Category Archives: Academia

Higher education: The latest bubble? | The Economist

Higher education

The latest bubble?

Apr 13th 2011, 11:50 by Schumpeter

The argument made isn’t great, but I agree overall. The coming bubble is going to messily pop. I see a business rush in the next 20 years not only to offer education, but accreditation.

Imagine businesses that can offer degrees. Students would pay the business for them to work and study at the business. The business could then be accredited so their “education” would be acceptable globally.

Exciting and scary

Open Access Does Not Equal More Citations, Study Finds (via @tonnet)

Open Access Does Not Equal More Citations, Study Finds

April 1, 2011, 4:12 pm

A new study suggests that while open access appears to increase the readership of scholarly articles, it doesn’t increase how often they’re cited.

The study stands in contrast with earlier research that suggested open-access articles were referenced by other scholars more frequently.

Philip M. Davis, a postdoctoral associate in the department of communication at Cornell University, was given access to 36 subscription-based journals produced by seven different publishers. In 2007 and early 2008, he randomly made approximately 20 percent of their articles free.

I find this counter-intuitive, but it’s an interesting finding.

I think that one of the ways that we (academics) can push open publication is to show that it results in a greater number of citations, thus impact factor. If this is the case, authors will favor open journals; thus, open journals will have access to better articles.

If findings like this prove to be accurate, that could frustrate a move to open journals. However, I have to guess that, to a certain extent, it is going to happen regardless.

South Korea Brings in Foreign Professors by the Thousands­—at a Cost

Media_httpchronicleco_fnvwi

This is a good, surface-level look at the issue. I like that it’s not just foreign professor’s whining about Korean academia. I too often hear these complaints. Not that there aren’t things to complain about, but it’s often overdone.

Many of these faculty have come to Korea because employment terms are better than what they can get in their home countries. As they say in the article, pay here is comparable to that in the States for starting professors and for established, tenured professors, it might even be better in some majors.

Many faculty, particularly in the field of English Education and related areas, don’t even have doctorates, which means that they likely wouldn’t be able to find any full-time work at universities in the States. With this in mind, a contract, or even tenure-track positions in Korea are quite tempting.

That being said, Korean universities have a lot of work to do to make their international faculty feel more welcome and part of the university community. At the minimum, there should be a dedicated “foreigner wrangler”. Someone to help translate, linguistically and culturally, is essential not only to acclimate a foreign professor to his/her surroundings, but to simply make them a better, more productive faculty member.

I’m a firm believer that Korean language classes should be mandatory for foreign faculty. This should be part of their contract and can be (though not necessarily so) provided by the university. Putting faculty together in these classes is a great way to build a sense of community and to build support networks that might not otherwise grow.

Lastly, I have to state that foreign faculty are beneficial to Korean universities and vice-versa. One of the commenters on the article provides a great justification of the friction experienced by faculty and Korean hosts. The process of globalization is a process of friction between different expectations, habits, and beliefs. This friction slowly wears away at the differences, resulting in the acceptance of some differences and the rejection of others. It is this process that is taking place at most Korean universities now and will continue for the foreseeable future.

Dissent Magazine – Got Dough? How Billionaires Rule our Schools – A hacket job, but a good one.

via dissentmagazine.org

Barkan certainly has an axe to grind and she grinds it and chops away in this piece detailing her account of educational philanthropists work over the last 10 years.

I have been a critic of many of these reform movements. Most are popular, with great ideas, yet tragic implementations. When I first heard of the Gates Foundation grants I was excited. I was in educational technology which would certainly see a lot of that money and I did (indirectly, of course). However, the projects chosen primarily focused on testing; more so, assessment of the basest nature. These were assessments that flowed from the same standardized tests used for years.

