Conclusions: Gendered Academic Citizenship as a Promising Research Agenda
This chapter summarizes the key findings of the book and the particular strengths of the Gendered Academic Citizenship (GAC) perspective. It discusses the main similarities and differences across the national contexts. The chapter ends by setting a compre
- PDF / 214,727 Bytes
- 18 Pages / 419.528 x 595.276 pts Page_size
- 79 Downloads / 218 Views
Conclusions: Gendered Academic Citizenship as a Promising Research Agenda Sevil Sümer, Pat O’Connor, and Nicky Le Feuvre
Introduction This book has identified and developed the concept of academic citizenship, locating it in the context of Higher Education and Research Institutions (HERIs) affected by neo-liberalism and managerialism, and with the hyper-competition, auditing and individualisation that has come to characterise academic institutions in the developed world. The book
S. Sümer (B) Department of Sociology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway e-mail: [email protected] P. O’Connor University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland e-mail: [email protected] Geary Institute, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland N. Le Feuvre Institute of Social Sciences, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 S. Sümer (ed.), Gendered Academic Citizenship, Citizenship, Gender and Diversity, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52600-9_8
229
230
S. SÜMER ET AL.
has an overall focus on the processes of inclusion and exclusion, recognition and denigration, privilege and discrimination and their consequences for women’s membership, recognition and belonging in such HERIs. Just after we started writing this concluding chapter, the world was hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. Almost overnight, universities and research institutions were closed down, students and staff were asked to study and work from home. Like many of our colleagues, we had to adapt, practically overnight, to the mass digitalisation of teaching and research activities, whilst also dealing with home-schooling and securing complex, often trans-national, care solutions for our loved ones. These gendered consequences of academic lock-down attracted rapid media and research attention (e.g. Minello 2020; Utoft 2020; Craig 2020). And rightly so: early analyses of available data and initial reports from journal editors showed a rapid decline in the number and share of journal articles submitted by women since the pandemic hit (Murdie 2020; Viglione 2020). The concept of gendered academic citizenship appears particularly relevant in this context, as consequences of COVID-19 measures seem likely to exacerbate existing inequalities within—and outside—academia. As we have argued elsewhere (e.g. Le Feuvre et al. 2012; Sümer 2014), any account of citizenship as related to participation in the public sphere, also needs to consider divisions of care work in the private sphere. Although we still need more research on the medium and long-term consequences of the pandemic and of the economic crisis that is likely to ensue, our multidimensional definition of academic citizenship suggests that these will vary by gender, class, race, age and physical ability and be experienced differently within HERIs in different societal contexts. In Chapter 1, we identified four ideal-types of academic citizenship (i.e. full citizenship, limited citizenship, transitional/probationary citizenship and non-citizenship): each involving different c
Data Loading...
