Contents

Acknowledgments...... XI

Introduction...... XIII

PART I INTRODUCTION Patterns in Higher Education Development: Towards the Year 2000 . . . . 3 Philip C. Altbach The Political Economy of Education...... 17 Martin Carnoy The Problematic Meaning of "Comparison" in Comparative Education. 31 Erwin H. Epstein Comparing Higher Education Systems...... 41 Maurice Kogan The Use and Abuse of Comparative Education...... 46 Harold l. Noah Higher Education in Developing Countries: The Scenario of the Future. 55 George Psacharopoulos

PART II FACULTY WORK AND THE PRODUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE New Perspectives on an Old Problem: The Position of Women Academics in British Higher Education...... 63 Sandra Acker The Academic Profession in International Perspective...... 78 Philip C. Altbach and Lionel S. Lewis The Market Oriented University and the Changing Role of Knowledge. 98 Howard Buchbinder Work...... 111 Burton R. Clark

vii viii Comparative Education

Places of Inquiry ...... 134 Burton R. Clark The University in a Democracy-Democratization of the University. .. 150 lutgen Habermas Producing Knowledge in Africa Today: The Second Bashorun M. K. O. Abiola Distinguished Lecture...... 156 Paulin}. Hountondji Cultural Influences on the Construction of Knowledge in Japanese Higher Education...... 163 Ken Kempner and Misao Makino Culture and the Role of Women in a Latin American University...... 176 Susan B. Twombly

PART III ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXTS Universities and Academic Systems in Modern Societies...... 191 Joseph Ben-David and Awraham Zloczower The Dilemma of Change in Indian Higher Education...... 214 Philip G. Altbach Public and Private Sectors in Higher Education: A Comparison of International Patterns...... 227 Roger L. Geiger The Decline of Latin American Student Activism...... 236 Daniel C. Levy The Paradox of the Autonomy of Argentine Universities: From Liberalism to Regulation...... 244 Marcela Mollis Latin America: Higher Education in a Lost Decade...... 255 Simon Schwartzman Cultural Politics in a Latin American University: A Case Study of the University of Panama...... 265 William G. Tierney

PART IV THE STATE Higher Education in Advanced Developing Countries...... 283 Philip G. Altbach The Policy Perspective...... 294 Ladislav Cerych What Is Changing in Mexican Public Universities in the Face of Recent Policy Initiatives for Higher Education? ...... 309 Rollin Kent Contents IX

Conceptualizing the Role of Education in the Economy...... 316 Peter Easton and Steven Klees Universities and National Development: Issues and Problems in Developing Countries 329 Lawrence j. Saha The Privatization of Higher Education ...... 338 jandhyala B. C. Tilak The Capitalist State and Public Policy Formation: Framework for a Political Sociology of Educational Policy Making...... 351 Carlos Alberto Torres

PART V SOCIAL CONTEXT OF HIGHER EDUCATION Equality of Higher Education in Post-Communist Hungary and Poland: Challenges and Prospects...... 371 Kassie Freeman A Subnational Perspective for Comparative Research: Education and Development in Northeast Brazil and Northeast Thailand ...... 384 Gerald Fry and Ken Kempner Latin America's Private Universities: How Successful Are They? ...... 409 Daniel C. Levy Independence and Choice: Western Impacts on Japanese Higher Education...... 422 Shigeru Nakayama The Academic Estate in Western Europe...... 433 Guy Neave and Gary Rhoades The Crisis in Higher Education in Africa...... 468 Samuela' Atteh Reform at Mexico's National Autonomous University: Hegemony or Bureaucracy...... 478 ImanolOrdorika Policies for Higher Education in Latin America: The Context 495 Simon Schwartzman Higher Education and Development: The Experience of Four Newly Industrializing Countries in Asia...... 504 jasbir Sarjit Singh The Development of Higher Education in Taiwan...... 518 Wen-Hsing Wu/ Shun-Fen Chen and Chen-Tsou Wu Reform at Mexico's National Autonomous University: Hegemony or Bureaucracy

IMANOL ORDORIKA

Abstract. Mexico's National Autonomous Introduction University (UNAM) is the most important higher education institution in this country. There seems to be unusual consensus in mod­ Although there seems to be broad consen­ ern society around the need for reform in uni­ sus on the need for a profound transforma­ versities and institutions of higher education. tion of this University, most attempts in the In a context in which knowledge and technol­ last 25 years have failed to generate the ogy change with amazing speed, these institu­ required reforms. The limitations and obstacles for university reform at UNAM tions appear to be conservative and bound to are analyzed in this article. The established traditions and ineffective practices. Public and power relations and the bureaucratization private sectors apply much pressure in the process are identified as the main political direction of financial and administrative and structural limitations for change. The change. University authorities blame faculty dominating system at UNAM is analyzed and students for the immobility of higher in a historical perspective emphasizing the education. cultural elements in the conformation of This paper argues that the crisis of higher the dominant discourse and alliance. education in Mexico is essentially a conse­ Confrontation and conflict within the quence of the lack of academic leadership and University and against external power legitimacy of governing bureaucracies. These structures are traced in this historical anal­ ysis and exhibited as permanent compo­ authorities have internalized the external nents in the modern history of UNAM. The demands for change but have been incapable existence of a legitimacy crisis in the gover­ of outlining a reorganization of academic disci­ nance structure of this University is argued plines, a modernization of goals and tasks, and in terms of the erosion of the prevailing a democratic reform of governance structures. dominating system, expressed in the open In their eagerness to maintain control over the manifestation of inherent contradictions institutions of higher education, bureaucracies through social conflicts directed against the have prevented faculty and students from con­ bureaucracy; the permanent challenge to ceptualizing and putting into practice these rules, regulations and established proce­ kinds of reforms. Bureaucracies have obscured dures; the lack of academic leadership; and the critical issues of modern university life. the internal dissent and the deficient articu­ lation within the dominant block. Finally, They have exercised power in a such a conser­ the building of a new hegemony at UNAM vative fashion that the present condition of uni­ (through a redefinition of the concept of versity bureaucracy appears as a clear obstacle university reform, the reconstruction of the for reform in higher education. social fabric, the establishment of new con­ This social phenomenon is very evident in stituencies, a rebuilding of collegial rela­ the case of Mexico's National Autonomous tions, and the founding of a new pact with University (UNAM). The weight of this institu­ the Mexican State), is shown to be a unique tion within the country and the magnitude of path towards university reform. the bureaucratization process makes its study