Teacher assessment has seen some more innovative suggestions, but practical implementations more often revolve around these same student test scores. If you judge teachers on how well students test, those teachers are going to prep students for the test. If you think that sounds like a good idea, remember that prepping for the test involves narrow instruction and training on how to take the test. This is not the kind of teaching you want for your kids, I assure you. They often point to Asian countries that did well on PISA. What they don’t indicate is that students in these countries might get as much as 20-40 hrs/wk of tutoring outside of school (or before/after-school programs). In a place like Korea, this can add $1000’s a month to the cost of raising children. Parents do this, and go into debt, with the hope that these kids will get into good schools, get good jobs, and thus support them in their old age. This is simply not the reality in America.

As Barkan brings up, poverty is the #1 determiner of school success. How are you going to get poor families to pony up for extra-curricular programs. Heck, many of these parents hardly see their children in-between their many jobs that just keep food on the table and a roof overhead. Without HUGE infusions of governmental cash, the amount of instructional time seen by students in Asia is an impossibility.

It’s not enough to put huge amounts of money into poorer districts. This only addresses part of the problem. The larger issues is the home. A small part of the problem is a lack of money for educational experiences in the home. A much larger issue, which goes beyond socio-economic status, is the American cultural view of education.

Somewhere along the way, Americans began to think of public schools as synonymous with education. What I mean is that schools become the sole educators. Parents removed themselves from the role of family educators and offloaded this responsibility to the schools. This might have started with reading and math, but it seems to have become all-encompassing, with schools taking on the responsibility of teaching reading, math, science, history, ethics, civics, economics (personal financial management), arts, physical education, cooking, sewing, typing (keyboarding), ………. You get the point. Many of these things were taught in the home, at least partially, in the past. If a parent didn’t take interest in math, it was because their kid was going to work in the mine on his 16th birthday. That was fine and still is, but those jobs are disappearing and those that exist don’t offer the same pay, benefits, or security that they once did. These days, any job/career that will boost folks above the poverty line requires advanced knowledge that goes beyond what can be done in most high schools. This is either going to come from self-/family study, college, or both.

You get the idea. I roam afar in this post. I suggest you check out the original article for a good read.

A follow-up note on prescriptive statements in nonintervention research studies – This is pretty awesome and sad

A follow-up note on prescriptive statements in nonintervention research studies.

Shaw, Shana M.; Walls, Stephen M.; Dacy, Breana Sylvester; Levin, Joel R.; Robinson, Daniel H.

Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol 102(4), Nov 2010, 982-988.
doi: 10.1037/a0020924

Abstract

  1. Robinson, Levin, Thomas, Pituch, and Vaughn (2007) examined 74 articles reporting nonintervention studies (i.e., studies with no researcher-manipulated variables) that appeared in 5 educational journals in 1994. Of these articles, 22 contained prescriptive statements (e.g., if teachers or students did X, then student outcome Y would result). In the present study, we examined 243 journal articles published between 1995 and 2005 that cited any of the 22 earlier studies and found that (a) 25 articles (10%) repeated the prescriptive statement and (b) 411 subsequent articles between 2005 and mid-2008 cited the 25 articles that contained repeated prescriptions, with 1 article alone cited 132 times. Thus, recommendations based on nonintervention research were found, to some extent, to be perpetuated by educational researchers. Implications of these findings for educational researchers and consumers are discussed, as well as future directions for this type of research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

This isn’t something that should surprise any of us. It’s good to see it written up. I think many of us make this mistake either out of ignorance or malice. I’ve heard the logic before, it’s published so I can use it as evidence for my study.

Career Advice: Pay Yourself First (via @jmackr)

The image of professorial perfection typically includes some combination of the following:

  • Super-Teacher who performs transformative and inspiring teaching every day in the classroom, grades extensive writing assignments with ease and quick turnaround, and answers all student e-mails with rapid efficiency..
  • Super-Colleague who is central to the functioning of the department, provides immediate and insightful reviews of colleagues’ work, attends all functions, and whose departmental labor nobody could live without.
  • Super-Researcher who challenges existing paradigms and shatters disciplinary boundaries with brilliant and prolific research.
  • Super-Role Model who serves as a mentor, confidante, adviser, and/or shining example for all students of color and/or women.
  • Super-Institutional Change Agent who serves on every search committee, diversity committee, and/or any committee needing “diverse perspectives” and who works to change longstanding structural problems within their institution single-handedly.
  • Super-Community Activist whose research directly impacts social problems, regularly attends community meetings, and/or is actively working for justice outside the university walls.

