Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Courage ... A Link
I normally do not post OP's (other people's) stuff unless it pertains to the college issues, but here's one on "courage" that I thought was worthwhile. Check the "Heavy Mettle" entry ... dated 5.09.2006.
Monday, May 15, 2006
A university is what a college becomes ...
A university is what a college becomes when the faculty loses interest in students"
John Ciardi
I sometimes wonder if this is not sadly true -- and also wonder why, given the above quote, that in the college system the administration wants to become a "degree-granting" institution (read university). Most faculty recognise the public perception of a college "diploma" is, sadly, much less prestigious as a credential than is a "degree". Yet -- how many degree-d students are unemployable because they do not have the skills set required to do a given job in the workplace? And how many students who already have a university degree are coming to college (because they can't get a job with their degree?)
Why are college "diplomas" so underrated by our management, our students, their parents, and some employers? Might it have something to do with the ways that the colleges have failed to position the value of the education we provide? Or the skills our courses develop? Or is it that our administrators (all university-educated) do not themselves appreciate what a college education can do for students?
Most of my students who have gone on to university over the last 25+ years have consistently achieved equivalent marks to their college marks in their university courses, and have consistently told me that their university courses were no more "difficult" than their college courses, and their grades in university were equivalent to those they received in college. So why are college diplomas, year for year, still seen as inferior to university programs?
On a somewhat different note -- why does our own college administration feel that they must invest an untoward (in my opinion) and exhorbitant amount of $$$ in creating "applied degree" programs, which are, at least at present, failing to attract enrolment -- perhaps for perception reasons as mentioned above -- and therefore are "loss-loser" programs. Also, why are we investing similar large $$$ in "research" areas which attract few, if any, sponsors of research? And as a result, the 2 and 3 year college diploma programs (which are and have always been the bread and butter programs for the colleges) are, like all proverbial cash cows in poorly-managed businesses, being starved to death by being underfunded and under-staffed?
Our latest investment in a new learning management system that insists on a "template" course which all professors will have to use is being sold to faculty as a great advance in a "collaborative" learning system. Sure, it's a nice system. However, those who understand the dynamics of the situation clearly are aware that the next step for the college is to simply take the template course that is now being forced on all faculty, and hire "instructors" (at a much lower pay scale than professors -- because the major difference under the contract is that professors design curriculum and evaluations, whereas instuctors "deliver" this material) and declare them to be instructors, not professors, because they are now provided with a prepared course of instruction ... according to prescribed instructional formats.
"The Instructor classification applies to those teaching positions where the duties and responsibilities of the incumbent are limited to that portion of the total spectrum of academic activities related to the provision of instruction to assigned groups of students through prepared courses of instruction and according to prescribed instructional formats..."
Now do you think that this will foster quality education? Yeah sure it will.
Granted this is a generalization. But it is a view of the future which is supported by a majority of both those managers and faculty that I have talked to who are aware of the budget situation. The move to a "template' course, and the current management move to assigning "lead teachers", to hiring of part-timers rather than full-timers, and to refusing to credit teachers for course development time all lead to the same conclusion. It does not take a genius to make the obvious connections here.
John Ciardi
I sometimes wonder if this is not sadly true -- and also wonder why, given the above quote, that in the college system the administration wants to become a "degree-granting" institution (read university). Most faculty recognise the public perception of a college "diploma" is, sadly, much less prestigious as a credential than is a "degree". Yet -- how many degree-d students are unemployable because they do not have the skills set required to do a given job in the workplace? And how many students who already have a university degree are coming to college (because they can't get a job with their degree?)
Why are college "diplomas" so underrated by our management, our students, their parents, and some employers? Might it have something to do with the ways that the colleges have failed to position the value of the education we provide? Or the skills our courses develop? Or is it that our administrators (all university-educated) do not themselves appreciate what a college education can do for students?
Most of my students who have gone on to university over the last 25+ years have consistently achieved equivalent marks to their college marks in their university courses, and have consistently told me that their university courses were no more "difficult" than their college courses, and their grades in university were equivalent to those they received in college. So why are college diplomas, year for year, still seen as inferior to university programs?
On a somewhat different note -- why does our own college administration feel that they must invest an untoward (in my opinion) and exhorbitant amount of $$$ in creating "applied degree" programs, which are, at least at present, failing to attract enrolment -- perhaps for perception reasons as mentioned above -- and therefore are "loss-loser" programs. Also, why are we investing similar large $$$ in "research" areas which attract few, if any, sponsors of research? And as a result, the 2 and 3 year college diploma programs (which are and have always been the bread and butter programs for the colleges) are, like all proverbial cash cows in poorly-managed businesses, being starved to death by being underfunded and under-staffed?
Our latest investment in a new learning management system that insists on a "template" course which all professors will have to use is being sold to faculty as a great advance in a "collaborative" learning system. Sure, it's a nice system. However, those who understand the dynamics of the situation clearly are aware that the next step for the college is to simply take the template course that is now being forced on all faculty, and hire "instructors" (at a much lower pay scale than professors -- because the major difference under the contract is that professors design curriculum and evaluations, whereas instuctors "deliver" this material) and declare them to be instructors, not professors, because they are now provided with a prepared course of instruction ... according to prescribed instructional formats.
"The Instructor classification applies to those teaching positions where the duties and responsibilities of the incumbent are limited to that portion of the total spectrum of academic activities related to the provision of instruction to assigned groups of students through prepared courses of instruction and according to prescribed instructional formats..."
Now do you think that this will foster quality education? Yeah sure it will.
Granted this is a generalization. But it is a view of the future which is supported by a majority of both those managers and faculty that I have talked to who are aware of the budget situation. The move to a "template' course, and the current management move to assigning "lead teachers", to hiring of part-timers rather than full-timers, and to refusing to credit teachers for course development time all lead to the same conclusion. It does not take a genius to make the obvious connections here.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
Template Woes, So I've Moved
I now know better than to try and change my template. Hey bloggers ... don't even TRY to change your template! Stick with what you got originally or be prepared to open a new blog. (If I get better info on how to do a change of template without blowing out the layout I'll let you know!)Meantime, I'm setting up shop here, so if you want the old posts try The Picket Fence. It's probably better that I start a new blog anyway, I want to expand beyond the original title to deal with all sorts of other issues that affect education in the colleges. For example, the technology issues that face us at our college.
In the last week I have been talking to (or listening to voicemails from!) people who are incredibly frustrated and angry at the way changes in the technology are impacting on the way we are able to do our jobs. Today I had an e-mail from a faculty member who has just heard informally of three changes that will make a significant impact on his/her ability to deliver a course ... but nobody formally told this professor about it. I got the e-mail but I cannot answer his/her questions as the email I got from this person was the first time I had heard of the issues. Talk about mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed *********!) And this is typical.
In the last week I have been talking to (or listening to voicemails from!) people who are incredibly frustrated and angry at the way changes in the technology are impacting on the way we are able to do our jobs. Today I had an e-mail from a faculty member who has just heard informally of three changes that will make a significant impact on his/her ability to deliver a course ... but nobody formally told this professor about it. I got the e-mail but I cannot answer his/her questions as the email I got from this person was the first time I had heard of the issues. Talk about mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed *********!) And this is typical.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