478 Social Context of Higher Education 479 particularly relevant. The National University the breech between urban middle sectors and is the most important institution of higher edu­ the State opened by the 1968 student move­ cation in Mexico.' The strong impact of the ment. From 1976 to 1982, during the Jose L6pez UNAM on Mexican society is based on its long Portillo presidency, an economic crisis required historical tradition, its moral authority, its pres­ the rev.ision of public expenditures. Investment tige, and the presence of its alumni on the most in public higher education was still large but important professional, academic, political and new requirements were established to rational­ governmental institutions throughout the ize this investment and organize educational country for many decades. This University has institutions. The corresponding official dis­ established the main features of the public course was that of "educational planning". higher education system in Mexico. Most of the During the presidency of Miguel de la Madrid public universities have attempted to emulate the financial crisis worsened and structural its best attributes and have reproduced its adjustment policies were adopted. Investment worst characteristics. Although the centrality of in public education was reduced drastically. the National University has diminished with This retrenchment was paradoxically called the expansion of the public system, significant "educational revolution". Carlos Salinas' dis­ changes at the UNAM deeply affect the rest of course was centered on the "modernization" of the universities and many other institutions in the educational system. As in De la Madrid's Mexico. period, the main argument was the quest for The political nature of university reform quality, even at the expense of reducing educa­ and the legitimacy of the transformation pro­ tional opportunity for many Mexicans. The cess are emphasized throughout this paper. It emphasis was placed on administrative effi­ attempts to expose the myths about the neu­ ciency (Martinez and Ordorika 1993). trality and the apolitical nature of the In this context, public higher education University as a mechanism to exclude faculty institutions have been severely judged and and students from the process of reform. questioned. The evaluation is oblivious of the This article is part of a broader research on historical contribution of these institutions to the issues of governance and reform in national development. The difficult conditions Mexico's National Autonomous University. in which they operate are largely ignored when The main objective is to identify the causes that analyzing their overall performance. explain the lack of structural change at the UNAM, to understand the most important Failure To Reform obstacles to transformation, and, by doing so, suggest alternative mechanisms for change. From the 1970s on, the Mexican government has imposed diverse policy directives upon the National University. These matters have deter­ Why Worry? mined the future of this institution in a decisive way. At the beginning of the decade, enroll­ Since the beginning of the 1980s the debate ment expansion and institutional growth, com­ over educational issues in Mexico has in­ plemented with political control, were the basic creased. This is particularly true with regard to requirements. This policy generated an enor­ public higher education. During the same mous bureaucratization of the University. In period of time the discourse has shifted from the late 1970s, in the midst of a severe economi­ an emphasis on "educational planning", to the cal crisis, the government demanded institu­ "educational revolution" and presently, to the tional change, with administrative efficiency as "modernization of education". the main objective. These terms represent the synthesis of Until now, there has been a refractory diverse educational policies of the Mexican attitude towards structural change that can government in different epochs. During the adapt the National University to the contempo­ presidency of Luis Echeverria (1970-1976) rary needs of the Mexican society. By structural there were many resources to distribute. The university reform, I mean one that produces State invested heavily in public higher educa­ changes to the structure of work and the tion with the fundamental purpose of closing organization of academic disciplines, and 480 Comparative Education transforms the structure of governance. I am later, many of the changes put forward by speaking of structural change: organizational Sober6n embodied a partial structural transfor­ (adjustment of educational levels and modali­ mation and redefined the internal relations ties), government styles, democratization of within the university. However, the reform did power, and academic policies. That is, change not address most of the academic concerns and that deeply alters the traditional relations thus failed to reorient the educational perfor­ between members of the university and those mance of UNAM. of the institution with society. In 1982 the Mexican government started to In the last twenty years, four different implement structural adjustment policies University administrations have failed in their designed by the IMF and the World Bank." One intent to transform the UNAM. These attempts of the consequences of these policies was the have been: the proposal to change the reduction of investment in public education. University's General Statute by rector The pressures on the UNAM were still not very Guillermo Sober6n in 1979; rector Octavio strong. Octavio Rivero Serrano's period as a Rivero Serrano's "University Reform," in 1983; rector was characterized by its immobility. At the modification of the regulations for registra­ the end of his first term as rector, Rivero tion, exams and tuition by rector Jorge Carpizo attempted a process of reform that would guar­ in 1986-1987; and the unsuccessful venture to antee his designation as rector for a second raise tuition by rector Jose Sanikhan in 1992. term. The reform was centrally designed and In 1979 Guillermo Sober6n tried to institu­ included a long process of legitimation by local tionalize the changes he had generated in the and central collegial authorities. Rivero was university. These changes can be summarized not reappointed because his administration as the geographic scattering of some university was characterized as conformist and unwilling components, increased centralization of deci­ to go far enough with the restoration projects sion making, the reduction in the autonomy of of the most conservative sectors of the aca­ faculties and schools within the university, and demic bureaucracy. As a result this reform pro­ the subordination of collegial authorities to cess was truncated. bureaucratic power. In the past decade the Mexican State has Sober6n stratified the massive institution gradually abandoned its accumulative and dis­ into two different universities within the tributive role in the economy. By 1984 the UNAM. One would be a small high quality Mexican State was in the midst of a redefinition university, with an increasing amount of of its role in the distribution of resources and resources, based on graduate education and intervention in society. Social expenditures research institutes and centers. The other one have been severely cut following the structural was to be an enormous, lower quality, resource adjustment dictates of the IMF and the World limited institution concentrated in the bac­ Bank (World Bank Report 1990). The Mexican caularate and undergraduate levels in schools government has increasingly embraced a neo­ and faculties. liberal discourse and practice. The University Council was set to approve The adoption of neo-liberal policies has a new General Statute in which these relations generated an enormous scarcity of resources would be legalized and a new vision of the for public higher education. In the UNAM, rec­ University would be sanctioned. Important tor Jorge Carpizo put forward a set of reforms sectors of the university openly expressed their which essentially embodied a retrenchment rejection of this project. APAC, the association project argued as a "quest-for-excellence". of tenured, full-time faculty members strongly Beyond the discourse, the project represented a opposed most of the articles of the project for a conservative, efficiency-oriented, managerial new General Statute. The rector's initiative was response to financial scarcity (Cameron 1983). stopped by a student movement during the University authorities tried to comply with the legislation process. new privatizing policies of the Mexican gov­ Nevertheless, some of the changes had ernment. already been put in place and although they Until this point most reform attempts had were never legalized they became common been essentially designed and decided in a cen­ practice in the following years. As we will see tralized process controlled by the university Social Context of Higher Education 481 administration. Participation by the faculty most important limitations for structural and students was restricted to a legitimating transformation. role with little opportunity to propose initia­ Some literature tries to answer this ques­ tives or reverse previously established deci­ tion by establishing that universities are con­ sions. I will characterize these as bureaucratic servative institutions; that faculty possess attempts to reform. strong resistance to change; that higher educa­ The 1986-87 student movement gener­ tion can only develop gradually; or that the ated a strong demand for participation in the objectives of university reform are excessively process of reform. This was crystallized when ambitious (Cerych 1987). Other authors pro­ the student and faculty demand for a Uni­ pose that universities in Latin America have versity Congress was reluctantly accepted by assumed this conservative stereotype when the university bureaucracy and the Mexican attempting internal changes (Garcia 1982; Levy government. 1988). Such an attitude contradicts a traditional The only recent participatory experience for anti status quo external position that frequently University reform, the 1990 University Con­ permeates this type of institution (Lipset 1975). gress, was frustrated by the Mexican govern­ For a full understanding of the current ment and the university authorities during the problems of the Mexican university it is neces­ first Sarukhan administration. The Congress sary to realize that the dynamic of the univer­ was characterized by an intense confrontation sity is determined by internal and external, between important sectors of faculty and stu­ political and economic factors. The university dents against the Mexican government and the is part of a social system and there is a perma­ University authorities.:' The result was a stale­ nent tension between the external and the mate on the most important issues, such as internal. There are very complex interaction finance and governance of higher education. mechanisms. These are expressed in diverse Implementation of the most important agree­ spheres and frequently produce flagrant con­ ments that the Congress produced has been tradictions (Brunner 1985). blocked by the bureaucracy and after more than The University is part of the power struc­ two years these have not been put in practice. ture of society. Because of this condition, the I characterize this, and other experiences in relations with the government, with diverse which the driving force for transformation has groups, and with social actors can be conflict­ been faculty and/or student social movements ual or complementary. At the internal level, the and their external alliances as democratic university is the site of active struggle for insti­ reforms. tutional control (Munoz 1989). Problems asso­ The latest attempt to produce changes in ciated with University governance are the institution also took place during the first necessarily the origin of almost every campus period of rector Sarukhan in 1992. It is also conflict, many of which pursue a different dis­ inscribed in the bureaucratic practice of tribution of power (Wolff 1970; Becker 1970).'+ retrenchment and essentially tried to raise This perspective on universities and the tuition costs transferring the main responsibil­ social power structure suggests that "the main ity of financing public higher education institu­ obstacles to change are the product of the lack tions from the State to the students. The of legitimacy of most of the mechanisms used attempt was stopped once again by a strong to orchestrate the reform and/or the incapacity student response. to establish agreements among the diverse political actors in the university scenario" The Obstacles to Structural (Munoz 1990, 58). That is, in a terrain in which most of the initiatives for change are contested, Transformation the vertical and centralized procedures used by Identifying the factors that have prevented university authorities to transform the institu­ the transformation of Mexico's National tion are unable to generate the necessary con­ Autonomous University (the UNAM) is the sensus within the university community. At the paramount motivation of this paper. The same time, the authorities have been unwilling main concern is to understand what are the to undertake a process of discussion and nego- 482 Comparative Education tiation with contesting groups to produce a independence of the university varied accord­ general agreement about university reform. ing to the magnitude of the confrontation The main impediments to a structural between this conservative institution and the transformation are therefore political. To State. During this epoch the university govern­ understand this situation we have to focus on ment shifted frequently from collegial struc­ power relations within the university and the tures to an extreme and almost dictatorial intense and complicated interdependence with bureaucratic-political system. the Mexican government. These two matters The period from 1944 to 1968 is often called are interwoven in a complex system of domi­ the "golden years" of the university. The nation. The system itself represents the articu­ Mexican government abandoned most of its lation of relatively heterogeneous political populist projects and the conservative groups groups within the university and their counter­ within UNAM closed the gap with the Mexican parts and relations in the Federal government. State. The new pact between government and These groups share similar interests and are University was symbolized by the 1944 bounded together by a powerful discourses Organic Law and the construction of the and a dominating view of the university. University City in the 1950s. Collegial struc­ The domination is institutionalized in a tures were established but these were severely powerful bureaucracy. This bureaucracy repre­ limited by bureaucratic and political bodies. sents its social base and at the same time is rela­ The third period goes from 1968 to our tively independent from it and, in some days. It is characterized by its conflictual occasions, even from the Mexican government. nature. The problematic relations between In summary, the main concern is the issue University and State and the struggles within of change. It is important to look at this prob­ this higher education institution heavily deter­ lem from a political perspective by analyzing mine the present situation at UNAM. This how internal and external power relations have paper is focused essentially on the third period. created obstacles to structural transformation at the UNAM. Power relations and struggles History of Confrontation within a campus can only be understood when viewed as interwoven with those in the broader In 1968, during the student movement, the society. The internal-external distinction is UNAM maintained the highest degree of extremely problematic (Gumport 1993). In this autonomy in all its history. It was precisely in case it is strictly methodological and the focus this confrontation against the government and will be placed on the interactions between these in the middle of a great social movement that dimensions. These relations are mediated by a the bureaucratic and collegiate authorities dominant alliance. The objective is to under­ assumed a truly independent attitude towards stand this social alliance and the way in which the State. it mediates these power relations. The Mexican student movement was mili­ tarily destroyed by the government after the killing of hundreds of students in 1968.6 These UNAM: Power events shocked the Mexican society. People and Autonomy within the universities were particularly bewil­ dered by the experience. In the midst of this Throughout the history of Mexico's National overwhelming defeat, the students turned their University after the Mexican Revolution the attention, and their action, to the University relations between the University and the itself. In the early 1970s students and teachers Mexican State have played a very important from several faculties produced some impor­ role. Taking these relations into account we can tant reforms of local governance structures and roughly and schematically define three peri­ procedures, and, to a lesser extent, changes in ods. From 1917 to 1944 the University assumed the curricula. Also as a consequence of the 1968 a conservative attitude and clashed against the student movement, teachers and workers in populist policies of the post revolutionary gov­ universities began the formation of unions. ernments. In 1929 the National University was These transformations generated