Enrique Kirberg, former rector of the State Technical University of Chile (UTE), has written an account of the 1968-73 university reform that in many ways parallels Carlos Huneeus Madge’s La reforma en la Universidad de Chile (1973). Like Huneeus, Kirberg was actively involved in the events he describes; and, like him, he makes his ideological stands explicit. Both their accounts of the university reform movement in Chile represent, in fact, the views of their respective coalitions and parties, namely, the left in the case of Kirberg, and the Christian Democratic party in the case of Huneeus. These were the most important forces fighting for control over higher education during the period.
Kirberg, however, must be credited with the unique experience he derives from his position as rector of UTE. The purpose of his book is to show how, thanks to university reform, comprehensive efforts were made to enroll workers at UTE. As Kirberg demonstrates, this was not an easy task, for a broad program of education for workers had to be created in order to adjust higher education to the needs of a sector of the population traditionally excluded from educational opportunities. This program, elaborated in conjunction with Chile’s largest workers’ union, CUT (Central Unica de Trabajadores), and other agencies of the Popular Unity administration, brought higher education to workers in twenty-four cities of the nation by 1973, often in their very work places. The aim of this program was to educate new professionals—who give the title to the book—of working-class origin, and provide them with middle-level management careers. Their education, which included a specialized technical training, was geared toward inculcating them with a sense of social responsibility. In return for their education, workers were expected to “assume a commitment with the social transformations [taking place] in the country under the people’s government” (p. 367). These new professionals would in turn go back to their industries to aid the government to increase production levels. Indeed, Kirberg understands higher education in terms of the economic priorities of the Allende administration, and suggests that “the situation required concrete and rapid measures to implement educational policies consistent with the historical process, particularly in relation to production goals” (p. 378). In this context, the achievements of UTE were impressive: enrollments expanded considerably for workers, several technological institutes were created, and available resources were used imaginatively to accommodate students.
Kirberg makes no attempt to question, however, some of his assumptions. At no point, for instance, does he discuss the relationship between university and government, and one is led to believe that it is intrinsic to the university’s functions to acquiesce with the policies of the government. Since for Kirberg the Allende administration was engaged in “bringing a just society” to the country, one can assume that he expects the reader to grant him that the university should follow the administration’s policies. He gives no account of the critiques to this understanding of the university-government relationship, and fails to report on the opposition to such policies. Kirberg’s book creates the impression that both the government and UTE were implementing their educational policies in a political vacuum. This absence of focus on conflict, and the emphasis on policy rather than politics, reduce the impact of this volume considerably. Still, any student of Chilean history will find Kirberg’s contribution significant, particularly in the areas of higher education for workers, university reform, and the educational policies of the Allende administration.
