Author Archives: Karen DePauw

Women in Academia: EUA webinar and more

Posted on by
Reply

On March 1, 2022, the EUA hosted a webinar entitled Women in academia: breaking the glass ceiling or rebuilding the house?  In the U.S., we have often talked about the glass ceiling(s) and thus, I was intrigued by the notion of ‘rebuilding the house” which I believe is the path to follow.  Although ‘breaking the glass ceiling’ is still important, I would encourage efforts that take on the system (the house) and rebuild it to be more inclusive, welcoming, and affirming.

Prior to the webinar, the EUA published a report in November 2019 which provided an overview of inclusion and diversity at 159 higher education institutions in 36 European systems and provided the foundation for university leadership to develop and implement strategies to build more inclusive higher education. The webinar presentations and discussion were mostly about women in academia including those in leadership positions in Europe. The panelists provided an update on demographic data and interactive website, and strove to address the following questions: Is gender parity now a reality in academia? Are more women from all backgrounds taking on leadership positions in academia? How can academia benefit from this cultural change?

The panelists shared detailed information about women in European higher education, offered their reflections on women in academia and their journey to leadership, and shared some strategies for change. The panelists and links to their presentations included:

  • Annick Castiaux, Rector, University of Namur, Belgium (narrative about her journey into academic leadership – see YouTube recording)
  • Mina Stareva, Head of Sector – Gender, DG Research and Innovation, European Commission
  • Ella Ghosh, Senior Advisor at the Committee for Gender Balance and Diversity in Research (KIF), Norway
  • Kathrin Müller, project manager, U-Multirank, Germany
  • Kamila Kozirog, Policy & Project Officer, EUA
  • Thomas Jørgensen, Senior Policy Coordinator, EUA

The webinar and the handouts are available on the EUA website and YouTube Channel. On this topic and others (open science, inclusion, teaching/learning), the EUA has made tremendous progress over the past 20+ years of its existence and nations around the world, including the U.S., should take note and learn from their experiences.

Although the focus of the webinar was about women in academia, there was also some mention of others who tend to be marginalized from and within academia. From my perspective, inclusion of this kind will need rebuilding of the system and will require systemic change.

Toward the end of the webinar, the issue of work-life balance arose and was quickly identified primarily as for women (and men) around child care. The notion of work-life balance also applied to elder care. In the U.S., we have had these discussions and have expanded these work-life balance efforts however they are so named but they are still mostly situated from the gender perspective. Work-life initiatives should be expanded beyond the notion of work life balance routinely beyond gender and family responsibilities to include others experiencing work-life disruption due to personal crisis and individual challenges such as disability, mental and physical health, and even social injustices.  At the Virginia Tech Graduate School, the work-life assistance program also started with female graduate students for birth and adoption and expanded to include male graduate students within a couple of years.  More recently, the program was expanded to include what we called significant life events (e.g., elder care, family or personal crisis, death).

Shall we break the glass ceiling or rebuild the house? We must change the system and rebuild the house.

Horizon Europe and #SticktoScience

Posted on by
1

In 2018, the European Commission (EC) began the process of developing a funding program for research and innovation for the European Union (EU) that would continue funding beyond Horizon 2020. The efforts resulted in Horizon Europe, EU Research and Innovation program 2021-2027, with a budget of €95.5 billion. The focus of Horizon Europe is to facilitate collaboration and strengthen the impact of research and innovation in tackling global challenges (e.g.,climate change, UN’s Sustainable Development goals) and increase EU competitiveness through an enhanced European Research Area.

Included in Horizon Europe program is the establishment of a European Innovation Council, identification of five main mission areas, a commitment to open access and open science policy, and the development of new partnerships with industry in support of EU policies.

Horizon Europe is an ambitious program with established timeframe for implementation.The Open Science principles are already articulated in the Factsheet: Open science in Horizon Europe. And the five missions include the following:

  1. Adaptation to climate change, including societal transformation
  2. Cancer
  3. Healthy oceans and water
  4. Climate-neutral and smart cities
  5. Soil deal for Europe (healthy soils, food)

Through Horizon Europe, the European Commission has demonstrated a strong commitment to research and innovation in Europe but only EU members can apply and receive funding.  That excludes Switzerland and the United Kingdom who are not members of the EU.  According to Jan Palmowski (2022), Secretary-General at The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities, the importance of Swiss and UK Association to HorizonEurope has been strongly articulated by researchers, science organisations and university rectors across Europe and has resulted in the #SticktoScience campaign trending in Twitter and social media at the moment.

