors, STS scholars have often neglected the university – the very context in which laboratories themselves are embedded – as a relevant object of research. In this paper, we argue for re-introducing the university as a relevant category and object of analysis by using the notion of epistemic virtues to link epistemic culture – traditionally the focus of STS – and epistemic structure – traditionally the focus of higher education studies. Advancing this line of argumentation, we make three analytical moves. First, we explore academic freedom as a specific version of negative liberty that extends beyond disciplinary boundaries. We suggest that academics continuously negotiate academic freedom considering culturally and socially situated epistemic virtues such as objectivity and neutrality. Second, we introduce the notion of humility to revisit scientific knowledge production more generally, and academic freedom in particular. Finally, we argue that practicing humility leads to enacting the university as an infrastructure of becoming otherwise, thereby enriching our understanding of universities as distinct and highly complex social spaces with a logic of their own.

Short abstract:

My contribution would discuss the role 'innovative' course design can play in critical education. Both as a tool to reproduce or update the current university, but also as a tool for educators to challenge the university.

Long abstract:

A critical perspective on education can conceptualize educators as tools through which capitalism reproduces itself, which has to some degree alienated the sociology of education from educators. While the university constantly looks for ways to transform itself through 'innovative' new ways to teach, the general tendencies of its reproductive role under capitalism often remain unchallenged. In this contribution I will discuss the role of creative course design in critical education at the university. I bring Paulo Freire’s critical perspective on education in conversation with the practices of ‘critical’ university educators by examining the creative ways they design their courses. I conceptualize one aim of critical education as the creation of spaces for critical reflection, as defined by Max van Manen, and ask what role creative course design plays in opening spaces for critical reflection. To reflect on the everyday practices of university educators I conducted ethnographic observation of three ‘critical’ university courses, in addition to 44 interviews with lecturers, students and colleagues. The contribution suggests that creative course design requires ‘critical’ situating, but that it benefits ‘critical’ educators to experiment in their courses. I present four examples of creative course design in critical university courses such as trips to an exhibition, self-reflection exercises, collaborative course design and café conversations. Finally, I discuss two limitations which the sociology of education encounters in analyzing and contributing to these educational practices.

Short abstract:

Showing the shifting concerns with research-based teaching in the face of performance governance arrangements, this paper questions declamatory discourses of transformation in higher education, calling instead for approaches that acknowledge intricate assemblages and unforeseen circumstances.

Long abstract:

Over the last three decades, concerns with invigorating the links between research and teaching have re-emerged in scholarly and political debates about higher education. In Denmark, as elsewhere, this re-emergence happened during a period when new modes of governing focusing on measuring and incentivizing performance became predominant in higher education. This paper explores how notions of research-based education – and research-based teaching - emerged as a matter of concern from the 1990s and trace their (re)creations in Danish university politics and practice.

The paper examines efforts to link research and education as a problem space, drawing on a compositional methodology, which combines policy documents, newspaper articles, oral history and scholarly work in higher education with ethnographic material from a recent initiative aimed at integrating research into teaching within a research-intensive university.

Elucidating the multiple re-creations of research-based education and teaching, the paper shows that a key concern in realizing research-based teaching in local practices today, relate to engaging students in research and inquiry rather than what is being measured in the exam. It argues that the recent re-invention of research-based teaching is not a simple transformation but entangled in a broader complex of educational policies and practices.

By examining the implications of performance governance arrangements on research-based teaching, the paper questions declamatory discourses of transformation in higher education, calling instead for approaches that acknowledge the intricate assemblages and unforeseen circumstances shaping the re-creation of higher education.

Short abstract:

Policy discourses are characterised by claims that the university should be ‘transformative’, and that education itself is in need of ‘transformation’. However, these discourses are open to critique, towards more nuanced understandings of educational continuity and change from STS perspectives.

Long abstract:

Policy discourses in contemporary higher education are characterised by frequent claims not only that education should be ‘transformative’ in terms of its role in society, but also that education itself is in urgent need of ‘transformation’. These statements may initially appear laudable, accompanied by mission statements addressing ‘global challenges’, social justice, or claims regarding inclusive engagement in learning. However, these discourses and the attendant practices sit in radical tension with neoliberal regimes of surveillance, audit and performativity pervading the contemporary university. The term ‘transform’ is derived from the Latin transformare, meaning ‘to metamorphose’, implying a fundamental altering. Inherent in this call is the notion that education is fundamentally flawed and in need of radical reshaping. In this ‘scorched earth’ imaginary, all existing epistemic and educational practices are assumed to be problematic, accompanied in in some cases with the implication that educationists themselves are a problem to be solved. Although there are clear imperatives for educational practices to be improved and challenged, this absolutist position raises questions regarding centuries-old practices of education, such as the embodied, co-present lecture or seminar, and the secluded, ephemeral, embodied and private epistemic practices and cultures of study, experimentation and teaching. This paper takes a critical approach to these discourses and the underlying assumptions that they convey and proposes alternative conceptions such as maintenance, stewardship, adaptation, and care, in order to provide nuance, and counterweight to these dominant discourses of educational ‘transformation’.

Short abstract:

Online proctoring (OP) technologies have been widely discussed publicly for their consequences for educational equity. I situate my findings within broader, growing concerns about the relationship between technology, justice and power due to "quick-fix" responses to structural problems in higher education.

Long abstract:

This exploratory research project investigates algorithmic bias in online proctoring (OP) educational software, and if and how undergraduate university students in Ontario face discrimination by data driven educational OP technologies. Although online proctoring technologies like Examity and Proctortrack have been widely discussed publicly for their consequences for educational equity – for example, students have reported that OP were not able to detect dark skin tones, erroneously flag neurodivergent students with accommodations, and more – there is very little empirical research which systematically documents the actual diversity of discriminatory effects students have experienced during the pandemic. This project used a cross-sectional design approach which I have conducted in two parts: (1) an anonymous survey which was distributed to currently registered students and recent alumni with graduation taking place between 2020 and 2024 at Queen’s University, Western University and Toronto Metropolitan University; (2) in-depth qualitative interviews with a selection of survey respondents. Students widely reported invasive experiences and increased work burdens that intersected with pre-existing burdens due to structural inequities. I conclude by situating my findings within broader, growing concerns about the relationship between technology, justice and power due to "quick-fix" responses to structural problems in higher education.