Abstract
In 'What is Enlightenment?' Foucault poses the question: 'How can the growth of capabilities be disconnected from the intensification of power relations?' This article revisits that question by raising critical questions about graduate capabilities. Its aim is to reflect, and to prompt reflection, on the complexities of the definition, implementation and evaluation of capabilities-based curriculum in the discipline of cultural studies and in the higher education sector more broadly. It asks what types of graduates are being ‘produced' by universities and for what purposes? Does cultural studies construct the student subject differently from institutional graduate capability frameworks? What is the role, if any, of higher education in the development of capabilities such as ethical practice or moral standards? What of the principles that are demonstrated in institutional graduate capabilities (sustainability etc)? Are these universal values? What relations of power and processes of normalisation underpin the ‘education revolution’ of capabilities-based curriculum?
Highlights
‘The principle of sleep‐teaching, or hypnopædia, had been discovered’ ... ‘[But] these early experimenters ... were on the wrong track
This article draws from previous research on a comparative analysis of Australian university graduate capabilities statements from the last fifteen years to examine the values, beliefs and assumptions embedded in such institutional statements
This article asks a number of questions: What types of graduates are being produced by universities? For what purposes? What is the role, if any, of higher education in the development of capabilities such as ethical practice or moral standards? What of the principles that are demonstrated in institutional graduate capabilities? Are these universal values? What relations of power and processes of normalisation underpin capabilities‐based curriculum?
Summary
‘The principle of sleep‐teaching, or hypnopædia, had been discovered’ ... ‘[But] these early experimenters ... were on the wrong track. It responds to the call from Giroux to incorporate cultural studies into the language of educational reform and to stake a place for the discipline, its academics and students in supporting, challenging or subverting institutional practices.[8] It picks up Flew’s claim that the ‘discourse of generic graduate capabilities opens up ...
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