#SticktoScience calls for an open and inclusive European Research Area urges The EU, the UK and Switzerland to rapidly reach association agreements so that the two countries can contribute scientifically and financially to the strength of Horizon Europe. This is a very important topic and hopefully will be resolved soon.

 

Higher Education 2020 and beyond

Posted on by
1

My two+ year hiatus from blogging coincided (accidentally) with the disruptions to higher education with the onset of COVID 19 as well as the recent (and ongoing) social, racial injustices, economic disparities and immigration challenges. 2020 marked a critical year for higher education around the world and pushed colleges and universities to pivot, adapt and adjust and to do so quickly.  Universities and colleges had to change immediately, something institutions of higher education have not done well in the past. IHEs are noted for slow change, if any.  And 2020 demanded something else.  Perhaps the confluence of pandemic, political upheaval, and racial social injustices will force colleges and universities to make the changes permanent.  To do things differently.

Although a critique might be appropriate, my focus here will be on the progress made toward the modern global university for today’s society and tomorrow’s future. James Duderstadt in his book entitled University for the 21st Century began the conversation in 2000 in the United States and it must, and it does, continue. The future of higher education has also been a conversation in Europe, led by the European University Association (EUA) which is celebrating 20 years of European collaboration since its founding – brief history is shown here.   What the EUA has accomplished in 20 years is truly amazing and very informative and relevant for higher education in the U.S.

Since 2000, the EUA has published many informative reports, conducted valuable surveys, hosted annual conferences and topic focused webinars (most recently virtually), and established organizational units to assist in achieving its goals. The EUA has advanced initiatives such as teaching/learning, diversity and inclusion, interdisciplinarity, open science, doctoral education, quality assurance and more. Although these are focused on the European context, their contents are valuable to U.S. institutions of higher education. Some of these I have discussed in previous blog posts (and tweets) and others I will elaborate in the upcoming weeks.

The most recent EUA initiative focuses on the future of higher education in Europe and strategies for success.  In 2021, the EUA published Universities without Walls: A vision for 2030.  In publising this report, EUA stated that

“Europe and the world are at a crossroad. We are facing immense challenges; finding a sustainable equilibrium between ecological, economic and social concerns, the digital transition and major political developments will be some of the main drivers of change for the new decade.

Education, research, innovation and culture are key to addressing these challenges. Europe’s universities uniquely unite these in their missions. They are keen to contribute to shaping a positive future for our continent with their academic values and missions. To be able to do this, universities need academic freedom and institutional autonomy, adequate public funding and enabling regulatory frameworks. It is in Europe’s keen interest to support them. Europe needs universities and universities need Europe.”

Earlier this year, the European Commission issued a challenge and opportunity to European higher education institutions through the documents entitled European Strategy for Universities and a Commission proposal for a Council recommendation on transnational higher education cooperation.  These documents serve as an impetus for bringing together the European Research area and the Higher Education area and EUA has already assumed a leadership in effecting change.  There’s more to come in the near future.

“Higher Education in 2030” is the theme of the Global Perspectives Program this year (GPP’22). This year, we will actually be able to travel to Switzerland, Italy and France and explore the future of higher education with university colleagues and EUA leaders. I’ve had the great fortunate to be engaged with EUA for the pasts 20 years and witnessed first-hand the developments and changes in Europe.  As future faculty members, the GPP participants have also benefitted from these efforts.  This year, we will learn directly from our colleagues how 2020 and its challenges have changed the universities.

written by Karen P. DePauw

Evolving PhD education: Trends in Europe and United States

Posted on by
Reply

in 2010, I was invited to speak at the European University Association – Council on Doctoral Education (EUA-CDE) conference in Berlin on a panel on doctoral education in U.S. and Europe. The 2010 report which included the update to the original Salzburg principles (2005) had just been released and these guided my comments comparing U.S. and European doctoral education.  The ten Salzburg principles included the following:

  • The core component of doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through original research. At the same time it is recognized that doctoral training must increasingly meet the needs of an employment market that is wider than academia.
  • Embedding in institutional strategies and policies:universities as institutions need to assume responsibility for ensuring that the doctoral programmes and research training they offer are designed to meet new challenges and include appropriate professional career development opportunities.
  • The importance of diversity: the rich diversity of doctoral programmes in Europe – including joint doctorates – is a strength which has to be underpinned by quality and sound practice.
  • Doctoral candidates as early stage researchers: should be recognized as professionals – with commensurate rights – who make a key contribution to the creation of new knowledge.
  • The crucial role of supervision and assessment: in respect of individual doctoral candidates, arrangements for supervision and assessment should be based on a transparent contractual framework of shared responsibilities between doctoral candidates, supervisors and the institution (and where appropriate including other partners).
  • Achieving critical mass: Doctoral programmes should seek to achieve critical mass and should draw on different types of innovative practice being introduced in universities across Europe, bearing in mind that different solutions may be appropriate to different contexts and in particular across larger and smaller European countries. These range from graduate schools in major universities to international, national and regional collaboration between universities.
  • Duration: doctoral programmes should operate within an appropriate time duration (three to four years full- time as a rule).
  • The promotion of innovative structures: to meet the challenge of interdisciplinary training and the development of transferable skills.
  • Increasing mobility: Doctoral programmes should seek to offer geographical as well as interdisciplinary and intersectoral mobility and international collaboration within an integrated framework of cooperation between universities and other partners.
  • Ensuring appropriate funding: the development of quality doctoral programmes and the successful completion by doctoral candidates requires appropriate and sustainable funding

In identifying the Salzburg principles, the European University Association (EUA) signaled specific focus on doctoral education across the European universities and its critical components. The topics addressed in these principles are quite similar to components of doctoral education in the United States and issues for doctoral education needed for the 21st century. One of the significant results of the Salzburg principles was the development of Doctoral Colleges and the concept of graduate campuses at European Universities. Graduate Schools have long existed in the U.S., doctoral schools/colleges is a new concept but one that has helped facilitate change in doctoral education in Europe.

Conversations about doctoral education and doctoral education reform in Europe and U.S. have continued in the last 10 years.  Today there are more commonalities and convergence about doctoral education than throughout history. In 2018, the publication of two significant reports has provided a lens into the evolving PhD education: Graduate STEM education in the 21st century (NASEM, 2018) and Doctoral Education in Europe Today (EUA, 2019).

The report entitled Graduate STEM Education for the 21st Century (2018) was published by the U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). The report included the identification of core competences for the Master’s and PhD degrees and recommendations for 21st century universities.  Although the report focuses on STEM programs, the competencies and recommendations apply more broadly to graduate education beyond STEM.  The core competencies for the ideal PhD degree fall into the following two broad categories: (a) Develop Scientific and Technological Literacy and Conduct Original Research and (b) Develop Leadership, Communication, and Professional Competencies

Recommendations for implementing quality graduate education in the 21st includes the following:

  • Rewarding Effective Teaching and Mentoring
  • National and Institutional Data on Students and Graduates
  • Ensuring Diverse, Equitable, and Inclusive Environments
  • Career Exploration and Preparation for Graduate Students
  • Structure of Doctoral Research Activities
  • Funding for Research on Graduate STEM Education
  • Stronger Support for Graduate Student Mental Health Services

“Importantly, this report also calls for a shift from the current system that focuses primarily on the needs of institutions of higher education and those of the research enterprise itself to one that is student centered, placing greater emphasis and focus on graduate students as individuals with diverse needs and challenges.” (2018, p.3)

During this same time period, the EUA-CDE conducted a survey of European universities about doctoral education throughout Europe.  The survey of doctoral education was based upon the Salzburg principles and designed to collect data in the following areas:

  • Organizational structures
  • Training and activities
  • Career development
  • Funding
  • Mobility
  • Time to completion
  • Supervision
  • Application and admission
  • Decision-making processes
  • Completion rate

The EUA-CDE doctoral education report includes data on the topics above and resulted in the identification of strategic priorities for European doctoral education moving forward.  The strategic priorities included the following:

  • Funding for doctoral students
  • Ethics and scholarly integrity
  • Attracting students from abroad
  • Career development
  • Gender equality
  • Open access/open science
  • Health/wellbeing of doctoral candidates
  • Increasing number of doctoral candidates
  • University-business cooperation
  • Societal engagement of doctoral candidates

As shown in the figure above, the top three strategic priorities for universities in Europe were funding for doctoral students, ethics and attracting students from abroad.  For more information about the findings, recommendations and suggested actions, see the report.

