Post-2016 election challenge and opportunity for higher education

Fifty years ago, Robert F. Kennedy introduced the phrase that “one may live in interesting times”.  He stated that “like it or not, we live in interesting times. They are times of danger and uncertainty; but they are also the most creative of any time in the history…” (speech given in Cape Town, June 1966).  It appears to me that today, we are also living in ‘interesting times’.  For most, uncertainty and danger for many are clearly perceived for 2017 and beyond. There is so much that is unknown at the moment that it becomes unsettling. But perhaps these post-2016 election times might also challenge us, the words of RFK to be “creative”. That is, to ponder, reflect and act.

In her book entitled Hope in the Dark, Rebecca Solnit (2015 reissue of 2004 book) writes  about ‘hope’ but not as optimism per se but rather that “hope locates itself in the premises that we d9781608465767-f_mediumon’t know what will happen and that in the spaciousness of uncertainty is room to act. When you recognize uncertainty, you recognize that you may be able to influence the outcomes.” (from her Facebook page in November 2016).    “Optimists think it will all be fine without our involvement; pessimists take the opposite position; both excuse themselves from acting. Hope is an embrace of the unknown and the unknowable, an alternative to the certainty of both optimists and pessimists. It’s the belief that what we do matters even though how and when it may matter, who and what it may impact, are not things you can know beforehand.”   As she proposes, recognizing uncertainty allows us to recognize that we might be “able to influence the outcomes”.  Thus, it appears that now is the time to take action.

Although a rather simplistic statement, the 2016 elections revealed so much more about the current state of U.S. society and higher education’s connection (or lack thereof) to that reality for many. Higher education has been often accused of being elitist and out of touch with society and I would argue that sometimes we have been. University towns are sometimes called a ‘blue bubble’ in an otherwise red state. A recent article from the Chronicle of Higher Education highlighted the phenomena of “blue bubbles”  and provided some perspective on why universities are sometimes isolated from the surrounding communities. And this is where change must begin.

From the perspective of higher education, I would argue (along with many others) that higher education has not only a role to play but a responsibility to get involved and even to assume a leadership role.  As educational institutions, colleges and universities must continue to educate our students as well as our faculty, staff and administrators about social justice, equity and civil discourse.  We must be intentional about engaging with the dialogue around difference, encouraging all to speak up and speak out and to do so by understanding difference and through listening and hearing the voices of others.  It is also important that we focus our attention to communicate with clarity and to enhance our skills and ability to determine the accuracy of information and seek truth.  Articles about programs, strategies and workshops as well as analyses, opinion pieces and reflections are found frequently in publications including the Chronicle of Higher Education, InsideHigherEd, and Times Higher Education to name only a few.

Let me offer a few examples.

In the days following the 2016 election, an increase in hate motivated campus-climate incidents occurred and was reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education.  The data were compiled by Southern Poverty Law Center which issued a report including historical context and detailed information about type and location of the hate-related incidents.  I believe that in part these data provided the impetus for the call for higher education to respond and a focus on citizenship was one such response. Although there are many others, recent articles suggest how colleges can teach students to be good citizens and urge colleges and universities not to retreat but rather to teach citizenship.  Examples of programs and initiatives for understanding difference, increasing awareness of micro-aggressions and implicit bias and sustaining affirming campus-climate environment appear regularly in the higher education news and social media.

Given the rhetoric of the 2016 election campaign, it has become very clear that “racism still exists and can appear” on university campuses according to racial-equity scholar Harper (2017) in a recent Chronicle of Higher Education article.  “The polarizing nature of the 2016 campaign makes improving the racial climate a more urgent matter for higher-education leaders.”  Once again,this speaks to the opportunity and the need to act and educate.

Education is critical and universities must do their part.  Universities can provide opportunity, programs, space (real and metaphorical) for dialogue, and messages that foster inclusion.   A recent example of a timely message is the address provided by Andy Morikawa (Blacksburg, Virginia) at the December 2016 Virginia Tech Graduate School Commencement.  (Note: his remarks begin at minute 35 on the recording).  Morikawa encouraged us to get involved, get engaged in civic life and community engagement, to be attentive, to listen, to have tough conversations with those who don’t share the same views and to do so regularly in community.

