Goldsmiths Learning and Teaching Conference 2012
Date: Friday 18th May 2012, 9.00-4.30
Venue: Goldsmiths, University of London (find us)
Cost: Free – registration necessary
Goldsmiths Learning Enhancement Unit is hosting a conference to explore some of the key issues currently shaping higher education today. The event interrogates what familiar concepts such as ‘interdisciplinarity’ and ‘research-based teaching’ really mean in current practice, as well as contemplating technology-enabled futures for learning.
You will hear from individuals whose work in university departments is shaping, shifting or challenging existing learning and teaching activities. In an exciting collaboration, Martin Conreen, from Goldsmiths’ Design Department, and Mark Miodownik, the materials scientist from University College, London who gave the 2010 Royal Institute Christmas Lectures, will give a keynote presentation. Presenters include Melissa Benn, Linda Drew, John Hutnyk, Andrew Middleton and Richard Wingate.
The conference is open to all and we look forward to seeing you.
As tickets are limited, please only register if you intend to attend!
Mark Miodownik (University College London) and Martin Conreen (Goldsmiths, Department of Design): The Importance of Stuff
Find out more
Please address queries to firstname.lastname@example.org.
John Hutnyk (Goldsmiths, Centre for Cultural Studies)‘Workers Inquiry’ and the Teaching Factory – A Cultural Studies PositionI want to focus primarily on the development of workers inquiry or co-research. First called a parallel sociology, which owes debts to Adorno, via the work of Panzieri in the journal Quaderni Rossi (Wright 2002:21). Alongside this, from outside the labour movement, the collection of oral histories and questionnaires of the ‘poverty-stricken’ came to be known as co-research. I think we can trace this work back to the figure of the Factory Inspector Leonard Horner as described by Marx in his chapter on ‘The Working Day’ in Capital.Today, workers inquiry in the autonomy tradition works at that field where the socialized worker may recognize themselves and their work – immaterial labour, affective labour, attention, virtual, precarious, productive consumption, communications, symbolic play, shit work mixed with temporary, flexible, diversified, collaborative, remote, transitory and itinerant labour –as subject to, and thereby organized against, capital and capitalists. The bourgeoisie can only recognize itself through the state, as orthodox Marxism would have it, and needs institutionalized sociologists and anthropologists to articulate its self-image (this is another trap of the teaching factory) but workers inquiry is necessary collective, participatory and self-organized. Here a responsibility to oneself as part of a project offers a different outlook on social research than does the control orders of disciplinary knowledge. So maybe we can explore the idea of breaking with the order words and hierarchy of knowledges where cultural studies might sidestep the requirement of working for the man (in order to work for the human).Reading:Steve Wright Storming Heaven Pluto Press. 2002 – chapter 2Marx ‘The Working Day’ – chapter 10 of Capital. 1867Additional Reading:Wright, 2000 Storming Heaven, London: Pluto. Ch 2.Kolinko 1999 Hotlines: Call Centre Communism – http://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/kolinko/lebuk/e_lebuk.htmDowling, Emma, R. Nunes & B. Trott (eds) special issue on Affective Labour in Ephemera http://www.ephemeraweb.org/journal/7-1/7-1index.htmShukaitus, Stevphen and David Graeber 2007 Constituent Imagination: Militant Investigations, Collective Theorization AK Press.Kracauer, Siegfried 1930 The Salaried Masses London: Verso 1998