strong granted autonomy from the government. The and permanent conflicts between the govern- Social Context of Higher Education 483 ment and university community. The State had sectors of faculty against the unionization pro­ great interest in controlling these conflicts and cess and the politicization of the University. overcoming the breach, opened by the student These conservative groups, essentially based movement, between the government and intel­ on the natural and exact science disciplines, lectuals, most of whom resided inside the uni­ w.ere the internal base for the government's versities. This interest generated a two-tiered control policy. governmental policy towards the UNAM: (a) a The authoritarian process that developed very important increase in financing, and (b) since 1972 consolidated a new social formation the construction of a huge bureaucratic appara­ that has dominated the UN AM until this tus to control every aspect of university life. moment. This does not mean that the actors are new. Most of the original components of this The Conservative Reaction formation had been part of the university for a long time. Some had direct linkages with the Another consequence of the 1968 student constitutive moments of the modern university movement was an extensive debate about the (1929 and 1945) through family or political renewal of public higher education. At the end group bonds. As we said before, the schools of of Javier Barros Sierra's term and during the medicine, law and engineering provided the rectorship of Pablo Gonzalez Casanova there broader base of faculty members for the new was an attempt to reexamine traditional values administration. The relatively new groups in and generate new definitions about the univer­ the Coordination of Scientific Research pro­ sity. During these years (1969-1972) the demo­ vided the new cohesive element between those cratic discourse about the university was traditional parties. emphasized. The importance of the education Sober6n was the representative of this con­ function and the political autonomy of the uni­ servative tendency. He was able to structure a versity were stressed. The need for an integral dominant discourse and articulate a broad university reform that went beyond the inertia alliance in the course of the confrontation of tradition to transform higher education into against SPAUNAM (UNAM's Faculty Union) a motor for political democratization, a socially and STEUNAM (UNAM's Employee and just economic development, and cultural mod­ Worker's Union), and the local transformation ernization was promoted strongly by the movements in the faculties of Sciences, Barros Sierra, and Gonzalez Casanova univer­ Economy, Philosophy, Psychology and sity administrations (Kent 1990). In practical Architecture. This discourse stressed the neu­ terms these definitions meant an expansion of tral and apolitical nature of the UNAM, the the higher education system, an increase in presence of external threats, and the technical academic quality, and the democratization of nature of university governance. university life. The most important transformation that The first administrative worker's strike concluded in the consolidation of the bureau­ (STEUNAM) and the violent occupation of the cracy occurred during the two consecutive rectory building by Castro Bustos and Falc6n administrations of Dr. Guillermo Sober6n in 19727 hastened Gonzalez Casanova's resig­ (from 1973 to 1980) as rector of the UNAM. nation, a consequence of Luis Echeverria's gov­ Two central elements synthesized ernment lack of support for the rector of the Sober6n's project for the University. The first UNAM. one was to guarantee the stability of the institu­ The unionization process and the progres­ tion. The second was to stop the expansion of sive trends for reform generated a strong con­ enrollment and the consequent growth of the servative reaction among die-hard power UNAM (Kent). The most important problems groups within the UNAM. The professional for the re-establishment of institutional rules organizations linked to the faculties of were anarchy, unionization, violence, and medicine, law and engineering, which tradi­ enrollment expansion (Sober6n 1980). tionally controlled the institution, realigned He associated the idea of anarchy to the themselves under the leadership of Guillermo existence of social and political movements. Sober6n. Rector Sober6n represented the con­ The unionization process was part of this anar­ servative and defensive attitude of important chy. The conflict about labor relations within 484 Comparative Education the university created a "state of crisis in public with the expansion of one of the most conser­ universities generating lack of stability, and vative sectors at the UNAM. It consolidated opening the space for issues that have nothing Sober6n's closest constituency and broadened to do with universities or the labor relations its political base. This project also had ideologi­ within them" (Sober6n, 12). A consequence of cal implications. The new social formation was this anarchy was the eruption of violence on viewed as supported on scientific knowledge campus as a manifestation of purely criminal and activities. The academic excellence was the actions or the expression of student activism foundation of the new governing coalition. (Sober6n). Rollin Kent summarizes the conservative The other important problem for the new group's worst fears and their project for administration was the increasing growth in UNAM. From a Soberonian standpoint, this student enrollment. It was an undesired trend. particular view had The Soberonian administration looked forward good motives to think that the university of to stopping this expansion and even to reduc­ the 50s and 60s was disappearing as a con­ ing enrollment. sequence of the explosive growth of the student population, the strengthening of the left-wing parties and the emergence of The Stratification of U NAM the unionization process. These factors seemed to generate a situation in which The stratification of the UNAM played a very political agitation would become a perma­ important role in dealing with massive enroll­ nent feature of university life and therefore ment and in the redefinition of the university a threat to the interests and modus vivendi of elite. The segmentation of the University, into those university sectors that had flourished an elite research and graduate studies institu­ in a quickly disappearing context. There tion, and a massive preparatory and under­ were several possible responses towards graduate institution within the same this situation. The response of Soberonism University, was done essentially through dif­ defined itself by highlighting the deactiva­ ferentiated investment. The financial resources tion of the political and educational poten­ for research institutes and centers, mainly in tiality of the massive zones and by the natural sciences area, increased substan­ developing the research sector. It was an option that did not perceive the massive tially while those of the schools and faculties university as a cultural challenge, as the decreased. The research mission of the UNAM requirement to promote educational inno­ was emphasized in public statements while the vation, it perceived it fundamentally as a teaching goals were placed at a secondary challenge in the political sphere (Kent, 66). level. The differentiation between teaching and research activities was emphasized. Schools and faculties were discouraged from imple­ The Creation of a Saga menting research activities through lack of or the Selection of Traditions investment. Most faculty members in these With this project in mind, and for the purpose locations fled towards the institutes or simply of articulating a powerful alliance Sober6n abandoned research. At the same time, recreated the university saga (Clark 1983): He research institutes and centers established their was able to select episodes within the history of own graduate programs. In many cases these the university to establish a dominant tradition were parallel to similar graduate programs that (Williams 1977). By reconstructing and reinter­ existed in the faculties. The first were consid­ preting the history of the university he estab­ ered programs of "excellence" and received lished a new legitimacy. These selected abundant financial resources. The latter were traditions articulated in a unique discourse lower level programs, detached from research contradictory episodes of the historical devel­ activities and with very limited resources. opment of the UNAM. Most of the views held Beyond the academic implications of this. by Sober6n are summarized in his book La model, we will look at some of the political Universidad, ahara (1983). consequences of this segmentation. The The new social alliance was able to present strengthening of the research sector redefined itself as a product of the autonomy movement of the force correlation within the University elite 1929 depriving it of original content provided Social Context of Higher Education 435 by the antigovernment student struggles that there are perverse intentions of political conquered autonomy. Other consequences of nature or of clear anti-university character this struggle, such as shared governance of stu­ behind statements that originally can be dents and facultv, were criticized by Sober6n. judged of a purely academic or administra­ The unresolved demands for demo~ratic elec­ tive nature. On other hand, these polluting factors are attached at the first chance, tion of university officials and against the exter­ because everybody wants to 'bring water to nal intervention of the government in his mill.' Do not forget that the UNAM has appointing authorities were not compatible played and will continue playing a relevant with Soberons ideal University and were there­ role in the development of Mexico and it fore forgotten. constitutes an agent of social mobility; The new alliance was viewed also as the therefore, in every conflict it is said that, in incarnation of the Organic Law of 1945 from the beginning and later, national or extra which it took its legal legitimation. For national interests that are opposed to the Soberon, the 1929 autonomy was a "precari­ development of the institution can come ous" law because "it gave the President of the into the game (p. 106). Republic the faculty to propose three candi­ Political intentions are therefore perverse dates to the University Council from which it and against the nature of the university. This had to appoint the Rector" (Soberon 1983; 107). vision provided the new dominant alliance On the other hand, with the perfect excuse to toughen the practice the 1933 Organic Law went beyond by of the bureaucracy in the bargaining processes granting total autonomy, nevertheless, it with diverse internal social actors and justify subjected the University and condemned it the repressive attitude during conflicts within to indigence, because it determined that it the university. At the same time. this discourse should obtain its own financial resources excluded most of the members of the univer­ after an initial ten million pesos handed by sity from politics while reserving this arena, at the government (p. 107). - the internal and external levels, for the bureau­ For the new Soberonian alliance, the 1945 cracy and the upper echelons of the governing Organic Law provided the basic ideological elite. foundation of a conservative modernization as With this idea of the UNAM as an apoliti­ opposed to a democratizing transformation of cal institution, the events of 1968 were brushed the university as proposed by Gonzalez aside. The democratization processes gener­ Casanova (Kent). From Soberons standpoint, ated by previous rectors (Barros Sierra and the essence of the 1945 Organic Law was the Gonzalez Casanova) were reversed in the name differentiation between political and academic of academia. issues within the university. In 1945 rector The "menaces" of the "anarchic and anti­ Alfonso Caso insisted that the University had academic" consequences of the 1968 were sym­ been severely damaged by politics. When bolized by the emerging unions. In the proposing the 1945 Organic Law he argued presence of this "enemy" the traditional con­ that it withered politics away from the institu­ servative tendencies of the university were able tion by organizing university governance to regroup and acquire a solid identity around through a combination of legislative and exec­ these selected, and now dominant, traditions. utive authorities whose actions were con­ The selected traditions, the discourse of strained to the academic realm (Caso 1944). apoliticism and neutrality, the response to the This discourse served the conservative external threat, and the technical nature of uni­ groups perfectly. The new formation argued versity governance configured a new ideology that politics had no place in an academic insti­ within the UNAM. The selection of traditions tution. Politics were condemned as a negative provided the historical rooting of the new ideo­ and anti-university practice. In reference to logical discourse. This ideology provided the university conflicts Sober6n wrote: new governing alliance with a solid common identity that enhanced its internal articulation. It must be understood that even when the The ideological discourse of the Soberonian cause of a university conflict can be evi­ coalition played the most important role in the dent, it can never be fully established if 486 Comparative Education confrontation with the democratic opposition These academic bureaucracies are very which was unable to put forward a coherent important political actors in the University as a opposing view of the University. The dispute whole. The academic, administrative and polit­ for faculty and public opinion support was ical performance of these groups is heteroge­ essentially a confrontation between this views. neous within the limits established by the The Soberonian ideology was of major impor­ central bureaucracy. The academic bureaucra­ tance in the downfall of the democratic opposi­ cies are recruiting sources for the central tion. In this process it became a dominating administration. "This link, of political nature, is ideology that was consolidated with the ulti­ a strong cohesive element of the whole appara­ mate defeat of independent faculty unioniza­ tus" (p. 99). tion and it was used to solidify the hold of the During this period the political bureau­ conservative bureaucracy over the UNAM's cracy also expands and diversifies at the cen­ political structures. tral level. The University is configured as a system with the stated purpose of acquiring The Bureaucratization Process administrative rationality and efficiency. The institution is reorganized into six subsystems From 1970 to 1980 the bureaucracy expanded (Jimenez Mier y Teran 1983): rapidly. The growth rate in this sector (239'10) was higher than that of students (188'X,) and • Schools and faculties controlled by the faculty (227%) (Kent).H Academic Secretary General. At the same time this bureaucracy diversi­ • Scientific research (natural and exact fied in two dimensions: at the level of the aca­ sciences research institutes and cen­ demic bureaucracies and at the level of the ters) under the Scientific Research administrative and political-bureaucratic struc­ Coordinator. tures. The first are the structures that directly • Humanities research (social sciences manage the academic units (programs, depart­ and humanities institutes and centers) ments, schools, faculties and research insti­ under the Humanities Coordinator. tutes). They are also the link between these • Administrative work under the Admin­ units and the central administration. Rollin istrative Secretary General. Kent argues that "these academic bureaucra­ cies constitute the visible heads of the academic • Legal issues under the General Attorney (of the University). power groups within the university" (p. 98). They emerge from the immediate academic • Internal and external issues, communi­ sphere, their formal attributions and their legit­ cation, media, etc. under the Secretary of imacy are determined by the management of the Rectorship. the units themselves. Schools and faculties lost their identities The creation of new schools, faculties or and independence and were gathered in a programs was the source of the expansion of unique block at the same level of hierarchy as this sector. From 1974 to 1977, the creation of administrative and legal affairs. The legal and the National Schools of Professional Studies political systems (General Attorney and (ENEP's) within the UNAM provided employ­ Secretary of the Rectorship) were consolidated. ment for more than 500 officials (deans, aca­ All of these officials and the chairs of several demic secretaries, chiefs of division and committees are appointed by the rector and department, coordinators technical secretaries depend directly on him (Kent). and administrative officials) (Kent). At the same time, and in spite of the expan­ In 1980, 5,170 appointed employees sion of the university, the collegial authorities worked at the UNAM. We consider that at (University and Technical Councils) were not least SlYX, were officials (if for each official reformed to enhance their representation and there is a secretary or a technical aide): functions. These structures were almost Therefore a labor market for more than reduced to the level of formal legitimators of 2,000 people, organized in dozens of bureaucratic decisions (Jimenez Mier y Teran). bureaucratic groups, was formed (p. 101). Social Context of Higher Education 487

