And we in the academy are willing to fight on their terms, giving up the rhetorical field, making their job to kill us easier. #academicsky, #highered, #academy

Also pay attention to words in the title and abstract. For example, Don’t say “improve healthcare for transgender people”; say “examine inefficiencies in health care delivery”

Kornprobst, M., & Senn, M. (2016). A rhetorical field theory: Background, communication, and change. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18(2), 300-317. #academicsky, #highered, #knowledgecommons (4/4)

Can we look at this theory to begin work on a revolutionary change back to a world where the impact of higher ed is no longer reduced to a flimsy argument over ROI? #academicsky, #highered, #knowledgecommons (3/4)

This theory can demonstrate how the background of the debate on the value of #highered has produced an evolutionary change, where those who care about higher ed failed to notice the agreed to reality was changed by those who wish to abolish higher ed writ large. #academicsky, #knowledgecommons (2/4)

I think the situation here highlights the positive power of unions in the private sector. And while some faculty are unionized, the impact is not the same as they are bargaining with state agencies that have been starved for decades. We, the academy, need the public to want to invest in us again.

I also think we can pay our PhD students better, but that involves having states reinvest in higher education, which feels like a fantasy.