In addition to these specific doctoral education topics and priorities, universities in Europe and the U.S. continue to explore evolving issues facing the 21st century university.  Among these are focus on teaching/learning, diversity and equity, open access, innovation and entrepreneurship, technology, academic freedom and accessibility.  Changes in doctoral education are critical for the 21st century university and doctoral colleges/graduate schools can help lead the path forward.

References.

Doctoral education in Europe today: Approaches and institutional structures (2019).  European University Association

Graduate STEM education for the 21st century (2019).  National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM).

Salzburg Principles II Recommendations (2010).  European University Association (EUA).

Graduate Education Week 2019

Posted on by
Reply

Graduate education week is an annual event sponsored by the VT Graduate School to acknowledge the efforts and thank the graduate students, graduate advisors/mentors and the faculty and staff for their outstanding contributions to graduate education. This year marks our 19th year through which we:

  • highlight the importance of graduate education to the university
  • increase the university’s awareness of the contributions to teaching, research and engagement missions of the university
  • enhance the graduate student experience through professional development programs and celebratory events.

The theme for 2019 is “Find your Balance” and many of the events are focused around this very important topic of balance in the lives of graduate students.  The session entitled “spring into balance” included tips on relaxation, time with therapy dog Moose, personal training tips and healthy food consumption.  Specific events include managing conflict, combating imposter syndrome, “balance games” and a teach-in about valuing the students’ lived experiences.  Another feature is the Graduate Life Center (GLC) Cafe, a weekly gathering of graduate students for engaging conversation.

During the week, the Graduate Student Assembly (GSA) hosts its 35th Research Symposium and Exposition followed by the Research Symposium Keynote featuring science communicator and educator Joe Hanson.  Joe Hanson hosts and writes “It’s Okay to be Smart“.  In addition, the Academy for GTA Excellence hosts its annual teach-in and a reception is held honoring VT Graduate School Citizen Scholars.

One of the highlights of the week is the Graduate Education Week Awards Banquet.  At this event, graduate students are recognized for their achievements in teaching, research and service; are honored as outstanding college doctoral and master’s students; receive outstanding dissertation and master’s thesis awards; and more.  In addition, outstanding faculty mentors from each college nominated by graduate students are recognized.

The week ends with the Big Cookout in which graduate students and their families join the Graduate School faculty and staff plus the Graduate Student Assembly on the lawn in front of the Graduate Life Center.

Although this week (March 25-29, 2019) we focus on graduate education, graduate education is a year-round endeavor. Thanks to all graduate students, faculty and staff who contribute to graduate education excellence and the creation of an innovative, interdisciplinary, and inclusive graduate community!!

It Depends

Posted on by
Reply

There are many times in our professional or personal lives when the answer to a variety of questions/queries is “it depends”.  This isn’t really surprising or uncommon. Frequently the answer/response falls somewhere along a continuum rather in a binary category.

One in particular comes to mind. It was apparent to those of us in the space that the facilitator wanted a definitive answer or at least an answer that was headed in one direction.  Among the audience, the answer we offered was “it depends”.  Although we were in agreement about the general direction of the conversation and goal of the workshop, there were too many unknowns or not-clearly-knowns that the response continued to be “it depends”.

In a graduate class I teach entitled “Preparing the Future Professoriate”, we take topics such as the description of an institution of higher education (e.g., college or university), definition of a faculty member, the role of faculty, mission of the university, funding for higher education, future direction of higher education, international higher education and much more. Obviously these topics are rather broad and there is no single definitive answer. “It depends”.

The fable of the elephant and blind “men” comes to mind here. How each of these individuals would describe the elephant “depends” upon the part of the elephant they touched.  The university is frequently described in this same manner. Those from a specific discipline or administrative home will offer their view based upon that discipline or administrative unit. The roles and responsibilities of a faculty member “depends” upon the academic discipline as well as institution type (e.g., “extramural funding is required”, “a book is the primary scholarly product”, “a 3-3 teaching load is standard”).  In other words, “it depends”.

Even topics of academic freedom and scholarly integrity, the hallmarks of higher education in my view, don’t always allow us to conclude with a definitive answer of yes or no.  Yes, we in higher education have academic freedom but questions are raised (e.g., is academic freedom an absolute, is academic freedom defined in various contexts and are their limits or conditions of academic freedom).  Around the world and even in the U.S., academic freedom is being challenged.  (Note: this is a topic for another blog post).