Bureaucratic growth was the material base Council, who, in turn, appoints the substitutive for the formation of political clienteles. These members of the governing board. constituted a very important element in the Bureaucratic authorities assumed political solid consensus that rector Guillermo Sober6n power. Collegiate (University council and tech­ was able to articulate. At the same time, this nical councils) and political authorities (gov­ process created new channels of political erning board) were thus reduced to a mobility within the University and therefore subordinate and legitimizing role. This situa­ enhanced and strengthened the career of pro­ tion can be illustrated at different levels. On fessional university officials. Rollin Kent one hand, Sober6n strengthened a parallel argues that the bureaucratic expansion served structure called the Council of Directors com­ a cast of officials whose increasingly posed by the deans of schools, faculties and autonomous interests and performance posi­ institutes and the directors of the central tioned them above the academic rationale of administration. This structure is not sanctioned the University as a whole and the different by the Organic Law. It combines authorities entities within it (Kent). selected by the governing board and other directly appointed by the rector. Since deans Bureaucratization and Political Control and directors depend directly from the rector for their selection or reelection he has strong The reaction against the process of unioniza­ control over this governing structure. The tion and collective bargaining was one of the Council of Directors deals with most of the cru­ most important features in consolidating the cial issues for the performance of the UNAM. bureaucratic aspect of governance at the Some of the decisions made by this body are UNAM and the progressive decline of colle­ then turned to the University Council for for­ giate authority with the reduction of faculty mal approval. participation in the decision-making processes The University Council has been excluded (Birnbaum in Bensimon 1984). from decisions like the establishment of enroll­ The task of controlling the University after ment limits. Other issues like university budget 1968 enhanced the bureaucratic and political and expenditures are decided by the executive features of governance and administration authorities and presented to the Council for within the UNAM. The latter was emphasized official sanction. In the last twenty years no by the authorities' need to establish powerful University Council has made any change to the coalitions to be able to counteract the action of budget proposal presented by the rector. students, faculty, and manual and administra­ This situation is reproduced at the local tive workers within the University. After level between deans and technical councils. At almost a decade of union struggles the defeat this site, the decisions about budget and expen­ of the academic union SPAUNAM after its ditures are of the exclusive competence of the merge with the staff union STEUNAM into dean in each school or faculty. In the research STUNAM in the 1977 strike opened the way for institutes the collegial authorities, Internal the new governing alliance. Councils, have no power of decision and are At the structural level the formation was consultation structures for the dean. able to consolidate its power. Sober6n deprived Other members of the University and the collegial authorities of their independence Technical Councils, representatives of students from the bureaucracy. On the basis of the par­ and faculty, are elected by their communities. It ticularities of the process for selecting govern­ has become a tradition that deans and local ing board members (similar to the appointment bureaucracies intervene in this election pro­ of supreme court judges in the US), he was able cesses to guarantee that the elected representa­ to ensure an overwhelming majority on this tives are politically compatible with the local board for the next fifteen years. This board authorities and therefore with the central selects the directors (deans) for the schools, fac­ administration. This complex circle of control is ulties and research institutes among three can­ so completed." didates proposed by the rector. They in turn represent more than one third of the University 488 Comparative Education