As we know education is a primary mission of higher education and for many universities, research is also a primary mission.  Science, discovery and the search for truth are critical and remain even more so in the post 2016 election era.  Besides ‘teaching citizenship’ and encouraging civil discourse, how do we engage our students with determining facts and uncovering ‘fake news’?  A recent article from Times Higher Education (THE) suggests that it is education not regulation.  Seargeant and Tagg (2016)  wrote that “the heightened need for critical literacy skills in tackling fake news and media manipulation highlights the central role that higher education can play for society as a whole.”  Further, Virgo (2017) writing in Times Higher education suggests that the university must accept its “role as critic and conscience of society”.

In this post-2016 election era, faculty and academic administrators have much to contemplate not only about our defined missions in research, teaching, and engagement but also as critic and conscience of society in accepting the responsibility of the university as a social institution and to do so with “intentional and ethical scholar activism“.

Higher education has the responsibility to be ‘creative’ and innovative in these ‘interesting times’ and to embrace the unknown and act so we can ‘influence the outcomes’.  Let us work individually as well as collectively.

Risk taking and higher education: Not an oxymoron

Words like revolution, transformation and risk-taking are not necessarily common in higher education….until recently.  And I’m delighted to see the change.

“Of the iUse of the univnstitutions that had been established in the Western world by 1520, 85 still exist – Catholic Church, the Parliament of the Isle of Man, of Iceland and of Great Britain, several Swiss cantons, and 70 universities. Of these, perhaps the universities have experienced the least change.” (Kerr 2001, p.115 from The Uses of the University originally published in 1982 by Harvard University press).

As indicated above and common knowledge, universities have been slow to change throughout much of history at least through the 20th century.  But the advancements in technology of the 21st century have definitely precipitated change in almost all aspects of the university.  We have seen changes in the teaching and learning mission.  Research and discovery have expanded due to the use of technology as have the ways in which we disseminate scholarship.  Innovation and entrepreneurship have become common in today’s universities.  And of course, administrative processes and communication strategies sometime bear little resemblance to the past.

Although change is occurring, more is needed.  Many books have been written, op-ed pieces published and reports issued about the status of higher education today.  Once such report entitled “An Avalanche is Coming” offered the following:pub-avalanche-130305_10432.693d2106

“Our belief is that deep, radical and urgent transformation is required in higher education as much as it is in the school systems.  Our fear is that, perhaps as a result of complacency, caution or anxiety, or a combination of all three, the pace of change is too slow and the nature of change too incremental” (March 2013, p. 3)

If the “pace of change too slow and nature too incremental”, the leadership for the 21st century universities must be willing to challenge the status quo and take risks.   We must be “futurisktic“.  In that blog (2013), I wrote:

“Being futurisktic is about change.  It is about embracing risk as an integral aspect of      change.  Risk should not be viewed as a negative but risk taking will likely force us out of our comfort zones.  By doing so, it allows us to acknowledge and embrace the meaningfulness and value of change…. Being futurisktic is about pushing ourselves and pushing the limits as is so wonderfully exemplified in the video entitled the future is ours.”

A recent example of pushing oneself and stretching beyond one’s comfort zone is the article about “From safe spaces to brave spaces” by Brian Arao and Kristi Clemens (2013).  The discussion of moving from “safe” to “brave” spaces has been especially pertinent to social justice and diversity. Several universities (e.g., UMBC, University of Michigan, Berkeley, UCLA, NYU) have initiated programs, dialogue and issued guidelines.  The metaphor of safe to brave should be embraced by university communities and utilized in considering futurisktic ideas and embracing change and institutional transformation.

I realize that change is difficult for some and especially in higher education where the culture tends to reinforce caution and the status quo.  As stated in “An Avalanche is Coming”, higher education needs transformation and individual leaders who can help lead the way.  “Ethical Ambition: Living a Life of Meaning and Worth” by Derrick Bell (2002) provides some guidance for these leaders toward this end.  He offers advise for being successful and maintaining a sense of integrity.  His message is simple in that he “urges us to livEthical Ambitione a life of passion, to have the courage to take risks for what we believe in, to rely on our loved ones and out faith for support during hard times, and to have the humility to know when our best intentions go awry” (front cover).

Blogging in graduate education

Blogging has a role in 21st century higher education including graduate education.

