Required Reading for Turbulent Times

Dealing with the Future Now

Every few years those of us in public colleges are plunged into the same turmoil of budget uncertainty that invariably results in canceling travel and professional development, hiring freezes, and creative attempts to defer payments for every non-essential expense possible. The atmosphere of fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) hangs over every decision and even the most promising experiments in innovative teaching and learning are likely to be abandoned. In Virginia, most of us in are in the midst of the FUD part of the cycle right now with no long-term end in sight.

This is the part of the cycle where this Change article by ALan Guskin and Mary Marcy should be required reading for every leader in a college or university. The authors argue that these periodic retrenchments are not short-term problems–they are long-term and structural. The three sources of income for universities–tuition, state and federal government support and private philanthropy–are all limited, while those of us who work in higher education have unlimited aspirations and imaginations that eventually have to bump up against the sustainability of our funding models.

Guskin and Marcy call for leaders to recognize the fundamental changes in the higher education environment and to try to find more sustainable ways of dealing with the structural limitations of future funding. Transformation rather than “muddling through” is the goal.

“Muddling through” is a time-honored practice for dealing with recurring fiscal problems in higher education. So in the face of the present fiscal constraints, one can almost hear people voicing familiar sentiments: “We have always been successful in the past and we will surely come out of this okay…But in the present environment, responses that assume an eventual turnaround in fiscal conditions are difficult to justify. Projected future economic realities indicate a scenario very different from past projections.”

The key to transformation is focusing on developing a vision of the future that challenges our conventional way of doing things and focuses on two overarching purposes: enhancing student learning and maintaining a decent quality of faculty work life. Unlike many models of learner-centered education, Guskin and Marcy acknowledge the importance of reestablishing a quality of life for faculty that allows universities to remain true to their core values while responding to inevitable economic and cultural change.

Achieving the vision won’t be easy in that it requires changes to some deeply held assumptions about the nature of higher learning. But if the structural financial changes predicted by the article are accurate, the consequences of not changing may be even more painful than giving up some cherished assumptions.

YouTube – Campus Voices: Forging an honest dialogue

YouTube – Campus Voices: Forging an honest dialogue

Susan Evans pointed me in the direction of this student produced-video on the situation at William and Mary campus. I think it’s a very effective piece of student work that captures a much better sense of what’s actually happening on campus than what I’ve seen in the “mainstream” media. The video itself is a potent argument for why having the right media tools in the hands of students is so effective–particularly with the support of folks like Sharon Zuber and Troy Davis.

Several folks from the BOV will be on campus this afternoon to meet with staff, faculty and students. You can follow the action from the student perspective on Tribeunited.com or Wrengate.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS4HjWGVZB4&rel=1]

The Rules of Engagement: Socializing College Students for the New Century

Tomorrow’s Professor Blog: 844. The Rules of Engagement: Socializing College Students for the New Century

One of the few listservs that I still subscribe to is the Tomorrows-Professor Mailing List, The TP Mailing List seeks to “foster a diverse, world-wide teaching and learning ecology” and goes out to over 25,000 subscribers at over 600 institutions and organizations in over 108 countries around the world. To date there have been over 750 postings by author and engineering professor Rick Ries.

The pieces posted are often thought provoking, like the one entitled Death to the Syllabus. I taught my last course without a syllabus–using a prospectus instead that I think avoided some of the baggage that has become intertwined with the syllabus in far too many courses:

It is time to declare war on the traditional course syllabus. If there is one single artifact that pinpoints the degradation of liberal education, it is the rule-infested, punitive, controlling syllabus that is handed out to students on the first day of class.

The most recent post to capture my attention probably won’t find its way into my practice anytime soon. Extracted from the subscription only National Teaching and Learning Forum Newsletter, the thrust of the article is that students are becoming ruder and more inappropriate in their behavior and that many arrive at college with no understanding of the basic standards of classroom civility, etiquette, and socialization that make a class run smoothly. Professor Neil Williams from East Connecticut State has developed an elaborate set of classroom Rules of Engagement to ensure that students live up to those standards. The rules include greeting the professor by name when arriving and leaving class, taking personal responsibility for errors in personal and academic judgement and my personal favorite:

When you yawn, cover it completely with an entire hand. When the event has passed, mouth the words ‘Pardon me’ or ‘Excuse me.’ An open-mouthed or uncovered yawn is about as insensitive, rude, and inappropriate as it gets. There is almost no instance in which a yawn arrives without some sort of internal biological warning, and all that is being asked is for students to cover their mouths out of respect for the person who is forced to look at them and their dental history.

According to Williams, the rules work as long as everything is done with a smile. When the rules work, the students can become better people, better citizens, and eminently more employable or acceptable to graduate school. What more could a teacher ask for?

