My name is Caleb. I am another new guy here at nGenera aka (New Paradigm). This post is about a bone that I, and many other students, have to pick with the current education system.
In college, everyone has those professors that can really get under your skin. It drives us crazy because, when they look at you, you can almost see their mind weighing the value of your comments and opinions upon the number of degrees you have. If you’re a freshman, you might as well be five years old. This attitude could be one reason why many frustrated people view school as being “just another hoop to jump through.”
This message is not a shot at professors…well, maybe some professors (the kind nobody likes, that get the frowny faces on ratemyprofessors.com), but more a shot at the way many universities see their students. Are students assets or liabilities to administrators?
If they are seen as “liabilities” that professors have to deal with in between their papers and research, then schools of the future are going to face some trouble. This Net Generation disagrees with the old idea that: Students are blank slates that come to school to learn what the all knowing professors tell them. They quietly do their homework, conform, and in four years jump out from the hoops. Due to a childhood of social networks and parents encouragement to voice their opinions, the Net Generation refuses to do busy work, expects that they will be listened to and empowered to execute their ideas.
For large red tape organizations like universities, that even have “Space Committees” to create policies for picture hanging on walls, this can be hard to swallow. However, some are starting to see the importance of building a “community of assets” from their students and facilitating communication and collaboration between communities, government, businesses and students.
During her inauguration speech, Purdue President France Cordova outlined the importance of making organizational and strategic changes for the future by explaining the plans Purdue has for its students in the coming years. Purdue has seen the United States’ need for talented young people in science and technology. For this purpose they have changed many of their teaching goals to include:
1. Lowering class sizes
2. Steering students toward those disciplines
3. Creating an entrepreneurial culture to attract students
4. Allocating funds and resources to interdisciplinary research projects
5. Creating a culture of collaboration through localizing eleven interdisciplinary centers
6. Building commercial research parks to encourage partnerships with national and global businesses
7. Creating a cooperative “Super Project” between two of their offices
8. Setting a standard for leadership and global awareness
It seems that under the direction of President Cordova, Purdue’s students won’t view their education as jumping through hoops, but making a difference by collaborating, empowering and innovating.
Comments RSS
| TrackBack URI
Hey Caleb
You are right on the money with the way you feel about universities education – though unfortunately there are still millions of students across the world (adult, tertiary, secondary and primary) who still face the ‘I hold the knowledge come unto me little children’ from their teachers.
I teach Drama and Media to secondary students and I always present myself as the most ignorant person in the class(Not hard actually as I usually am); I’m the dumb messenger who’s turned up with the problem but none of the answers! It starts a dialogue, it empowers and most importantly it engages learning in students, because they feel valued, because they are an asset in the learning process.
We are in a time of transition, not only in education but also in every aspects of life. The current generation of leaders/educators resolved their power in a hierarchical ‘what I know is a commodity’ system. You have developed in a far more egalitarian ‘I am what I share’ culture. The first question to the old generation is can they actually see the new way? Or more cynically do they see it and are just playing for survival? My experience tells me that it is about 1 ‘can not see’ for every 2 political creatures – I just think hierarchies made them that way? I have not quick answers for this other than a stabbing in the forum.
From my pre-teaching background as an artist and performer I know that I prefer your way of working – collaboratively (the concept of ‘collaboration’ has many interpretations that I won’t even go into in this comment) and I hope the ‘inspiring’ words of Purdue President France Cordova are genuine and not the marketing ‘spin’ of the false a hero touting ‘sound bites’.
Proof of life questions would be:
Are they designing university communication systems to promote dialogue between all parties (students, lecturers, administrators)? Positive communication flow and interface is essential to collaboration.
NB dialogue, as opposed to monologue, recognises the equal validity of comments/opinions of all participants on the strength of the opinions appropriateness to the solution, not on who suggested the idea.
Is the university/faculty/tutor creating opportunities for collaboration and open-ended conclusions or results?
NB: The power of the ‘come unto me and learn’ set is that they already know the answers, so why should the student bother having their own opinion or answers.
Is the university initiating processes that encourage diversity of opinion?
NB Processes so much more important than structure – structure are the pipes – processes are the water that flows through them.
Lots of money will be spent in educational institutes on structure redesign (particularly management consultants).
The bottom line is I have work in systems as hierarchical as a pyramid, with gifted leaders who love collaboration and gained leverage by engaging their staff. Equally I have worked in environments with structures as flat as a pancake where nobody even spoke. Structures can move you in the right direction but it is process that will determine your fate and that of the organisation.