The complexity in which we live and work in higher education requires additional perspectives.  Many of the “grand challenges” and “wicked problems” require interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary efforts. As we work in these settings, there is no definitive answer from a single disciplinary perspective but rather an evolving academic journey informed by the multiple perspectives in the conversation.  The initial answer is “it depends” and requires interdisciplinary thinking.

As change continues in higher education and the 21st century university evolves, we must not only anticipate and expect but embrace “it depends”.

Holistic admissions

Posted on by
2

Increasing diversity in graduate admissions has become regular conversation among graduate deans and graduate school personnel.  The Council of Graduate Schools has include sessions on diversity and inclusion at its Annual Meetings and summer workshops for many years and recently actively promoted holistic admissions through a funded project and publications.  In 2015, Hobsons funded a CGS research project to explore existing practices and strategies for creating a more diverse graduate student population.  The results were shared with the graduate education community through a CGS publication that includes promising practices for holistic admissions and an overview of existing resources.  As graduate dean at Virginia Tech, I was invited as one of the participants to share our holistic admissions process.

Since then, I have also been invited to participate in ETS sponsored breakfast panels for increasing diversity in Graduate School at the 2018 CGS Summer Workshop and 2018 Annual Meeting.  These were focused generally on strategies used by selected Graduate Deans for creating inclusive graduate education and increasing diversity in graduate school and followed the development of the ETS GRE Holistic admissions website. In November 2018,  ETS hosted a webinar entitled “Diversity in Graduate Education: Looking at – and beyond – admissions”.  The panel was moderated by Jamal Eric Watson, Executive Editor of Diverse: Issues in Higher Education.

At Virginia Tech, we have developed a holistic admissions process that involved a modification of the on-line application to facilitate admission decisions based upon more than quantitative measures including test scores and GPAs (or the university from which they graduated).  Applicants are “more than a number” to us.  We value the following characteristics as success critical attributes and use them as relevant factors in admissions:

  • Community involvement/service
  • Leadership
  • Social, economic, physical, and other barriers overcome
  • Personal/professional ethics
  • Achievement
  • Research and scholarship

While it can be argued that the characteristics are often articulated in the applicant’s statement or letter of application and frequently incorporated into letters of recommendation, VT Graduate School has added sections to the application itself and created the ability to “sort” by these characteristics as well as GPA and test scores.  We added questions to the application and for the reference letter section.  These modification have encouraged academic units to select those additional characteristics of importance for admission and to “sort in” the applicants who demonstrate these within their pool of qualified candidates.

In modifying our application, we considered data provided by our academic departments about the additional criteria that were used in the review of the application materials.  Specifically, we modified the application so that applicants could provide additional educational experience for consideration in admissions including the characteristics/attributes identified above.

We also modified the letter of recommendation form based upon the personal attributes critical to academic success studied by Educational Testing Services in its development of the Personal Potential Index (PPI).  Specifically, reference letter writers are asked to evaluate the applicant on the following attributes: communication skills, ethics and integrity, initiative, innovation and creativity, planning and organization, and teamwork. They are also asked to provide a brief statement about the most compelling reason to admit the candidate.  Although the full letters of recommendation are still to be submitted, the characteristics/attributes can be used to sort-in those with the desired experiences.  The historic context, rationale and process are articulated in a short presentation.

Based upon anecdotal evidence and our initial data collection, our holistic admissions approach allows for the inclusion of a more diverse pool of applicants than use of quantitative criteria primarily.

University mission statements

Posted on by
1

Some background before discussing mission statements….

Transformative Graduate Education (TGE) is a university-wide initiative offered by the Graduate School at Virginia Tech. Through the implementation of unique programs and opportunities, TGE pushes the boundaries of traditional disciplinary academic education and aims to significantly change how graduate students prepare to become the next generation of scientists, educators, scholars, engineers, artists, and career professionals.  One of these programs is the Future Professoriate graduate certificate.

Every semester for the past 15+ years, I’ve taught a graduate course entitled Preparing the Future Professoriate which is one of the required courses to earn the certificate. The purpose of the class is to provide graduate students the opportunity to learn about universities and especially the roles and responsibilities of faculty members.  Each semester 55+ master’s and doctoral students from our 8 different colleges (e.g., Engineering, Science, Liberal Arts and Human Sciences, Business, Architecture and Urban Studies, Natural Resources and Environment, Agriculture and Life Sciences) enroll in the class.

