Page 144 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 144
šolsko polje, letnik xxxi, številka 3–4
own participation in the discursive search and reflexive self-question-
ing about life, society, community, institutions, culture, national identi-
ty and the life situation – of every individual. Academics should pay spe-
cial attention to questions concerning the role and status of knowledge in
universities and educational processes in general. They must possess the
desire to pay critical attention to the ‘problem’ of the university environ-
ment. Many representatives of scientific sovereignty and academic digni-
ty in Slovenia have done so; convincingly so, yet still not enough of them.
This means there can be no organised and joint action and commitment
to progress (not to technical development). The lack of academics’ moral
courage (Haidt, 2013) is obvious.
Unrealised political promises and harmful measures
In the Republic of Slovenia, the university and the principle of univer-
sity autonomy are constitutional categories. They are directly described
in Article 58 of the Constitution: “State universities and state faculties
are autonomous. The manner of their financing is regulated by law”. This
autonomy derives from the freedom of science and art, which Article 59
of the Constitution states is also a constitutional category and a condi-
tion for university autonomy: “Freedom of scientific and artistic creation
is guaranteed”. The first Commentary on the Constitution complements
this fundamental premise of the constitutional protection of universi-
ty autonomy. It emphasises that the autonomy of universities is primari-
ly a defence right. This means that universities are independent and that,
without state interference, they decide on their organisation and opera-
tion. Such autonomy also contains elements of the right to a positive sta-
tus, which positively obliges the state to provide, within the framework
of an organisational-legal and institutional guarantee, the basic organisa-
tional frameworks for state universities to operate in (Šturm 2002, p. 586).
After every parliamentary election, government coalitions have
loudly declared the need for a political legislative reform of the education
system and universities. The social democratic parties did so emphatically
– by way of a promise. Still, these promises have not been kept. The rheto-
ric of the ministers responsible for education and science continue to dif-
fer markedly from the rhetoric used by party leaders during pre-election
campaigns.
Instead of the necessary progressive step forward in the last 10 years,
a noticeable step backwards has been taken. This chiefly concerns the au-
tonomy of the universities.7 In particular, their total subordination to the
7 Former president of the Republic of Slovenia, Prof. Dr. Danilo Türk, addressed this ques-
tion 12 years ago (2008). Also see Svetlik (1996, p. 119). Svetlik emphasises, among other
142
own participation in the discursive search and reflexive self-question-
ing about life, society, community, institutions, culture, national identi-
ty and the life situation – of every individual. Academics should pay spe-
cial attention to questions concerning the role and status of knowledge in
universities and educational processes in general. They must possess the
desire to pay critical attention to the ‘problem’ of the university environ-
ment. Many representatives of scientific sovereignty and academic digni-
ty in Slovenia have done so; convincingly so, yet still not enough of them.
This means there can be no organised and joint action and commitment
to progress (not to technical development). The lack of academics’ moral
courage (Haidt, 2013) is obvious.
Unrealised political promises and harmful measures
In the Republic of Slovenia, the university and the principle of univer-
sity autonomy are constitutional categories. They are directly described
in Article 58 of the Constitution: “State universities and state faculties
are autonomous. The manner of their financing is regulated by law”. This
autonomy derives from the freedom of science and art, which Article 59
of the Constitution states is also a constitutional category and a condi-
tion for university autonomy: “Freedom of scientific and artistic creation
is guaranteed”. The first Commentary on the Constitution complements
this fundamental premise of the constitutional protection of universi-
ty autonomy. It emphasises that the autonomy of universities is primari-
ly a defence right. This means that universities are independent and that,
without state interference, they decide on their organisation and opera-
tion. Such autonomy also contains elements of the right to a positive sta-
tus, which positively obliges the state to provide, within the framework
of an organisational-legal and institutional guarantee, the basic organisa-
tional frameworks for state universities to operate in (Šturm 2002, p. 586).
After every parliamentary election, government coalitions have
loudly declared the need for a political legislative reform of the education
system and universities. The social democratic parties did so emphatically
– by way of a promise. Still, these promises have not been kept. The rheto-
ric of the ministers responsible for education and science continue to dif-
fer markedly from the rhetoric used by party leaders during pre-election
campaigns.
Instead of the necessary progressive step forward in the last 10 years,
a noticeable step backwards has been taken. This chiefly concerns the au-
tonomy of the universities.7 In particular, their total subordination to the
7 Former president of the Republic of Slovenia, Prof. Dr. Danilo Türk, addressed this ques-
tion 12 years ago (2008). Also see Svetlik (1996, p. 119). Svetlik emphasises, among other
142