A Glimpse into the Educative Power of Community

Gardner Writes » Blog Archive » Techfoot’s back on the bull’s eye:

Hamilton College Career Center Philosophy Twenty years ago I wrote the first draft of this philosophy statement. Glad to see it’s still there.

I appreciate Gardner’s kind words about my renewed attention to my blog and his comments on missed opportunities for integrating the academic mission with the goals of other units. I was particularly interested in his thoughts on student affairs:

Student experience: that’s the purview of Student Affairs, right? The people who schedule the mixers and dances and res-hall activities? The people who get the pool tables and climbing walls together for student recreation? Yet how many rich, unexplored opportunities are here for creative informal learning encounters, among students and faculty and staff. Instead, we seem to have independent, centrally funded catering operations–credit catering, activity catering, etc. Where’s the academic mission situated within a view of the whole person?

I spent 14 years of my professional life as part of the student affairs “division” at Hamilton. As the director of the Career Center, my community of practice was a pretty diverse group–the priest and chaplains; the clinical psychologists and counselors; the residence life folks; nurse practitioners and “the doctor”; the campus activities staff, the directors of multicultural affairs and service learning, along with the occasional faculty member doing a three year term as “downstairs dean”. We met in (seemingly endless) staff meetings, task forces, study groups, parties, retreats, sporting events, art shows and campus protests, and developed a remarkable sense of shared purpose and passion, even with the diversity of our professional training and experience.

The passion that held us together was the belief that, as Gardner says, the four-year, residential, liberal arts experience provides an unparalleled opportunity for learning in all its richness. We believed deeply in an expansive view of education that included emotional, motivational, spiritual and physical components as well as the cognitive and critical skills and understandings that were the centerpieces of the “academic mission”. While the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of our work were largely invisible to our faculty colleagues, we believed that we were contributing to something more substantial than merely organizing the next Smashing Pumpkins concert.

Early in my tenure at Hamilton, I got a call from the president’s secretary. One of the president’s practices was to schedule one-on-one meetings with new administrators shortly after they were hired. (His other practice was to protect the college from administrative bloat by writing a statement into appointment letters: “I’m sure that someone with your outstanding qualifications and potential will build on your Hamilton experience to move onto more challenging opportunities within five years.”) During the conversation, he asked me what my goals were for the new job.

Even in my short tenure, I was aware of the general distrust by the faculty of such a pristine liberal arts institution for anyone with the obscenely vocational title of Director of the Career Center. “My goal”, I told the president, “is to be as good at doing my job as the very best of your faculty are at doing theirs and to have you recognize and appreciate the contribution that makes to the College. The folks in my office share the same goals as the instructional faculty. We want to help students develop self-knowledge and understanding, learn to make decisions creatively and critically, and apply their writing and oral communication skills to building their own careers and contributing to their communities. Our methods of doing that are different–but they are every bit as complex as what faculty do within their disciplines. For us, the ultimate measure of success won’t be a book or publication in a prestigious journal. The measure of success will be if we can build on the best ideas of the psychologists, sociologists, learning theorists and our colleagues at other universities to help students lay the foundation for lifelong career development. ”

The president looked at me like I was nuts. He said something like, “As long as all the theoretical stuff doesn’t get in the way of building a good on-campus recruiting program, we’ll be just fine. I would really like to see more top-tier investment banks coming to campus though.”

For the rest of my tenure at Hamilton, we tried share the idea that the Career Center program made an important contribution to the developmental learning process and that students would benefit integrating their skills, values, interests and passions into a commitment to lifelong learning–starting with their first job or grad school search. The success of our attempt to communicate that vision could probably be summed up in the words of the tour guide with the most abrasive voice I’ve ever heard in my life. During the last summer I was at Hamilton, the admissions tour went right by my open office window, and five times a day, I had to listen to her holler:

And this is our career center where the recruiters come in the spring and the seniors go to get jobs…

So much for all that theoretical stuff…

I have to hope that our new tools of communication and collaboration can help someday make the various communities on our campuses more open and more transparent. Blogs, wikis, YouTube and the rest might help provide glimpses into communities that otherwise might be invisible to us, and those glimpses may well grow into something more.

Understanding Students’ Experience

Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts – A Neglected Necessity in Liberal Arts Assessment: The Student as the Unit of Analysis

Dan Chambliss, a former colleague of mine at Hamilton, has written a valuable article for the Center for Inquiry in the Liberal Arts. The article reminds us of the difference between the way that most faculty experience academic life and the way students experience it and suggests some ways that we can incorporate a more systematic understanding of student perception into our planning and assessment models.

As a sociologist, Dan has spent much of his professional life rigorously studying things that many of us know intuitively at some level, but often don’t act upon. Research by sociologists and anthropologists has confirmed that students exist in a culture that often runs parallel to that of faculty and administrators, but that only occasionally intersects.