University Bureaucracy and the State national level. The performance of selected and appointed officials at every level was con­ As we have seen previously, the new dominant strained by their particular political needs formation at UNAM condemned politics as a within the national political context. Perhaps anti-university practice. However, the leading this situation can be best illustrated by follow­ bureaucracy was very far from the Weberian ing the political careers of some of the most ideal of an apolitical specialized administrative important officials during the Soberon, Rivero corpus. Both the central and the local bureau­ Serrano, and Carpizo administrations. cracies have been intensely involved in internal Our study shows nine important members and external political processes. At the internal of the Sober6n administration, two from level, in the dispute of power positions, the Rivero's period, and three from Jorge Carpizos local groups within the dominant alliance con­ rectorship, who occupied high level positions front each other and generate pressure upon in the Federal Government. This is only a small the rector and the governing board for the sample. There are many mid-level officials, selection of deans and rector. Confrontation general directors, and deans that have also and bargaining processes also take place in the occupied positions in the government after appointment of secretaries and general direc­ leaving the UNAM. Most of them never go tors at the central level, or local officials in back to their academic positions in the schools, faculties and institutes. University, if they ever had one before being It has been common practice that external part of the bureaucracy. The study also shows interest groups within the government inter­ that most appointed officials are members of vene in these power disputes within the the PRJ. This suggests that the selection of the University. If anything, this intervention UNAM's directors is guided by strong political increased during the Soberon era. After the constraints. 1968 events, the University has been seen by the government as a major political problem. The political conditions at the UNAM have Bureaucracy and Autonomy been part of most political considerations dur­ The autonomy of the UNAM is granted by the ing the last presidential periods (Luis Organic Law.~ However, it is very evident that Echeverria, Jose Lopez Portillo, Miguel de Ia the full exercise of autonomy rests fundamen­ Madrid, and Carlos Salinas de Gortari). This tally on two processes which~ vary according to situation has strengthened the linkages historical conditions. The first requirement for between internal and external political actors. a real autonomous performance is that univer­ Broad sectors of faculty and students still sity governance relies on the academic commu­ maintained a confrontational attitude against nity (faculty and students) through collegial the government. The Soberonian formation structures. On one hand, this guarantees that was able to generate the idea that the State and decision-making is based fundamentally on the the conservative groups in the UNAM had internal logic of academic development and common enemies within the University. The the way in which external conditions relate to dominant groups abandoned any vestige of this logic from the perspective of those their old anti-State tradition and joined the involved in academe. On the other hand, in the government in a common project for UNAM. event of the existence of differences or contra­ The alliance that now dominated the dictions between the University and the State, University was able to outline their own con­ a broad based collegial governance provides servative°view as the only path for the develop­ internal cohesion that strengthens the bargain­ ment of this higher education institution. The ing power of the institution. government adopted that view as its own pro­ We have seen that the bureaucratization of ject for UNAM. UNAM has subordinated the collegial struc­ The Soberonian alliance pursued their own ture and therefore weakened faculty and stu­ academic and political interests. Since the dents participation in decision making. This UNAM had reached the political importance of situation has generated permanent internal a ministry, the bureaucracy within this institu­ conflicts of varying magnitude and impor­ tion insel:ted itself in the political process at the tance. The lack of consensus about the Social Context of Higher Education 489

University project opens the door for external moral leadership." Even if the group is firmly intervention and pressures that shift institu­ in control of power, it must continue to lead tional policies to adapt them to each six-year (Gramsci 1980). governmental requirement. Since 1973, the Soberonian alliance has The second base for autonomy is the exis­ been able to dominate but has lacked the capa­ tence of strongly independent executive bility of leading the institution. In most situa­ authorities. Once again this is not the case at tions in which domination is exercised without UNAM. University bureaucrats are strongly moral and intellectual leadership the domina­ linked to external political groups. Their politi­ tion itself is eventually eroded. The deteriora­ cal strength comes from these external con­ tion of the system gives place to a legitimacy stituencies. Their future careers depend on the crisis. bureaucrats' compliance with external designs. In the case of UNAM, the legitimacy crisis All these conditions amount to very little inde­ is expressed in several ways. Some of the most pendence of the university bureaucracy from important are: the open manifestation of inher­ the government. ent contradictions through social conflicts It is possible to say then that the bureaucra­ directed against the bureaucracy; the perma­ tization process of UNAM has weakened the nent challenge to rules; regulations and estab­ autonomy of the institution towards the lished procedures; the lack of academic Mexican State. During the last twenty years the leadership; and the internal dissent and the National University has probably suffered the deficient articulation within the dominant highest degree of external intervention in its block. modern history. This intervention takes place in definition of internal policies, the determina­ tion of spending patterns for public funding, Conclusions and the designation of authorities and Let us focus on the future of university reform appointed officials. at UNAM. Future transformation attempts make it necessary to look at the relation Domination Versus Hegemony between confrontation and reform. At the same time it is essential to analyze reform at UNAM Without question, the Soberonian alliance was as the process of building a new hegemony. able to control UNAM and generate some With this objective in mind, in this section I political stability. In the course of the con­ shall bring together many elements of the pre­ frontation, Sober6n was able to put together vious analysis and focus on these issues. transcendental transformations. Since then, the As we have seen, the bureaucracy at the University has remained without considerable UNAM grew in number and strength during change. The social formation that emerged dur­ the last twenty years. In its drive for political ing the Sober6n administration has dominated control it displaced faculty members from tra­ the National University for twenty years. ditionally academic decisions and activities. However, the governing elite has been inca­ The social fabric of the university was disman­ pable of developing a hegemonic process that tled. These actions were undertaken in the can concert the diverse views about the univer­ midst of an unprecedented period of growth. sity in a unified effort for reform. Since 1986, The required incorporation of new faculty even their capacity to control has diminished. members into the university took place in a It is possible to analyze this situation in completely disorganized academic environ­ Gramscian terms. Cramsci distinguishes ment. The academic consequences of this pro­ between intellectuai and !110m! leadershni, and cess have been extremely costly to this day. domination (Cramsci 1980, 99). On many occa­ The bureaucracy at the UNAM has pre­ sions he also uses the concepts direct, lead or sented itself as an element of continuity. As a rule in opposition to that of domination receptacle of the essence of the University and (Cramsci 1971, 55f). It is said that a group leade a representative of its "best" traditions. As the or directs when it is capable of exercising power single path to modernity, that is, the only way in a !zegelllonic manner. To do this, the group to adapt to the new requirements of the envi­ has to previously establish an "intellectual and ronment. Nevertheless, the conflicts and con- 490 Comparative Education frontations within the university community two general views of the university's future) and within the bureaucracy have grown in the comes from the academic elite and its govern­ last ten years. The initiatives for reform have ing bureaucracy within the UNAM. This group generated intense clashes. can not evade its commitment to the federal government to apply externally designed Confrontation and Reform reforms, but fear of losing established privi­ leges and control over the university makes the As Baldridge suggests, from the 1970s up to the bureaucracy a weak instrument for this pur­ present there has been increasing political and pose. economic pressure upon the universities. This Paradoxically, the existence of this group is true in the case of the UNAM. Financial con­ has become a liability even for the Mexican straints have determined the new political government. The government is now inter­ demands the government places upon the ested in certain kinds of reforms through University. These demands have included the which the elitist interests of bureaucracy can be reduction of costs through limitations on stu­ sacrificed in order to produce the changes dent enrollment and by decreasing faculty demanded by the State from the UNAM. salaries, the standardization of evaluation pro­ cesses, and the political control over social actors in the institution. Reform at UNAM: Building We must understand that the recent a New Hegemony attempts to transform the UNAM have pro­ duced the confrontation between two broad We have said that the domination process at directions for reform. On one side, the vague UNAM has been unable to generate an aca­ and heterogeneous ideas of broad groups of demic reform of the University. The difficulty faculty and students, a set of proposals for in articulating diverse social actors stems from democratizing governance, expanding access the lack of hegemony of the governing elite and guaranteeing the permanence of students and its representative bureaucracy. We also in the university. On another, the direction the suggested that after twenty years, even the government has been trying to impose on the domination capability of this social alliance has university through bureaucratic authorities, deteriorated. The emergence of new conflicts of which suggests a privatizing, financially effi­ students and faculty against the bureaucracy, cient set of measures. In Carnoy and Levin's the challenge to rules and regulations, the con­ terms "these constituencies can often be frontations between projects, and the disarticu­ viewed as those interested in greater 'equality' lation of the dominant block are evidence of versus those interested in greater 'efficiency'" the existence of a legitimacy crisis. This legiti­ (Carnoy and Levin 1985,231). mation crisis can only by solved by the emer­ In addition there is also the confrontation gence of a new historical block, the product of a between bureaucratic control and democratic new hegemonic process. participation at the UNAM, and perhaps even The opportunity to overcome this critical more meaningful, the struggle of faculty and situation and advance towards a profound students to modify the organization of work structural reform at the National University and the structure of academic disciplines. requires a redefinition of university gover­ These initiatives have encountered a thorough nance and consequently the role of bureau­ resistance from the bureaucracy. cracy as well. The decision making process However, it is necessary to acknowledge must be based on representative collegial that university authorities promote constant authorities. Bureaucracy must be reduced in bureaucratic adjustments and changes in an number, importance, and expenditure. It has to attempt to strengthen their overall control over be subordinated to the collegial governance the university. In this situation, the contradic­ structure. tion between the discourse of decentralization The independence of high university offi­ and its implementation is very meaningful cials relative to the government must be guar­ (Weiler 1990). The main resistance to structural anteed by active participation of faculty and change (in the context of the confrontation of students in an academic election process. Social Context of Higher Education 491

