The
Weekly Blab
Volume
4, Issue 2—October 20, 2009
Please note that there are several embedded
links in case you want to read more on a particular subject.
Good
Stuff This Week:
Lots of good things happened this past
week. Here are some capsule descriptions
of ones that I attended. Apologies if I missed one of yours, but it’s impossible to attend
everything.
The first “non-regalia” Convocation took place
on Tuesday, and was a big success. Prof.
John Palfrey of the Harvard Law School spoke on the subject “Born Digital”, and
discussed a number of interesting ideas about how students from the digital
generation form their “personas”, and what their attitudes are about living in the
digital world. He maintains an online
blog on this subject. There are, no doubt, some important
implications for how students learn, and how we should deliver
instruction. About 400 people attended,
which makes it (I am told) the best attended academic event in SPSU’s
history. Does anyone know if that’s
actually true? Anyway, thanks to Mark Nunes (who did most of the organization of this, including
suggesting and booking the speaker), Nancy Reichert and the Honors students,
and SGA for supporting this effort. The
plan is to have a convocation every semester. Suggestions for future speakers are welcome.
Also on Tuesday, the Scholarship @ SPSU series
hosted Prof. Lili Harvey and Prof. Karen Thompson
(both of Agnes Scott College), speaking about an article that appeared in the
Chronicle called “Maintaining
Your Research Mojo”. Profs. Harvey and Thompson
talked about the difficulties in maintaining a research program at a small
liberal arts college, including lack of staff support, having only one faculty
member in any given research area, lack of high-end equipment, high research
expectations coupled with high teaching and service loads, and other issues
that are also true for SPSU. One of the
more interesting aspects of this talk were how their own attitudes had
changed—they originally “looked down” on older faculty who were no longer as
active in research as they had once been, and said “this won’t happen to
us”. They then saw their own research
trajectory beginning to follow the same path, and started to think about how to
change that. So—it was an interesting
and timely presentation. Thanks to
Bernice Nuhfer-Halten for pulling this together.
Also on Tuesday, a party was held for the ET
department faculty, thanking them for their fine work in
successfully achieving ABET accreditation for the maximum six
years. I can personally attest to the
quality of the chicken fingers, but I skipped the quiche. Thanks to Jeff Ray and his office for
organizing this.
On Wednesday, the Library hosted its annual
Authors Reception. I couldn’t make this
one, but I hear it was a great event that featured an archivist from the
National Archives.
Also on Wednesday, the Alpha Chi Honor Society
had its third induction of new members.
This is another fun activity, though I almost missed it since it got
onto my calendar as happening on Thursday.
Since I have to robe up for this one, I had to borrow Steve Hamrick’s
regalia since I hadn’t brought mine in.
As usual, it was great seeing the students and their parents so proud of
their achievements and dressed up so nicely.
A real highlight is that each student identifies the faculty member who
has had the largest impact on them, and the huge range of faculty who are
chosen. Thanks to Mark Stevens, who
coordinates this activity.
On Wednesday night, I went to the International
Movie presentation, featuring the Iraqi movie “Ten”. Iraj Omidvar (ETCMA) introduced the movie, which was about the
lives of women in Iran as shown by a series of ten vignettes taking place in a
car being driven around by the lead actress.
By a very strange coincidence, just as I got home I received an email
from my sister containing an article about the origins of the name “Szafran”. This
article says that the name derives from the spice saffron, which in turn comes
from the Persian city of Zafaran. So, way back in history, my family may have
come from Persia.
On Thursday, the Construction Management held
its annual fundraising dinner at the Cobb Galleria. I’ve been to this several times over the past
years, and it is always great to see the various grads and industry folks who
come and speak so highly of the CM program.
Money raised from the dinner goes for student scholarships and to
support faculty research activities.
Regent Tucker (from the BoR) was the
speaker. I won a week at Pawley Island,
South Carolina at the silent auction, which is the same place that my backyard
hammock is from.
On Friday, no events. What’s up with that? Again, sorry if I missed
your particular event. I’m sure
it was great!