Students and faculty also approach academic disciplines with different expectations. Faculty, for instance, typically place the psychology department among the natural sciences; most psychologists themselves do, and many fiercely advance a scientific agenda and image for their discipline. But most freshmen (reasonably) expect psychology to explain parental divorce, boyfriend problems, and why roommates fight. When they discover that hypothesis testing often figures more prominently than people, many students drop psychology.

Perhaps the most important point in the article for me, though, was the clear identification of he problem of reasoning from “organizational collectivities”:

the success of individual students doesn’t directly reflect the success of classes, departments, programs, or institutions, since individual experience cannot automatically be inferred from the behavior of collectivities.

With all the emphasis on assessment of student outcomes, most of us still fall back on reasoning from collectivities as a way of judging and publicizing our quality. Individual student learning is a complex interaction of all the academic and nonacademic experiences of a whole human being, and measuring the effectiveness of courses, departments and professors will never give the kind of deep insight into individual learning that would be necessary to allow us to make our universities truly liberating. Most universities have the expertise among the faculty in the social sciences to do this kind of research at a much more sophisticated level.

Even though we have the expertise, few of universities are using it to plan policy, because of the natural limitations of our own humanty. All of tend to focus most directly on the contribution that we make to the institution:

As the paid employees of academic institutions, then, we all concentrate on our formal, institutionalized, organized efforts to help our students. So it’s not surprising that when we try to measure what happens, we measure our own efforts: what buildings are newly opened; what programs are designed and initiated; what’s in the course catalogue; the classes we teach and how many students are in them; even how successful those classes are.

Dan lays out specific guidelines for doing policy research:

  1. Start by sampling actual student and looking at their entire transcripts. Even small random samples of transcripts can give “startling” insights into the actual academic lives of your students.
  2. Look hard at the academic lives of all your students–not just the award winners. How did the bottom half of the class get there? Does the institution bear any responsibility or is it purely the students’ lack of talent or achievement?
  3. “Finally, remember that departmental or program-level assessment, so politically feasible and apparently efficient, may easily be irrelevant to student outcomes.”

Lots to think about here…

Digital Ethnography : A Vision of Students Today

Digital Ethnography » Blog Archive » A Vision of Students Today:

This video was made by a group of Kansas State students as part of a class production known as the Digital Ethnography project. (See this YouTube video for more information about what they are doing and how they are doing it.)

The project wasn’t on my radar until the a recent post from Andy Rush at the University of Mary Washington. We’ve learned a lot from anthropologists who produce works like Coming of Age in New Jersey and My Freshman Year, but this has a kind of power that goes even beyond those texts.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o]

The blog post has a great description of how the video was produced.

This video was created by myself and the 200 students enrolled in ANTH 200: Introduction to Cultural Anthropology at Kansas State University, Spring 2007. It began as a brainstorming exercise, thinking about how students learn, what they need to learn for their future, and how our current educational system fits in. We created a Google Document to facilitate the brainstorming exercise… (Read the Rest)

Now that they are in my aggregator, I’m looking forward to following the work of the class and their professor.

Life in the Grey Zone

I spent an hour yesterday responding to a request from a colleague to write a clearer statement defining what level of support academic departments could expect from staff in our Academic Information Services group in maintaining their departmental web pages. She noted, quite correctly, that our service-level agreement (SLA) was a tad mushy when it came to that subject and that the ambiguity continued to generate friction among department chairs.

At one level, the text should have been fairly easy to write. The policy (sort of) says that we don’t support department, program, center or institute web sites.

We used to. Over the last few years the college has invested tens of thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours in developing a template application that allows non-technical users to create and maintain web sites. Anyone who can fill in a web form can have a website with a host of features that used to require late night hours by a departmental liaison with a PHP manual and a coffee pot. There’s no need to depend on an academic technology specialist to fill in web forms, and we have plenty of projects that do demand the skills that only those folks have. The SLA states that change pretty clearly.

The problem is that the service level agreement doesn’t align perfectly with reality. Over the years, our service model has been shaped more by our membership in the community than it has been the more transactional approach that’s implied by the SLA.

If I’m walking by a faculty office and I’m asked for help getting an image to display on a template site, I’m always going to do what I can to help. If a colleague who I’ve worked with on multiple committees, eaten meals with and see in the gym every Tuesday asks me for help re-sizing a batch of pictures for the department web site, I’d do it, because the relationship is more important to me than the policy. If someone calls and says that they’ve been struggling to understand the documentation on the template site and they still can’t figure out how to set up the calendar, I’m very likely to run over to their office to help, since supporting self-directed learners is a core value for me.