Executive authorities must be subordinated to fined in a new pact which fully recognizes the collegial structures. autonomy of this University. The responsibili­ Due to the State's financial crisis and the ties of the institutions towards society in gen­ pressure of particular economic groups for eral have to established. reductions in public investment it is difficult for public universities to expect increases in The Political Nature of Higher federal funding. While maintaining the myth Education Reform of the neutrality of the university, the bureau­ cratic response to this problem has been to Universities have been characterized as com­ focus on business as the basic constituency for plex organizations. Participants are articulated the university in order to acquire private fund­ by disciplines and are deeply reflective about ing and support for public institutions. the organization of academic work. Therefore, Business and the wealthy classes of society profound structural reform requires ample have put enormous pressures on this institu­ coincidence among participants. The process of tion for the establishment of new efficiency structural change at the university level needs measures and other forms of privatization. to articulate the visions, projects, and ex­ This path can only lead to the disappearance of pectations of different social actors within the the University as we know it today. institution and those of diverse external con­ To be able to maintain and enhance its stituencies. This is essentially a process of national and public character, the UNAM must hegemony building. The search for internal establish new alliances with a different con­ and external legitimacy, the articulation of ade­ stituencies "whose interests are in equitably quate constituencies, and the building of hege­ expanding public services" (Slaughter 1985, mony are fundamental elements of university 316). reform which reveal its profound political The reconstruction of the social fabric at nature. the UNAM and the alliance with these new We have examined some of the elements of constituencies must be based on a redefinition the new hegemonic process at UNAM. Most of the concept of university reform. Up to this public higher education institutions in Mexico point, administrators have understood reform share the problems of university reform with as "structural adaptations to austerity" the National University. Bureaucratic and (Cumport 1993, 8). Their own political welfare heavily politicized administrations have and the project for efficiency have been their attempted transformations which have lacked primary concerns. the required consensus among students and The reform of a higher education institu­ faculty. tion like the UNAM requires a broader per­ Hegemony will be built through the estab­ spective. Many issues have to be brought into lishment of collegial internal relations within consideration. The role of higher education in a the different sectors of each university, the developing country like Mexico, and the articulation with new constituencies, and the rapidly changing conditions of knowledge, redefinition of the interrelation with the State. technology and knowledge production have to An assessment of the functions and future be analyzed. In todav's context, it is important tasks of public universities will articulate all to look at the these relations in the construction of new social functions and purposes of higher educa­ formations. tion, including what will constitute legiti­ The new hegemonic processes are essen­ mate academic knowledge, academic tially political. The myth of neutrality and vocations, and knowledge products and apoliticism must be discarded in order to deter­ whether the commercialization of knowl­ mine the structure, agenda, size and clientele of edge for revenue enhancement will be a public universities (Slaughter). The future of legitimate direction for higher education in Mexico's National Autonomous University the 21st century (Cumport 1993,6). and the Mexican higher education system lies Tn these terms the relation between the in the deeply interwoven tasks of hegemony UNAM and the Mexican State must be rede- building and university reform. 492 Comparative Education

