I wonder if PvO actually reads the Australian’s op-ed page? Today he has a piece that opens:
It’s hardly surprising that ANU isn’t bothering to respond in detail to all the ongoing complaints from the Ramsay Centre and others that it cancelled plans for a degree in western civilisation.
Just two days ago there was a joint op-ed from the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor in the Australian. To be fair, it is very likely that neither the Chancellor nor the Vice-Chancellor actually wrote the op-ed but nonetheless it was a fairly detailed response to the on-going kerfuffle.
Today the academic head of the Ransay Centre responded with his own op-ed.
Now despite both sides insisting that the “door remains open” I suspect that when you have had such a public airing of irreconcilable differences that while the door may be open nobody will be darkening the doorstep.
The challenge is that both op-eds set out versions of events that sound plausible and reasonable. But the Ramsay Foundation op-ed also tells us about expressions of interests (EOI).
The name for the degree proposed by the ANU in its original EOI last November was bachelor of Western civilisation. Ramsay accepted this. ANU did not raise this again until months later.
Regarding the curriculum, at the first meeting between ANU and the centre in January we raised the possibility of the university developing a text-focused “great books” curriculum, along the lines of the indicative — not prescriptive — curriculums available to view on our website and suggested in our EOI invitation.
So the Ramsay Centre had made it clear what it was they were looking for when they put out an invitation for expressions of interest and the ANU responded to that expressions suggesting the name of the degree?
Perhaps the Ramsay Centre should publish ANUs EOI. This is beginning to sound like a bait and switch tactic.