One of the early assignments for the class is to find, share and blog about mission statements from two college or universities, U.S. or international. Over the years, I have found this assignment and the discussion that follows to be important in raising awareness about the various types of colleges and universities around the world and their different and yet sometimes similar mission statements. As a result, I have continued to reflect upon the purposes for mission statements, similarity in the words included in the mission statements, the audiences for mission statements, and changes that have occurred over time.  And in the past few years, I have used digital polling software (e.g. Mentimeter for interactive presentations) to share the results with the class for discussion.

The first question I ask for each to share three to four words that they found in the mission statements.  And the second question was for them to identify the type of institution they selected.  I was curious about the words contained in the mission statements and I wanted to learn how they would characterize the university they selected.

Below I’ve included word clouds from the mission statements as shared by the graduate students in the class for the past three semesters. (Please note that this is not intended as a scientific analysis but more of an observation). As you can see, there are some words like research, community, knowledge, service and more that seem to be found in many of the mission statements. Teaching (learning), diversity (access), and global also appear in many mission statements. None of these words are surprising.  But what is surprising is that the word “student” (students) doesn’t appear as often as one would think.  Student or learner (and teaching/learning) seems to be implied rather than directly mentioned. In the figures below, private universities, liberal arts colleges, community colleges were in the mix.  If we were to sort by higher education institution type (e.g.private universities, liberal arts colleges, HBCUs, and community colleges) the key words in the mission statements would reflect more about the specific mission of the institution.

 

 

 

 

 

In addition to the word clouds for the mission statements, the second question was about the type of college or university selected by these students.  Two examples of the word clouds are shown below.  As you can see, public research universities were common among the universities selected – not surprising because VT is a public research university and perhaps is the most familiar and of interest to the graduate students.   I found it interesting that “PWI” was used as a popular description for many of the entries but likely this was related to the recent in class conversation about PWI (predominately white institution), HBCU (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) and MSI (Minority serving institutions) institutions.

 

 

 

In January 2018, I was pleased to read a blog by Julian David Cortes-Sanchez entitled “What do universities want to be? A content analysis of mission and vision statements worldwide”.  Although this isn’t the only analysis completed on mission statements, I found his findings pertinent to the mission statement assignment for my graduate course.  Cortes-Sanchez did an analysis of mission and vision statements and found that the most frequently used terms were research, university, world, knowledge and education. These are very similar to the words identified through the class assignment; not surprisingly.  The terms of global or world seem to be newer addition to mission statements as universities strive for a more global presence.

Although there are some very similar words used in mission statements, close attention to the words used can provide a greater understanding of the unique mission of the institutions of higher education.

 

On being inclusive

Posted on by
1

Recently, I’ve been thinking about the terms diversity and inclusion – how they are used, what they mean and how they are connected. My reflections have evolved over the years and rather than write a long narrative with historical perspective, I will be brief. In terms of which comes first, I will argue that it is inclusion that should be mentioned first and thereby guide our thinking and actions.

Diversity and inclusion are words that do have historical significance and context; at least dating back in the mid 20th century.  Diversity tended to be defined in terms of gender and race initially and recently more broadly in terms of the multiple and intersecting human social identities (e.g., age, LGBTQ, ability, religion, country of origin).  As a term, diversity has often been focused on difference as well as the value that these differences bring.

Inclusion in the 20th century was commonly associated with mainstreaming and integrating children with disabilities into regular schools (e.g., PL 94-142 Education of all Handicapped Children’s Act).  Inclusion has taken on a broader meaning today in the higher education landscape especially inclusive excellence and inclusive pedagogy. Through my higher education lens, inclusion must be defined as active, intentional and ongoing engagement with the full range of diversity topics and the multiple social identities in the curriculum and community.  Inclusion is about changing the culture so that individuals could be and are included.  It’s about having choice and choices. An “inclusion” approach (attitude and actions) empowers the creation of welcoming, affirming and diverse communities.

We hear frequently diversity and inclusion used together and usually in that order.  But I believe that our philosophical approach and actions should focus on inclusion and the creation and sustainability of inclusive affirming environments. Obviously we must incorporate both – inclusion and diversity – but here’s my main point.  If we are truly inclusive (attitude, actions) we will be diverse.  If we focus primarily on diversity, inclusion doesn’t always follow.  As administrators, faculty, staff and students we should focus “on being inclusive”.

p.s.  Virginia Tech Graduate School will begin the 3- year implementation of a new inclusion and diversity requirement for graduate students starting Fall 2018.