Caleb you are on the right track – so don’t let the bastards get you down – I’m a Gen Xer and I felt like you at uni 20 years ago – I just hope that current efforts and shifts in education can make the time of change closer for you than it was for me.
It is a revolution, one conversation at a time.
HTH
Burt
Comment by Gilbert Halcrow - May 7, 2008 10:32 am
Thank you for your kind words Burt. It is nice to be told you’re right on and I appreciate your comments. I am interested as well to see if Purdue follows through with the president’s grand vision because I think her aim is dead on. Universities shouldn’t be the last ones to adopt the concepts of collaboration. If they are to prepare the Net Generation for the workforce than they need to utilize the same principles the workforce is using.
Universities also have a special and unique niche to offer incredible value to society. They are the Meccas of knowledge that mold minds and constantly make new discoveries through their research. I am excited to think about how much more they could do if they can adopt the principles of wikinomics.
Like you said, even within their own universities, professors, program directors, and deans often are working on the same projects and don’t even know it. On my campus we pushed for a mentor program to utilize business people from the community to offer practical advice and connections for undergraduates. When I spoke with the different departments and programs it turned out that four of them were trying to work on the same project and didn’t even know it.
That’s what intrigued me about Purdue’s vision. I want to add a few more processes and systems to your list Burt. Like you said, universities need to ask:
1-Do they have communication systems to promote dialogue between all parties (students, lecturers, administrators)? I would also include community members (both local and global), government, and other universities to that list. Also, are those communication systems and methods set up in a way that they can be changed, evolve, and improved on easily, or are they set in stone?
2- Does the classroom encourage dialogue as opposed to monologue, and is recognizing the equal validity of comments/opinions of all participants on the strength of the opinions appropriateness to the solution, not on who suggested the idea. I would add, what is being done with those ideas and comments? Is it all talk? How can the students apply it? Granted, some classes you can only do so much to engage the students, but if students and professors are collaborating, and other professors are sharing ideas, then different ways to engage the class will become evident.
3-Is the university/faculty/tutor creating opportunities for collaboration and open-ended conclusions or results? If I understand this point correctly, are the students allowed to run with the ideas they come up with?
Is the university initiating processes that encourage diversity of opinion? I would add on how large a scale?
A couple others: Is there cross disciplinary collaboration occurring between different colleges departments and programs?
If you haven’t noticed, I am fairly passionate and bitter about the subject. Sometimes you feel like you’re pushing against a rock. I believe that many universities and professors, like you, are pushing these concepts and are starting to be heard. Over the next two weeks or so, I want to spend some time highlighting the steps and processes some of these universities are taking.
Basically, in short; way to go Purdue, thanks for the comment Burt, and let’s share how universities are doing it.
Comment by Caleb Love - May 8, 2008 10:56 am
Caleb
I like the development of points. Yes Pt 2 definitely need to be ‘actioned’ as they say talk is cheap and students (and I dare say lecturers) will feel greater satisfaction and motivation if what they talk about gets used in a tangible way.
Your interpretation of Pt 3 is correct: the university/lecturer is a facilitator/coach guiding and directing the game/form – but not determining how the play/content goes. This is the one step the ‘I’ve got all the knowledge come unto me’ culture find the hardest. It is just a little right-brainedness too far for many.
As I say in my Media or Drama class it’s a ‘Do learn’ not a ‘Talk learn’! Suddenly the learning dynamic shifts from me as the content deliverer ‘expert’ to a co-creating mentor. I then direct student where they should go to look for information or develop skills (personal, social, technical and creative) to complete the project as they have designed it. It is very rewarding and exciting not knowing what will be created.
I think the truth is, practical courses (at all level of education) when taught well have been doing the ‘Wiki’ for years.
I hope that Tertiary can managing this significant shift successfully – as it has a direct effect on our efforts to reform at secondary and primary.
It is hard to convince colleagues to shift their practice in high schools when the vast majority of tertiary courses still insist on ‘exam results as the main criteria of entrance. This will always result in a content-driven curriculum, the exam factory mentality and no motivation for many colleagues to evolve their practice.
This is a great discourse and it is vital that universities and school understand how each other are evolving. Thanks.
Burt
Comment by Gilbert Halcrow - May 10, 2008 12:22 am
[...] last week’s post I stepped onto the, “school is a bunch of hoops to jump through” soapbox. I love that soapbox, [...]
Pingback by Wikinomics » Blog Archive » The Parable of the 3D Poster - May 15, 2008 10:03 am