However, if someone who I don’t know sends me an email message and says “please have someone make these changes to our web site by tomorrow at 8 AM”, I’m likely to point to the SLA. Not our job. If a department creates a new center or institute that needs a complex web site built next week, I’ll probably invoke the SLA and suggest that someone attend the template workshop.

I don’t know how to capture that reality in a public document. (Maybe that’s what this entry is doing.) Our AIS group was founded to insure that there were people within the college community who had a deep commitment to learning and a passion for understanding technology. Living with commitment and passion requires living in a grey area where decisions are often made based on the implicit logic of community membership rather than on the clarity of an SLA. That logic allows us to say no to some tasks and to focus on others, even if we can’t always articulate it as clearly as we might like.

Action Verbs–Twitter Style

Twitter: What *are* people doing? :: Now I Have a Blog Too

Back in my career services days, we used to spend a lot of time putting together our infamous action verb list for students to use in preparing their resumes. Now Twitter answers the question about what people are really doing as they move throughout their days. Based on a sample of 500,000 tweets Chris Finke has compiled the most common ‘-ing’ verbs and the number of times they appeared in the 500,000 messages.”

We always had students write in the -ed form to focus on the fact that they had already used the skills. A few words are missing from the Tweets list that always found their way onto the typical career services list: things like systematized and supervising and prioritizing. The Twitter top 10:

  1. going
  2. watching
  3. listening
  4. getting
  5. playing
  6. working
  7. trying
  8. reading
  9. waiting
  10. looking

The Art of Building Virtual Communities

21st Century Collaborative: The Art of Building Virtual Communities

Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach, who was a student in the planning class a couple of years ago, has been putting together some extremely valuable posts on her blog. (I loved the news reel clip on progressive education from her post on John Dewey.) This essay on building virtual communities pulls together a variety of different frameworks and checklists to stimulate thinking about what might work for creating interest and sustaining it over time. The central question is precisely the one we need be addressing in each site we build.

The burning question for many of us trying to establish educational CoPs is how to design a VLC that is compelling enough that it will compete successfully for the attention of busy educators? Because communities of practice are voluntary, to be successful over time they need the ability to generate enough excitement, relevance, and value to attract and engage members.

There’s no definitive answer, but two ideas seem to flow through the various models Sheryl outlines. First, the navigation and design of the site need to encourage visitors to move through the various roles at their own rates. Site designers should clearly define what the benefits are to each group of users at each level and make it easy for folks to participate at their own comfort level. Secondly, identifying leadership that will commit time and energy to sustaining the community probably should be a requirement before launching the site. The likelihood of success without enough leadership is pretty slim.

They’re Back

Anne Truitt Zelenka » Get That Back to School Feeling

Our first year students arrived yesterday, and Anne Truitt Zelenka, editor at large for Web Worker Daily, captured many of the feelings I have every year about this time.

…I love the motion after summer’s pause. I love the thrill of new projects and the renewed energy for old ones. I love the return to making work seriously fun instead of taking vacations that are seriously fun.

Her end-of-summer ritual includes buying a new notebook (of course) and setting out her class schedule that includes some heavy duty corporate consulting and finalizing a book manuscript balanced with some “non-niche” blogging about cooking and eating. She also covers some of the items on her not-to-list like not speaking without pay at conferences, not “building her personal brand” and

I’m not worrying about whether I’m building my career in the way I “should” because building it in the way I enjoy seems to be working just fine. My desultory blogging of the last three years, my connecting with people just because I like them, my non-niche blogging and my sometimes irresponsible approach to my supposed responsibilities has inspired me, motivated me, and connected me in ways I never experienced or imagined before the web.

I’m hoping to capture some of that inspiration, motivation and connection through my on-line writing. My class schedule is pretty full this fall:

  • My class in Educational Technology Planning
    will be meeting this fall trying to live out the model of authentic learning that Marilyn Lombardi has written about some so articulately.

  • After a year of planning and discussing, we’re launching the reorganization of our Academic Technology staff to shift the balance between desktop work and more substantive academic work. This is pretty stressful, since our faculty satisfaction ratings have been very high,and we’re essentially trying to fix things that most folks don’t think is broken.
  • Project Management: We’re trying to become more transparent in the way we select, manage and complete our projects in the TIP program. The list keeps growing…

My not-to-do list not to spend so thinking about writing or regretting not have written. (I would be great if some of that time could be focused on actually writing.) I’m going to start with two assumptions:

  • I’m going to worry less about typos. In 25 years, I’ve seldom written a paragraph that didn’t have a word missing or an unfinished thought. Mark Twain said that it is a very uncreative person who can only think of one way to spell a word; I consider myself a somewhat creative person.
  • I’m going to write even though I don’t think I have anything to write about.

I’m going to start by hitting publish.

css.php