Although blogging and blogs have been around for more years, Gardner Campbell (currently Vice Provost for Learning Innovation and Student Success at Virginia Commonwealth University) was on the Virginia Tech faculty and passionately advocated for the use of blogs for the undergraduate students in the VT Residential Honor’s College. In August 2011, he wrote that blogging could “catalyze learning” through the framework of “narrate, curate, and share”.  His efforts inspired me as Vice President and Dean for Graduate Education to establish my own blog and to incorporate blogging in Graduate School administrative activities and more importantly as an integral part of the Transformative Graduate Education (TGE) initiative. (Note: currently we are also engaged in other types of social media [e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LInkedIn] but the focus here is blogging).

For the past several years, blogging-as-pedagogy2blogging has become an integral part of several graduate courses offered within the Graduate School’s Transformative Graduate Education (TGE) initiative including GRAD 5104 Preparing the Future Professoriate, GRAD 5114 Contemporary Pedagogy (GEDI), GRAD 5214 Diversity and Inclusion in a Global Society and GRAD 5014 Ethics and Scholarly Integrity.  Embracing “blogging as pedagogy” in these courses, graduate students are encouraged to “reflect, read, write and share” with their colleagues on topics related to not only preparing the future professoriate but current issues facing higher education.  Although some expressed initial hesitancy to blog and were new to blogging, most of the graduate students became actively engaged with blogging.  Many commented that they enjoyed learning a new skill and found it valuable.  Indeed, blogging is an important aspect of modern learning.

Beyond its use in graduate courses, blogging was introduced to the faculty and graduate students associated with interdisciplinary graduate education at VT specifically through the Interdisciplinary Graduate Education program (IGEPs).  Each IGEP has created a blog that feeds into the “mother blog” hosted on the website which provides the shared space for cross IGEP discussion.  Another example is the use of blogs with the Global Perspectives Program organized through the VT Graduate School.  The “grandmother blog” for the Global Perspectives program gathers and shares blog posts from several “mother blogs” including GPP Switzerland, GPP Chile, GPP alumni, and from the graduate deans experience.  This provides but one example of how individual blogs can feed into a common space for collective reflection on global perspectives and engage colleagues around the world.

Blogs are but one form of communication in today’s academic world.  In sharing and disseminating our scholarship, we have typically used publications (articles, books, exhibits and more) and presentations. Technology used in our connected world allows for other ways of sharing today.  Blogs use a different voice and often reach different audiences in different ways but represent a valuable tool for scholars and practitioners.  Graduate students as the future faculty and career professionals need to gain these skills as part of their graduate degree and preparation for the 21st century workforce.

Learning Revolution

When asked by Bill Moyers in April 1988 “can we have a revolution in learning?”, Issac Asimov responded with “Yes, I think not only that we can but that we must.”  He went on to talk about the time when “once we have computer outlets in every home, each of them hooked up to enormous libraries, where you can ask any question and be given answers, you can look up something you’re interested in knowing”.  Asimov was actually talking about the internet before the internet had become a reality.  And he was talking about the need for educational reform and the need for lifelong learning, learning that was individualized, a learning revolution some 35 years ago.  His message of the late 1980s is as important today as it was then.

hazybluedot
“That’s another trouble with education as we now have it. People think of education as something that they can finish.” — Isaac Asimov
12/29/13 10:01 AM

Did we have a learning revolution in the late 20th century?  Perhaps we could say that some progress has been made but with more needed (that’s for a longer conversation). Although there are many good things happening in learning in schools and higher education, we have yet to realize the full extent and possibilities of the learning revolution.  Sir Kenneth Robinson, in arguing for the learning revolution states emphatically that what is needed is a transformation from the “dogmas of the past” and the “tyranny of common sense”.  In a 2013 TED talk, Robinson spoke eloquently about the three principles “crucial for the human mind to flourish”, creativity and the climate of possibility for education in the U.S.

Robinson and Asimov are but two of the scholars who have argued for educational reform. Although they have often focused on public school education, their messages are very compelling and therefore applicable for higher education as well.  The learning revolution can and should occur at colleges and universities in the United States and around the world.  Some examples are currently underway within the Commonwealth of Virginia including the Office of the Vice Provost for Learning Innovation and Student Success as VCU, the Technology-enhanced Learning and OnLine Strategies (TLOS) at Virginia Tech, and the Transformative Graduate Education (TGE) initiative offered by the VT Graduate School.