administration and the IMF (Giron). The res­ Notes cue package put together by the IMF and the 1. Some figures may illustrate the significance Swiss International Payment Bank, consist­ of the UNAM. In 1990 the UNAM had ed of a new 1,800 millic;n dollar credit by the 274,409 students (10,351 graduate, 135,409 latter and 5,000 million dollars delivere'd bv undergraduate, 3,681 vocational and 121,812 the IMF through a Stabilization Plan. All the baccalaureate), 29,085 teachers and re­ private banks which held the Mexican debt searchers and more than 25,000 administra­ granted a ninety day payment postponement. tive and manual workers (staff). It had 13 Meanwhile, the Mexican government put to­ faculties, 4 schools, 5 multi-disciplinary units, gether a Plan for Financial Reorganiz

Gramscian sense. Ideology will be the ideas Carnov, M., and Levin, H. M. (1985). Schooling and and beliefs which constitute the foundation Work in the Democratic State. 1st. ed., Stanford, of a hegemonic process. Discourse is the ex­ California: Stanford University Press. pression of ideology. Case. A. (1944). Anteproyecto de Ley Organic« de la 6. There are many books about the 1968 student UNAM que el rector presenia a ia consideruciou del movement and its tragic end. For an accurate Conse]o Consiiiuuente Uniocr» itario. Mexico, OF: chronological and documentary approach, Imprenta Univcrsitaria, UNAM. look at EI niocimicnto cetudiantii de Mexico by Cerych. L. (1987). 'The Policy Perspective', in Clark, Ramon Ramirez (1969). Two excellent testi­ B. (ed.), Perspectives Oil Higher Education. Califor­ monial books are Massacre in Mexico by Elena nia: University of California Press. Poniatowska (1975), and Los Dut» II los Allos bv Luis Gonzalez de Alba (1971). - Clark, B. R. (1983). The Higher Education System: Am­ 7. During three months a small armed group demic Organization in Cross National Perspcctioc. headed by Miguel Castro Bustos and Mario Berkeley CA: University of California Press. Falcon occupied the rectory building by force. Garda, L. J. (1982). Unicersidud II Politico en America They put forward an ambiguous set of de­ Latina. Deslinde. . mands including the admission of students Giron, A. (1985). 'La Danca Transnacional vel Petroleo from the teaching colleges (escuelas normales) en Mexico'. En Problemas del Desar(ollo. No. 60. to UNAM. The group used a radical discourse Mexico, DF. Noviembre-Enero. and presented itself as a left-winged revolu­ Giron, A. (1984). ": Y el Endeudamiento Externo para tionary association. However, it was com­ Quien?" En Problemas del Desarrollo. No. 58. pletely isolated from the student movement Mexico, OF. Mayo-julio. and its known political groups. Gonzalez Gramsci, A. (1980). Tl Resorgimento. Mexico, OF: Juan Casanova assumed a hesitant attitude and fi­ Pablos Editores, S. A. nally decided to resign when the government failed to support him. Castro Bustos and Fal­ Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. con were later imprisoned. Years later, Castro London: Lawrence & Wishart. Bustos reappeared working for Guillermo Gumport, P. J. (1993). 'The contested terraine of aca­ Soberon's political group in the state of Guer­ demic program reduction', [ournal of Higher Ed­ rero. This is probably a confirmation of the ucaiion (May/June). suspected links between Soberon and Miguel Jimenez Mier y Teran, F. (1983). 'Fl Autoritarismo en Castro Bustos during the rectorship occupa­ la UNAM', Ph.D Dissertation, Facultad de Cien­ tion. cias Politicas y Sociales, UNAM. 8. The book tvuidcrnizucion conseroadom If crisis Kent Serna, R. (1990). lvtodcrnizacion conscrradotu II cri­ academica en la UNAM by Rollin Kent Serna sis academica en la UNAM. Mexico, OF: N~leva provides a good description and analysis of Imagen. the bureaucratization process at UNAM from Levy, D. C. (1980). University and Government in an organizational perspective. Mexico. New York, NY: Praeger. 9. For an exhaustive study on the structural and legal characteristics o(this governing system Levy D. C. (1988). The State and Higher Education in look at the book EI /vutoriturismo en la UNAM Latin America: prioaie and public patterns. Con­ by Fernando Jimenez Mier y Teran. necticut, USA: Yale University Press. Lipset. S. M. (1975). 'Who is the enemy?,' in Hook, S., Kurtz, P., and Todorovich. M. (eds), The Idea oin Modem Uniocrvit«, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus References Books. . Becker, H. S. (1970). Campus Power Struggle. USA: Martinez Della Rocca, S., and Ordorika Sacristan, 1. Transaction Books. (1993). UNAM: Espejo del Mejor Mexico Posib!«: La Bensimon. E. M. (1984). 'Selected aspects of gover­ unioersidad en e! contexte cducuiico naciounl. Mex­ nance. An ERIC Review', Communitu College Re­ ico, DF: Editorial ERA. view 12 (2). Munoz Garda, H. (1989). Politico If Lluincrsidtid, In­ Brunner, J. J. (1985). 'Universidad y Sociedad en stituto de Investigaciones Socialcs, UNAM. America Latina'. Caracas, Venezuela, CRESALC. Munoz Garda, H. (1990). 'Gestar una nueva cultura Cameron. K. (1983). 'Strategic responses to conditions politica', Unioersida.! Futura 2 (4): 58,59. of decline: Higher education and the private sec­ Slaughter, S., and Silva, E. T. (1985). 'Towards a po­ tor', [ournul of Higher Education (54) No.4; litical economy of retrenchment: The American p. 359-80, Jul-Aug. public research universities', The Renietoof High­ Cardenas, L. (1978) Palabras Y Documcntos Publico: De er Education 8 (4): 295-318. LazaroCardenas. 1. ed., Mexico: Siglo Veintinuno Soberon Acevedo, G. (1980). injonn« del rector, Editores. 1973-1980, UNAM. Mexico, OF: UNAM. 494 Comparative Education

Sober6n Acevedo, G., de los Angeles Knochenhauer, M., and Olmedo, C. (1983). La Unioersidad, ahara. Mexico, DF: El Colegio Nacional. Weiler, H. N. (1990). 'Comparative perspectives on educational decentralization: An exercise in con­ tradiction?', Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 12 (4 Winter). Williams, R. (1977).Marxism and Literature. New York: Basic Books. Wolff, R. P. (1970). The Ideal of the University. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.