Issue to
Consider: Higher Education and
Manufacturing Automobiles
Ah, October is here, and this is the season of
educational analogies. Several articles
have appeared in the press as of late, on the subject of how higher education
must change and using the example of what has happened to American automakers
as the reason we must change. The
argument goes something like this:
American automakers were once the envy of the world, and held 80% of the
domestic market, but their success carried the seeds of their future
failure—their inability to change and adapt to new realities caused them to
fall to today’s dire levels. American
higher education is currently the envy of the world, but if it doesn’t change
to reflect current fiscal realities, it too will fall to the same sad fate.
One version of this appeared in Newsweek,
written by Senator Lamar Alexander (R, Tennessee). His primary solution is that universities
should help students complete college in three
years. There are several variations of
this idea that have become popular in Georgia and elsewhere, including Early
Colleges and Joint Enrollment. In this
article, the colleges used as examples haven’t done anything to change their
curricula—they have a three-year option where students can take additional
credits in the summer session and in January term (a three-week session common
at private colleges). The students thus
take 40 credits a year, and therefore earn their 120 credits in three
years. Such programs have been around
for many years and some students have taken advantage of them. Nationwide, however, the majority of students
are taking longer to graduate for a variety of reasons—the average length is
now over six years.
Another version of this is in the Chronicle
of Higher Education, written by Hamid Shirvani, the President of California State
University—Stanislaus. The California
State system has taken a big hit in financing by the state (which itself is
deep in the red), and have been forced to reduce their enrollments by tens of
thousands. Shirvani
argues that we have to look at the entire higher education enterprise, and rid
ourselves of the “culture of entitlement” that faculty, students,
administrators, parents, etc., have fallen privy to. Among Shirvani’s
conclusions are that “employees in higher education must become more
productive”, “productivity measures should be applied in all areas”, “we should
re-evaluate the notion that large classes are inherently pedagogically
unsound”, “for professors to teach more and do less governance and committee
work”, to “focus more on degree completion” by “paying more attention to
student success and seeking more and better ways [to] support and guide
students”, to “re-examine the teacher/scholar model”, and to not “overlook the
ever-increasing specialization of graduate programs, in which professors
happily replicate students in their own, often narrow, interests, focusing on
limited knowledge”. He notes that the
taxpayers must do their share, but then says “the only way that we can persuade
them to invest in higher education is to demonstrate our commitment to
efficiency, openness, and accountability”.
The automobile manufacturer analogy strikes me
as flawed in a number of respects—foreign universities aren’t about to invade
our markets (though online universities already have), and I don’t think we’re
delivering a form of education that the “consumer” doesn’t want or need—quite
the opposite—the world is adopting our model.
Also, there aren’t just three “manufacturers” of higher education—there
are 6,000. Most important of all,
education isn’t a commodity like a car—it is a much more subtle, intellectual
experience. Still, both articles make
the not so subtle point that we can count on the state for less money (on a
percentage basis) in the future, as tax revenues will be down and people won’t
be in the mood or have the capacity to have their taxes raised. Hope that the state legislature (or the
federal government) will come through with additional money to restore the last
few years of cuts is probably a lost hope.
Despite the harsh tone of the Shirvani
article, a focus on degree completion and seeking better ways to support and
guide students is both a real imperative and the right thing to do. Becoming more productive will also be
necessary, which means that we’ll likely have to make some hard decisions collectively
regarding class sizes and formats. While
I’m still optimistic that we’ll be able to do some hiring of new faculty for
next year, doing the full complement seems unlikely. Eventually, revenues will rise and we’ll get
our share, but that is still some time in the future.
Your comments are always welcome.
Issues
to Consider: Graduation Rates
No takers so far on winning the jazz CD for the
best “how to improve graduation rates” suggestion, so the competition is still
open.
Issues
to Consider: Cookies at Harvard Faculty
Meetings
It’s always interesting to see what articles
folks at SPSU respond to. This week’s
big winner was the one about Harvard cutting out cookies at faculty meetings to
save money, which attracted more than a dozen comments. Not too much sympathy was evident for those
ivied halls.
New
Contest:
To win yet another jazz CD, answer the
following three questions:
1) Americans are superstitious of the number
13. What number are Italians
superstitious of, and why?
2) What common word, other than “orange”, has
no word that rhymes with it? Hint—it is
also a color.
3) What is the female equivalent of the word
“fraternal”?