Let’s encourage our colleagues to engage our students (undergraduate, graduate), faculty and administrators in conversations about transformation and change for universities for the 21st century and to lead the learning revolution.

 

 

Academic duty

Donald Kennedy, President Emeritus of Stanford University wrote about the responsibilities of faculty in his book entitled Academic Duty (1997).  Kennedy wrote that “academic freedom” was well known but less so “academic duty” due to the “relatively uncodified” (p. vii) understanding of faculty work. He argued that faculty work included the following duties: to teach, to mentor, to serve the university, to discover, to publish, to tell the truth, to reach beyond the walls, and to change. Today, we would likely propose that the work of faculty has expanded to include additional roles including grant writing, fundraising, public relations, global perspective, civility, and building inclusive communities to name a few.

As I reflect on these duties, I think we could agree that many of the academic duties (e.g., to teach, to discover, to publish, to serve, to mentor) are well known and accepted among the responsibilities of faculty.  The degree to which these and other duties are evident in the lives of the faculty do vary some depending upon the type of university and type of faculty position but they are what we can expect when hired as a tenure track faculty member.  But they do represent the core of faculty work.

Two of the duties deserve additional comment – “to tell the truth” and “to change”. The academic duty of “to tell the truth” has become increasingly more important especially in the context of almost daily reports of research misconduct, plagiarism, and other examples of lapses in professional and scholarly ethics in higher education.  The availability of entities such as the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and official ethics guidelines and training programs through National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) have brought greater attention to and scrutiny of scholars and their scholarly work and sometimes professional and even personal lives.  Online academic news sources especially the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Education, World University News regularly provide news and updates on cases of academic misconduct and of course, social media including twitter (e.g., ORI twitter) helps disseminate information.  Professional codes of conduct and ethical guidelines exist in many academic disciplines and are often incorporated into the professional development of the future faculty.

“To change” is the second academic duty to be highlighted here.  It has been said that universities are slow to change and those of us who have been in higher education for some time would likely agree.  But I would argue that universities and therefore faculty have a responsibility to change, to grow and to challenge ourselves to continue to be meaningful and relevant today and for the future.  Universities are social institutions and therefore have a responsibility to society, including a global society.  Higher education has been challenged by the technological advancements and the rapid rate of change. One need only to consider the development of the internet and the surprising speed of the transition from Web 1.0 to 2.0 and the most recent development of the MOOC and its impact upon higher education. Institutions of higher learning have yet to realize the full extent of these developments. If we are open to it, MOOCs will help us understand more about learners and learning and they can challenge us to think differently about how we provide opportunities for acquiring and disseminate knowledge.  These are but two examples about how we must engage with change and prepare the faculty (and future faculty) to change and to be changed.

 

Language is important

The language that we use is important especially the words and what they imply.  We know this and we can cite many different examples.  I will offer only one perspective that resulted from my readings about faculty in higher education recently.  Not surprisingly, I regularly read the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Education and other similar venues about higher education.  My comments which follow are not a criticism of these publications but should be viewed as a commentary about how we in the academy continue to use familiar words and phrases that while accurately portraying a current situation do therefore perpetuate these notions as if they are “fact” and can’t be changed in the future. Two examples follow.

The first of two phrases that I read and hear colleagues use is the “two body problem”.  These words are commonly used to describe the situation in which two individuals (e.g., spouses or partners), or at least one of these individuals, seek faculty positions in higher education.  Since the 1980s, words like spousal hire, partner accommodation, and more recently dual career hires have been used.  An underlying assumption was that this was a “challenge” or “problem”.  I agree (and have argued favorably on numerous occasions) that indeed higher education needed to become aware of and proactively address the fact that increasingly so couples desire career opportunities for each individual and therefore, often two faculty positions. This phenomenon has increased over time and has become a reality facing higher education.  And thus rather than call it “the two body problem” which immediately casts the situation negatively as a problem, perhaps we could use language that reflects a positive attitude and encourages action.  The message sent and received is very different if we change “problem” to “opportunity”.  Inside Higher Education has made positive strides forward in this arena through the featuring “dual career” couples (reflecting via photos a full range of diversity) and their opportunities to seek dual careers as evident on their website.  This sends a message that two careers are possible rather than a problem.

