Lecturers’ Multiple Subjectivities and Constructions of Students
6.0. Introduction
6.1.3. Critical Negotiations of the Vision and Mission
One lecturer from IU critically negotiated the implementation of the university’s vision and mission. This appeared to be the effect of his rational thinking, gained during his postgraduate studies in the global North.
In the case of IU, the vision and missions of the English department is.
Vision:
To become a department of English language (linguistic) and literature terkemuka [leading] in administering teaching and learning, research, and community service to produce graduates in English language and literature who have kekokohan akidah [strong religious faith], deep spirituality, noble morality, broad knowledge and mature professionalism. Also to become the centre of the development of science, technology and arts which have Islamic spirit and become kekuatan penggerak masyarakat (community organiser).
Missions:
1. Administering education characterised by Islamic values in preparing the graduates which have kekokohan akidah [strong religious faith], deep spirituality, noble morality, broad knowledge, and mature professionalism;
137 2. Administering teaching and learning professionally to prepare the graduates competent in English language (Linguistic) and Literature and able to apply them either as pure or applied sciences;
3. Administering research and kajian-kajian [studies] as to dig up and develop science in English language (linguistic) and literature especially which has Islamic values;
4. Developing community service in solving problems related to sosial keagamaan [social and religion] and providing a professional service to society which menggali [dig] and develop science in English language (linguistic) and literature especially those which have Islamic spirits;
5. Keeping religious values and professional academic ethics in administering the department. (AGIU, 2011, p.48).
The senior male lecturer with a PhD from a Western country in non-TESOL study problematised the implementation of the university’s vision and mission, as they did not provide a balance between study and relaxation:
I think there is nothing wrong with the vision and mission … but the problem is that when the vision and mission is wrongly implemented like an Arabic programme from 2-8 pm. That’s wrong in my opinion … I disagree with that seriously … as a part of bureaucracy, well, I supported but from my personal opinion I disagree with that … part of torturing and imprisoning students in my opinion … from they learn Arabic 2 through 8 pm, it is a part of torturing … abusing students … because students have no time to study and [relax]. (IUSML, Initial Interview)
This was the most critical stance toward the vision and mission reported in my research. His critical argument was based on the fact that all students at the Islamic university, during their first year, have to live in the university’s boarding school to learn more about Islamic knowledge through the study of Islamic books/texts, and have to attend the compulsory Arabic class from 2-8 pm and join religious activities. In the morning, some of the classes at different faculties start
138 at 6.30 a.m. It is in that context that the lecturer said that the vision and the mission of the university were wrongly implemented, using very emotive words such as “torturing”,
“imprisoning” and “abusing” the students.
The lecturer’s very strong critique was based on students having insufficient time to “study” and
“relax”. This reflects his overseas study experience. In my classroom observation he not only explained academic material to students, but also described his forms of relaxation such as going to the football stadium within the university. The lecturer resisted the dominant discourse of the university curriculum document, as well as national policies, as the result of his exposure to educational experiences in different countries.
Therefore, the seven lecturers in my study were positioned in complex ways towards the university vision and missions, which relates to Connell’s (2007) ideas of Southern Theory and the critiques of these ideas. The senior male lecturer with a postcolonial studies background had a cosmopolitan understanding of the vision and missions which appeared to resonate with Yazan’s (2018) glocalised construct in ELT, where global and local are interwoven. But this needs to be explored further (see Bhambra, 2007): the senior female MRU lecturer’s discursive statement about neoliberal discourses seemed to be not grounded in practice because in my classroom observation she did not mobilise the neoliberal discourse again. This might be the effect of the (possible) tension between the “entrepreneurial” discourse of the vision and mission and the status of MRU as a public service agency. However, her valorisation of Inner Circle English in the AW classroom suggests Collins’ (2013) argument about the difficulty of negotiating relations of power between the global North and South remains uninterrupted. This also suggests that the possibility aspect of Post Method, which challenges the dominance of Inner Circle English (see Kumaravadivelu, 2006b), was not part of the senior female lecturer’s practice. The senior male lecturer’s disagreement with the implementation of vision and missions at IU suggests significant resistance to IU Islamic discourse, which will be further discussed in section 6.3. (Lecturer’s Subjectivities in Relation to Religion and Science).
139 6.2. The (Possible) Effect of History and Cultural Geography on Lecturers’ Subjectivities
The lecturers’ personal and professional histories, and also cultural geographies, have an important influence on their subjectivities (Manathunga, 2015). Personal history is derived from a lecturer’s past cultural socialisation in their family and their culture, while professional histories come from formal educational experiences and training. Cultural geography is also important, in highlighting the impact of geographical place(s), the lecturers’ socialisation, and their cultural values.
The senior male lecturer with a postcolonial study background encouraged students to be critical of Western hegemonies and domination in the Indonesian context:
Yes, because I want to say that sometimes we try to understand other cultures, but those who try to accept peace and harmony, but there are dominations, hegemonies, which make our relationship became not good. So it arises the stereotypes, prejudices and sometimes that’s not wrong, isn’t it? Because in reality our stereotype to America sometime negative, negative because what is that they are exploitative, discriminative, take benefits, individualistic, isn’t it? Individualistic in the context of they take the gold [from us to the US] and do not create welfare for the local society [Papuan people] but above all I want to invite the students to think critically. I indeed learnt postcolonial theories, so from there, I really know that we have been in imperialisation from long time and we have to make drastic changes primarily on our mindset.
(MRUSML, Reflexive Interview)
The lecturer’s discursive practice above synergises with the possibility principle of Kumaravadivelu’s (2006b) Post Method approach which encouraged the space for questioning the status quo. His masters on postcolonial study overseas has shaped his subjectivities. This suggests that cultural geographies and disciplinary background have shaped his being critical against the global Northern dominance.
140 The lecturer defined culture by referring to the work of Javanese scholar Djojodiguno (cited in Saliyo, 2012):
In my opinion, culture is a product made by humans in which the basis is his rasa (feeling), karsa (output), so thought, his activity is for me is culture. Rasa [feeling] is a kind of entity in the man’s heart which can sense something is soft or not, something is good or not. Karsa is the output. And I believe that up to now that the product of culture is thought which is abstract, custom [daily habit]
including rituals or ceremony. And the third, culture can produce something which we can see such as temples, souvenirs, outfit, dress, batik. (MRUSML, Initial Interview)
This definition of culture suggests that he resorted to a Southern perspective of knowledge. His understanding of culture might be constructed and reconstructed from his arts community involvement, his masters study period, and his Javanese family as well as his postcolonial study background.
The critical stance of the lecturer with a postcolonial studies background above is in contrast with the most senior male lecturer teaching the CCU course at the IU:
Also you here, we here in our community … when you are coming to my house for instance … normally I serve you the thing I like without having to offer you what would you like to drink … we have coffee and I serve you … but then I don’t do it … because I think what we do is not correct that’s my opinion … but I don’t blame it … but I feel American one is the best one … because I offer what I can offer you … can I get drink for you? What would you like to drink? … I have a coke, coffee, tea, water … why because I said American one is the better one … if you don’t want coffee because you want to sleep … you come to my house at 8 pm and you want to sleep early … and then I give coffee then you won’t be able to sleep … that’s I prefer a coke … a coke also have coffee right? My question: more rational choice?
141 More rational choice, even though people may not have accepted it but I try to
explain it … but I am very American in that sense. (IUSML, Initial Interview)
Being ‘rational’ (in the American way) for him meant that he would not serve coffee if the guest visiting his house wants to sleep early. His construction of the implementation of IU’s vision as shown in the imbalance between students’ involvement in Islamic activities and relax as ‘torture’
and ‘abuse’ confirms his discursive claim of being rational. The lecturer seemed to have transformed and reconstructed his subjectivities.
Therefore, personal histories and cultural geographies appeared to have different effects on lecturers. Gaining MA and PhD in non-TESOL study, the senior male lecturer from IU represents the hegemonic power of the West. This may provide evidence of the difficulty of challenging relations of power between North and South, as Collins (2013) argued. Meanwhile, the lecturer with a postcolonial study background appeared to resonate with Connell’s (2007) ideas on social science functioning as a form of critique.
6.3. Lecturers’ Multiple Subjectivities on the Relationship between Religion and Science Most lecturers’ understandings of the relationship between religion and science at the two different universities were ‘normalised’ by their university’s visions and missions. However, one lecturer in each university held contrasting views to their colleagues:
Well I disagree with Islamisation of knowledge that as every single knowledge is Islamic … if we agree with the Islamisation of knowledge we are being trapped with the secularisation … we are falling into trap of Islamisation … because we believe we need to separate the secular and there is Islamic knowledge … while all knowledge come from Allah (the Almighty) … that’s the knowledge … we don’t have to Islamise … Number two, I think Islamisation is utopian … it never happens.