Effecting change in graduate education

Posted on by
Reply

It seems like I’ve been advocating for change in higher education for a long time now.  In some of my presentations dating back 1990s and recent blogs include posts about a ‘futurisktic‘ perspectives, university for the 21st century (Duderstadt, 2001), a call for embracing the ‘conceptual age‘ (Pink, 2005) and more. As a strong advocate for change in higher education, I want to share an example of change for graduate education.

Last week (June 12-14), the VT Graduate School hosted a conference on creating a space and place for graduate education drawing upon the 13+ years of experience gained through the innovative Graduate Life Center (GLC) and the Transformative Graduate Education (TGE) initiative offered by the VT Graduate School.  Graduate education colleagues and student affairs professionals attended the inaugural gathering to participate in the conversations about the “places, spaces, services and collaborations it takes to support the unique needs of graduate students”.

The conference was focused on the “what” and “how” of creating a space and place for graduate education.  In my opening remarks, I focused on the “why” and the historical context that prompted the development of the GLC and the TGE programs.  To begin….the call for change and the confluence of Duderstadt (2001) and Pink (2005).

In his book entitled “A University for the 21st Century, Duderstadt (2001) wrote that if lasting institutional reform is to be achieved, it will require changes in graduate education, with greater emphasis upon the integration of the disciplines and their applications to societal issues.  Daniel Pink (2005) argued in his book “A whole New Mind” that society has moved from the agricultural age to the industrial age to the information age and for the 21st century, the conceptual age.  Specifically, he wrote that “we are moving from an economy and a society built on the logical, linear, computer-like capabilities of the Information Age to an economy and a society built on the inventive, empathic, big-picture capabilities of what’s rising in its place, the Conceptual Age.”

Although other reports, books and professionals have called for change, Duderstadt and Pink were very influential in my rethinking and re-imagining graduate education and the leadership role that Graduate Schools could play.  Graduate schools and graduate deans have and must accept the responsibility for creating a space and place for graduate education. This can be done physically regardless of the size of the space and can definitely be accomplished conceptually in building and growing academic community(ies).  At their core and among the underlying principles, Graduate Schools and Graduate Deans must be responsive, integrative, interactive, inclusive & innovative. We (graduate deans) have the power to convene and we must be lead the transformation.  The calls for change in graduate education are loud including the most recent document from National Academies of Science, Engineering and Mathematics (NASEM, May 2018) entitled Graduate STEM education for the 21st century.  Although the report is focused on STEM, the recommendations are applicable to graduate education in general.  We (Graduate Schools, Graduate Deans) have responsibility for change, must be strategic and lead the transformation.

 

Obviously there are differing perspectives and views of and from the different parts of the university not unlike the fable of the blind “men” and the elephant.  Although many within the university community might want to see the Graduate School in a more traditional sense and less transformative, leaders needs to see things differently and look for that which is “unobvious” to others.  Times have changed and we have the responsibility to create a new culture for graduate education by developing meaningful and relevant programs. In doing so, I found the following strategies to be useful:

  • programs (e.g., workshops, classes) that provide added value (e.g., career development) to the degree
  • programs and opportunities that compliment not duplicate departmental efforts
  • incentives for participation including graduate certificates and academic credit
  • resources need to be identified within Graduate School and utilized to offer programs and opportunities
  • programs and opportunities should be innovative, dynamic and evolving and especially meaningful and relevant to current and future graduate students
  • strong commitment from the Graduate Dean (e.g., advocate, champion for change)

The consensus study report (NASEM, 2018) indicates that “it would be wise to acknowledge and understand the current and future challenges facing this system (higher education) and take steps now to ensure that it remains vital, adaptable, and relevant for many generations to come. To neglect graduate education, or to ignore threats to its success, puts the economic, social, and cultural well-being of the nation at risk. (p. 19, 2018)

Graduate education needs to change and we can transform graduate education through by understanding cultural change and building a new culture with new traditions and expectations for graduate education for the 21st century.  We don’t need to do this alone; we can develop partnerships and collaborations.  The charge to graduate deans is to take the lead and the challenge to our student affairs colleagues is to join us.  We can create a space and place for graduate education.