The second phrase and one that is relatively new is “the baby penalty“.  Dr. Mason (former Graduate Dean at UC Berkeley and current faculty member) and her colleagues have studied and authored a recent book in an attempt to answer the question of whether or not babies matter.  Their research shows that babies do matter and make a difference in the lives of female academics.  Honestly, I don’t find this surprising because I think intuitively we know that having babies and raising children does impact one’s lives and more so for females than the males.   While the data do support a “negative” impact upon the female faculty member in a traditional sense of academy, the data are also a reflection of the way higher education is currently structured and not the way that it could be.  Families and babies should not be referred to as a “penalty”.  In the Chronicle of Higher Education article, Mason stated that it is time to “… demand family policies that will at least give them a fighting chance to have both a successful career and babies.”  University leaders could use the data to insist that higher education actually make structural changes and more fully embrace families and work-life balance in our colleges and universities.  This truly is an opportunity and perhaps a mandate for change.  Let’s begin by modifying our words because language is important.

 

Wilhelm von Humboldt, the PhD and the modern research university

Recent conversations at multiple venues have prompted me to reflect on Wilhelm von Humboldt, the Doctor of Philosophy degree and the evolution of the modern research university.  First, the Swiss higher education system and the routine acknowledgement of Humboldt ‘s influence were discussed during the Input Seminar for the UniBasel Global Perspectives Program (March 18-19, 2013).  Two days later in Dublin at the EUA-CDE Global Forum on Doctoral Education (March 20-22), the topics of conversation included the evolution of doctoral education in Europe and the increasing emphasis on research in doctoral education (PhD).  During the last few class sessions of GRAD 5104 Preparing the Future Professoriate, our discussions focused on global higher education and several international students shared an overview of the higher education systems from their home countries.  This provided the opportunities to reflect on the historical perspective of higher education and their influences on universities around the world.  At the March meeting of the 2013 VT Global Perspectives Program, we discussed terminology and the similarities and differences to understand better the evolution of global higher education and the universities that we will visit in May.  And finally as I read through selected blog posts from GRAD 5104 and GPP Switzerland I pondered the themes of these ‘conversations’ and realized the underlying but un-articulated interconnectedness of the 21st century research university, the evolution of the PhD and the influence of Humboldt.  Humboldt, the German university and the man, are frequently referenced in discussions about the university in Europe but less so in the United States although his influence is part of U.S. history as well.

WilhelmvonHumboldt.jpg

Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) was a 19th century philosopher, a Prussian diplomat, and an early ‘architect’ of national education including the ‘university’.  He is well known throughout Europe as the founder of the University of Berlin in 1810. Within a relatively short period of time, the University of Berlin (Humboldt) would soon became a model for 19th century European universities and ultimately would influence the development of U.S. universities. In recognition of Humboldt’s influence in shaping the modern university, the university was renamed Humboldt University of Berlin in 1949. The name of Humboldt reflects both Wilhelm’s contributions and those of his brother Alexander, a famous geographer and explorer.

Wilhelm von Humboldt espoused the view that the university should be a community of scholars and students.  In this ‘Humboldtian’ university, teaching and research were interconnected and vital to the work of the individual scholar.  Although important to advancement of knowledge and integral to the university’s mission, research was thought by Humboldt to be ‘ancillary to teaching’.  This notion persisted until the 20th century when research would finally be recognized as a ‘vital entity in itself’ thus setting the stage for the further development and prominence of the modern research university.

During the recent European University Association (EUA) – Council on Doctoral Education (CDE) Global Strategic Forum on Doctoral Education in Dublin, the PhD was described historically as a ‘license to teach’.  This makes sense when one considers that the original purpose was to prepare scholars to teach in universities.  For many years, the doctoral degree required advanced scholarship but not original research.  And once Wilhelm von Humboldt entered the discussions, the strong link between teaching and research was made that would change the university.  As the value of research expanded and the desire for original research increased throughout the last century, the Doctor of Philosophy degree changed and the PhD is recognized as a research degree worldwide.

The modern research university will continue to evolve and an emphasis on research will remain.  But the conversations about doctoral education must also continue about the importance of teaching and learning, the preparation for careers outside higher education, and the engagement between the university and society.  These conversations are happening within EUA-CDE regularly and will continue in the Future Professoriate graduate course (GRAD 5104) and especially the VT-UniBasel Global Perspectives Program.  I look forward to the ongoing dialogue.