Universities in a time of change

Abstract

Critical thinking But central to university training is the concept of critical thinking. In its research, in its scholarship, in its teaching and in its community engagement, a good university nurtures critical, independent thinking in all of its disciplines and in all of its facets. Critical thinking is vital for the development and progress of society—from government, to industry, to commerce and to the academy itself, we need more critical, independent graduates for South Africa. We need such graduates for innovation, for creativity and for new solutions to old problems. We need critical, independent thinkers for the organs of democracy such as the judiciary and the press. It is through more lateral critical thinking that we are able to address the many social and economic challenges that we face in our country, ultimately for the good of society. Skills are also an essential part of university training, and our students need to master the basic discipline-specific skills in order that they have the basis to develop critical, independent thinking in their chosen fields. It is very necessary that universities impart skills—not in a mechanical fashion but in ways that instil critical, independent thinking. This is what distinguishes university training from, say, artisan training, the latter being so important for keeping the cogs of our economy moving. A good university academic should publish in internationally-accredited journals, and be an active member of his or her local, national and international community of scholars. A good academic provokes critical thinking in his or her teaching and supervision of research students, and actively contributes to the academic functioning of the university. A good academic also engages critically with society: I don’t think that we can leave it only to government agencies, technocrats and bureaucrats to make decisions that have a profound effect on our lives. Society needs independent, credible and technically competent voices to pay attention to issues of safety and the environment, and to protect its general interests. Society also needs to be protected from uninformed voices (remember the AIDS dissidents?) on projects of national importance. Who should society rely on for the truth—or the best version of the truth? Or better still, how can society make up its own mind on matters that concern it? I want to make it clear that it is not simply a matter of having expert scientists adjudicate on matters under consideration. Many of the Nazi scientists were probably expert scientists. What we need are expert scientists who are also critical and independent, and who are socially conscious and compassionate. We need credible voices that are unstinting in seeking the truth; who are morally and ethically bound to telling the truth; and are courageous enough to act on the truth. Academic freedom enshrines our protection to seek the truth. Academic freedom is not a special privilege accorded to academics, but it is a responsibility and obligation of academics to be critically engaged with society—being public critical voices is a part of our job. This is our contract with society.