PRIORITIZE AND PAY YOURSELF FIRST!

The first three expectations can occur among any tenure-track faculty with a perfectionist streak, but the last three seem to be especially common among underrepresented faculty. In other words, while institutional and community activism may be important to individual majority faculty, they seem to be externally created and internally imposed expectations for faculty who are underrepresented in their disciplines. At some level, when disproportionate requests, expectations, and pressures from others mix with a personal desire to be the professor you never had as an undergraduate or graduate student, the result can be over-working and over-functioning in some areas of your job (service and teaching) while neglecting critically important others (writing and research).

Personally, I have never met a real live Super-Professor and I can’t think of a single person that fits all these criteria at one time! More often, trying to do all of these things simultaneously means that none of them get done well AND it’s easy to get exhausted, angry, and resentful in the process. So in addition to visualizing your career as a book with many chapters, I want to suggest consciously releasing yourself from unattainable expectations.

As we head into the home stretch of the semester, let’s try being gentle with ourselves and acknowledging that it’s impossible to do all of these things at the same time at the highest standard. Instead, try aligning your time with your long-term goals. If your goal is to win tenure at your current institution, then publishing your research needs to be a high priority. Great teaching and great service won’t make up for a lack of research productivity when you are evaluated for promotion and tenure at most institutions. To enable higher research productivity, you may need to lower the bar a bit in other areas of your work life. I am also going to boldly suggest that you symbolically send a message to the universe about the importance of your writing by paying yourself first each day. That means try starting every day with 30-60 minutes of writing.

I know this is easier said than done! Personally, I start each morning thinking about all the things I will be held accountable for that day (client calls, meetings, talks, etc.). My immediate impulse is to do those things first and hope my writing will get done later. But from experience I know that I will have neither the time nor the energy “later” to write. I also know that at some deep level, completing these other tasks first means that I am prioritizing them over my writing. It means that I’m putting everyone else before myself, my writing, and my future. And it means I’m putting seemingly urgent and short-term demands before the truly important activities that will lead to accomplishing my long-term goals.

Instead, I push myself to write first thing in the morning (against my natural tendency) and the result is that I often don’t spend as much time on other tasks as I wish I could. But guess what? Even with less preparation than I would like, everything is fine. Most importantly, writing every day keeps me productive in a way that allows me to have choices about my future. I often feel euphoric after my writing time because I know my overarching agenda is moving forward, I’m intellectually stimulated and bursting with new ideas, and I have made my daily investment in my long term success.

This week, I want to challenge you to do the following:

  • Recommit yourself to 30-60 minutes of writing EVERY DAY this week.
  • Try paying yourself first by writing in the morning before you do any other work or check your e-mail.
  • At the end of the week, ask yourself: How does this feel?
  • If you cannot pay yourself first, patiently and gently ask yourself, Why not?
  • Every time you experience the impulse to be super-professor, stop, look around, and ask yourself: Who else is operating according to this standard?
  • If you still haven’t written your semester plan, it’s not too late.


I hope that this week brings you the strength to pay yourself first, the discipline to write every day, and the joy of investing in your future!

Peace & Productivity,
Kerry Ann Rockquemore

This is something that I really need to do for myself. I need to take time at the beginning of every day for writing. I’ve tried to do this many times, but I’ve generally failed miserably.

What often happens is that I’ll get on the computer and the time suck begins: email, Twitter, Facebook, blogging, phone calls, grading, student/faculty meetings, classes…. At the end of most days, I scratch my head and try to think of what I accomplished. The answer is usually “nothing”.

At least some time at the beginning of each day can get ideas onto paper and organize the jumble that is my brain. Of course, writing isn’t enough. Reading is a big part of what I need to do. I think a mix of reading and writing for an hour at the beginning of each day will make a big difference. I’m going to try it.

%d bloggers like this: