21 research outputs found
Political Scientist as a Historian
Symposium āPersonal Encounters with Serendipitiesā 
Jukka Kortti, Valtaan ja vastavirtaan. Helsingin yliopiston valtiotieteellinen tiedekunta 75 vuotta.
Kirja-arvio Helsingin yliopiston valtiotieteellisen tiedekunnan tilaamasta 75-vuotishistoriikistaĀ Valtaan ja vastavirtaan, jonka on kirjoittanut Jukka Kortti.Ā Tiedekunnan oppiainevalikoima on vaihdellut vuosikymmenten varrella, mutta valtio-oppi on kuulunut siihen alusta asti. Kirjassa kƤydƤƤn lƤpi tiedekunnan vaiheita ja roolia suomalaisen hyvinvointivaltion ja yhteiskunnan rakentamisessa, yliopistoradikalismissa ja yliopistohallinnonuudistustaistelussa yleisen ja yhtƤlƤisen ƤƤnioikeuden puolesta. Nykyvaihetta mƤƤrittƤvƤt historiikin mukaan talous ja tulosjohtaminen, ja Berndtson viittaakin myƶs yliopistodemokratian purkamiseen rakenteellisten muutosten seurauksena. Nykytilanteessa huomiota saavat lisƤksi uusien oppiaineiden ja opintokokonaisuuksien synty, virkarakenteen muuttaminen, uudenlainen opetukseen panostaminen, kansainvƤlistyminen sekƤ tasa-arvokysymykset
SCHOOLS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND THE FORMATION OF A DISCIPLINE
Autor smatra da je vrijeme da politiÄki znanstvenici ponovno ispitaju podrijetlo
svoje discipline. Ocjenjuje da su dosadaÅ”nja prouÄavanja povijesti politiÄke
znanosti, zaÄudo, zanemarila ulogu razliÄitih āÅ”kola politiÄke znanostiā
u oblikovanju politiÄke znanosti kao discipline. One se uobiÄajeno uzgredno
spominju u povijesti politiÄke znanosti, premda postoji nekoliko prigodnih
spomen spisa koji opisuju razvoj tih institucija. Ne postoji meÄutim nijedna
sustavna i komparativna studija o razvoju tih institucija, o njihovu utjecaju
na pojavljivanje politiÄke znanosti kao neovisnog sveuÄiliÅ”nog subjekta. Pa
ipak, iskustvo Slobodne Å”kole politiÄkih znanosti iz Pariza (1871), Fakulteta
politiÄkih znanosti iz Firence (1874), Å kole politiÄkih znanosti na SveuÄiliÅ”tu
Columbia (1880), Londonske Å”kole za ekonomiju i politiÄku znanost (1895),
NjemaÄke visoke Å”kole za politiku (1920) pokazuju da su te Å”kole odigrale
krucijalnu ulogu u raÄanju politiÄke znanosti kao legitimne akademske discipline.
Autor pregnantno najprije prikazuje glavne znaÄajke āmodela ameriÄke
politiÄke znanostiā (i njezin razvoj kroz tri faze, pri Äemu se osnivanje Poslijediplomske
School of Political Science na SveuÄiliÅ”tu Columbia 1880. godine
smatra simboliÄnim zaÄetkom te discipline). Potom se osvrÄe na tri klasiÄna
europska modela visokog obrazovanja: engleski ānjumenovskiā liberalnog
obrazovanja, njemaÄki āhumboltovskiā istinskog uÄenja i jedinstva nastave i
istraživanja te francuski ānapoleonovskiā model, prema kojemu su nastava i
istraživanja meÄusobno odvojeni. Iz tih se triju europskih modela razvio novi
ameriÄki sustav visokog obrazovanja. Novo se ameriÄko istraživaÄko sveuÄiliÅ”te
oslanjalo na ideju liberalnog obrazovanja, na struÄne fakultete (pravo, biznis),
na ideju povezanosti istraživanja i nastave. PokazujuÄi u kojem su smislu
te europske Å”kole politiÄke znanosti utjecale i na razvoj ameriÄke politiÄke
znanosti, a zatim u kojem su smislu ameriÄke Å”kole u kasnijoj fazi utjecale na
razvoj politiÄke znanosti u Europi, autor nudi skicu za reinterpretaciju povijesti
politiÄke znanosti.The author is of the opinion that it is time for political scientists to reexamine
the origins of their discipline. In his judgment, the study of the history
of political science, curiously, has neglected the role of different āschools of
political scienceā in shaping political science as a discipline. They are usually
mentioned only in passing in histories of political science, though there
are a few commemorative writings describing the development of these institutions.
There are no systematic and comparative studies, however, on their
development and their impact on the emergence of political science as an independent
academic subject. Still, the experiences of the Ecole Libre des Sciences
Politiques in Paris (1871), the Facolta di Scienze Politiche in Florence
(1874), the School of Political Science at Columbia University (1880), the
London School of Economics and Political Science (1895), and the Deutsche
Hochschule fć» Politik in Berlin (1920) demonstrate that these schools have
played a crucial role in the birth of political science as a legitimate academic
discipline. The author begins with a pregnant account of the principal characteristics
of the āmodel of American political scienceā and of its development
through three stages (the founding of the graduate School of Political
Science at Columbia University in 1880 is considered the symbolic inception
of the discipline). Then he looks into three classic European models of
higher education: the English āNewmanianā model of liberal education, the
German āHumboldtianā model of true learning and unity of teaching and research,
and the French āNapoleonicā model, according to which teaching and
research were separated from each another. The new American higher education
system developed out of these three European models. The new American
research university relied on the idea of liberal education, on professional
schools (law, business), and on the idea of the linkage between research
and teaching. Through an analysis, firstly, of the influence of those European
schools of political science on the development of American political science,
and, secondly, on the influence of the American schools in a later stage on the
development of political science in Europe, the author puts forward an outline
for a reinterpretation of the history of political science