(IUSML, Initial Interview)
142 The lecturer’s discursive practice above extends what Almiqdadi (2011) explains as the views of
“traditional Muslim scholars” who argue that “all knowledge come from Allah” and for them
“there is no need to re-Islamise” (p.5). So the lecturer’s subjectivities about the relationship between religion and science reflects existing debates about the Islamisation of knowledge.
When I asked him whether the Islamisation of Knowledge was a form of political knowledge production, he answered:
Well I think [the former rector] want to make the benchmark … something that they can sell it … there is nothing wrong with [the former rector] Ideas … I think [the former rector] is smart, in many respects I agree with him ok … we have to formulate a concept, the selling the marketing Ulul Albab … to differentiate his own concepts from other institutions … but in my opinion up to now I still believe, (I hold my opinion) that Islamisation of knowledge is, sorry, is rubbish, utopian ideas and it will never happen. (IUSML, Initial Interview)
The lecturer constructed Ulul Albab as an IU marketing strategy. In that case, the lecturer positioned (Ball, 1994; Walshaw, 2007) Ulul-Albab within Ong’s (2006) neoliberalism as exception, in other words by consider ing it as a form of “market calculation” to manage the competition with other institutions.
Contrasting views about the relationship between religion and science are reflected by the lecturer with degrees from a local university:
That’s good, including the expansion of Islam in the modern era how we behave to that. That’s good sir, seeing Islam from the modern time.
(MRUSFL2, Reflexive Interview)
This lecturer seemed to suggest that Islam gained more importance or credit if it is seen through science. This also implies that science is seen as the symbol of modern times. So the lecturer was interested to find ‘scientific’ reasons for her religious beliefs.
143 I then asked her about the benefit of discussing the relationship between religion and
science, she replied:
The advantage is actually religion can be rationalised, so from it we can rationalise for example we are not allowed to eat bacon as bacon as the research says it has lots of diseases. That can be rationalised. In the past it was not linked, the science was discussed alone and so was the religion.
(MRUSFL2, Reflexive Interview)
The above quote seemed to imply that for this lecturer, in the past the religion was not compatible with the modern times. Therefore, rationalisation of religion based on scientific research is, according to this lecturer, required. The lecturer’s discursive statement both resonates with rational thinking, the global North construction, and with the national discourse of religiosity and noble morality in Indonesia. This example suggests that for this lecturer, global Northern discourses are not in tension with Islamic discourses.
Therefore, the senior male lecturer from IU seemed to transgress the construction of
‘lecturer’ at IU (see Chapter Two). This suggests that Ball’s (1994) argument that though we take the positions constructed in the policy, they cannot be generalised in all contexts. The senior male lecturer’s rejection of the implementation of Islamisation of knowledge appeared not to be in line with Connell’s (2007) support for the mobilisation of Islamic discourses by some Islamic scholars. This also clarifies Collins’ (2013) argument about the impediment of negotiating power between the global North and South. The fact that a majority of lecturers were normalised by the university’s vision and missions suggest that Emirbayer’s (2013) argument about Northern theory shaping institutions was justified. However, whether or not the lecturers’ teaching practices resonate with the vision and missions at IU and MRU is something in need of further investigation.
144 6.4. Section Summary
The lecturers extended, enacted, or resisted the vision or the implementation of the vision of the universities. This suggests that the subject positions constructed by the national policies and university curriculum documents can both enable or constrain lecturers. The status of the IU and MRU as public service agencies may limit the operation of the emerging neoliberal discourse. The lecturers’ positioning toward the university’s vision and missions may be constructed by their disciplinary background or their exposure to counter discourse. Cultural geography did shape the lecturers’ subjectivities but this would only function to interrogate Western dominance if it works hand in hand with lecturers’ exposure to counter discourses. The lecturers’ subjectivities about the relationship between religion and sciences appeared to reflect the discursive debates between different regimes of truth. All these suggest the lecturers’
statements were shaped by competing regimes of truth and by geopolitical relations of power between the global North and South entrenched in the university curriculum documents, and national policies.