Category Archives: Academia

How Double Majors Can Ruin Your Life: Two Arguments for Doing Less

How Double Majors Can Ruin Your Life: Two Arguments for Doing Less

via calnewport.com

Thanks to Adam for pointing me to the blog, Study Hacks. Many good posts. They are primarily aimed at the student crowd, which I’m slowly putting behind me. The advice is really good and this particular post hit close to home.

I’m a double major in Language Education and Instructional System Technology and Indiana University. The decision to do this has made my life miserable. For years, people contacted me about doing the same thing. When ask that question, I respond, “DON’T DO IT!!” They are often surprised when I say it, but they understand better when I explain.

First, a double major means that you serve two masters. In a PhD program, this will work against you at every turn. You are already immersing yourself in the literature and culture of the field. This is difficult enough for one field, but in two? It’s impossible to keep up. You are always going to be behind.

Second, you will either end up ignore one group or the other. This will make forming relationships with your classmates and professors very difficult. The culture in departments doesn’t really allow for this. You will not get the full benefit of immersing yourself in a single group and this will affect you personally, but more so professionally, in the years to come.

Third, everything will take longer to do. More courses, more projects, more reading, more writing, more hassle. Your classmates will pass you by and you’ll be that old guy that’s been in the department for longer than many of the professors.

It’s too late for me. I’m nearly done. I’ve gone to far. It may not be too late for you. Stick with a single major and do it well. If you have other interests, do a minor or just take classes. After you graduate, you can do any kind of research that you want to do. You’ll have no class requirements or professors pushing you to go one direction or another. You’ll be free to explore.

DON’T DO A DOUBLE MAJOR

Academics leave your ivory tower: form communities of practice (should read – Stop trying to impose community)

Academics leave your ivory tower: form communities of practice 

Authors:
Sheryl Buckleya; Adeline Du Toitb

Abstract

Institutions of higher education (HE), public and private, are moving through a crisis period of tapped-out states, funding cuts, tuition increases and layoffs. It makes good sense to rise to meet these new realities with new ways of doing things, and the places that succeed will be the ones that do. A holistic approach is necessary whereby excellence in teaching and learning as well as research should be the ultimate aim. Among the various ways to achieve this, is the promotion of communities of practices (CoPs) among the academics. Therefore, CoPs are to be seen as an “extension” of any programme to achieve excellence, because as it has been shown it is the sharing of the tacit knowledge that makes the difference in any organisation in its pursuit for a competitive advantage. An HE institution should be considered to be at a greater advantage than any other non-academic organisation since each staff member is a knowledge worker whose mission is to transmit, create and incorporate new knowledge to the existing knowledge. This paper looks at the possible reasons preventing academics from participating in a CoP. It will be shown that CoPs can play a very important role in a university set-up.

Keywords:

higher education;
knowledge sharing;
communities of practice;
universities
via informaworld.com

I couldn’t grab the full-text for this one. From the description in the abstract, though, I’d say that the problem is simple. CoPs form not at the behest of an organization, but through the nurturing of its members. The members must find value in their participation, both in full members and peripheral members.

Now, let’s consider academics. Most departments hire faculty not for their similarities but for their differences. They want diversity in their programs. In doing so, these academics share only the same general area of interest. This simply isn’t good enough for active CoPs membership. They want people who can help them and understand them in their specialties. This is way that join and participate in organizations and, even more so, special interest groups inside of organizations.

Now, you may say, “but they are all teachers.” To that I’d respond, “Not really.” Many academics teach in order to do research. They might even teach because they want to focus their own theories and understandings of topics in the field (how many seminars are professors checking out new areas of research?). Teaching is not necessarily what they are interested in practicing.

However, it is true that if there is a common area to be found, it is likely in teaching methods or the localized practice of teaching. Again, though, I have to ask how the university will develop a CoP based on this when there are so many established ones outside of the university.

When they say that academics should leave their ivory tower, I think they should be advocating that they leave their universities. When the world is your potential network, a closed intranet have to offer something really special to keep you inside.

Endangering education – Great, brief commentary on academic inbreeding

Living things that pursue completeness prefer crossbreeding. Even primordial cells knew this. Instead of blocking germs that threatened to infiltrate them, the cells sought co-existence and co-prosperity with them. Today, the mitochondria in our somatic cells provides evidence of this phenomena. Even if we humans do not consciously choose crossbreeding, our instinct for it is certainly in our DNA.

The same principle applies to education, where academic inbreeding decreases competitiveness for both students and schools. Educational institutions that succumb to this problem fail to keep up with current trends, which is why Ivy League universities in the United States often hire from outside their ranks.

via joongangdaily.joins.com

While academic in-breeding goes well beyond simply being at the same school, this is a significant problem.

These professors primarily graduate from a SKY university and then do their graduate studies abroad. This certainly lessens the damage of in-breeding. However, this also ignores the cadres of qualified, talented applicants who happened to either bloom later or thrive in other environments. It is a terribly short-sighted.

Schumpeter: Declining by degree | The Economist

Declining by degree

Will America’s universities go the way of its car companies?

Sep 2nd 2010

FIFTY years ago, in the glorious age of three-martini lunches and all-smoking offices, America’s car companies were universally admired. Everybody wanted to know the secrets of their success. How did they churn out dazzling new models every year? How did they manage so many people so successfully (General Motors was then the biggest private-sector employer in the world)? And how did they keep their customers so happy?

Today the world is equally in awe of American universities. They dominate global rankings: on the Shanghai Ranking Consultancy’s list of the world’s best universities, 17 of the top 20 are American, and 35 of the top 50. They employ 70% of living Nobel prizewinners in science and economics and produce a disproportionate share of the world’s most-cited articles in academic journals. Everyone wants to know their secret recipe.

via economist.com

There are some great points in here. However, this doesn’t really address the downfall of universities as much as it does point to restructuring. The former is unlikely, the latter is a sure thing.

I do like how they focus on the perils of tenure, not the part that assures employment, but the path for getting there. Too much focus is put on the research and too little on innovative teaching.

Nowhere is this more true than in Education departments. It’s time for large university education schools to consider whether an article in an SSCI journal is worth more than a semester of engaged teaching and learning. Now, it is.

A long struggle for part-time lecturers

A long struggle for part-time lecturers


Kim Young-kon, left, and his wife Kim Dong-ay pose with a foreign supporter from Hong Kong in front of their tent pitched on a sidewalk near the National Assembly in Seoul, in March. / Courtesy of Kim Young-kon

Couple lives in tent for 1,000 days in protest

By Park Si-soo
Staff reporter

For 1,000 days, a couple in their 60s has lived in a worn-out, small tent pitched on a sidewalk leading toward the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, demanding the passage of bills to improve part-time lecturers’ employment status and working conditions.

via koreatimes.co.kr

Another article on part-time lecturers’ struggles in Korea. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, DON’T BECOME A PROFESSOR!!

This is a great job if you can get it. It is becoming more and more unlikely that you will, though. Go make your way in the content fields and then come to teaching once you have made your mark (and some money) in your content area.

Employers hiring fewer full-time workers, more contractors – trend began in higher ed quite a while ago

Say goodbye to full-time jobs with benefits

goodbye_jobs.gi.top.jpgMany people looking for work are having trouble finding the traditional full-time job with benefits.

By Chris Isidore, senior writerJune 5, 2010: 11:12 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Jobs may be coming back, but they aren’t the same ones workers were used to.

Many of the jobs employers are adding are temporary or contract positions, rather than traditional full-time jobs with benefits. With unemployment remaining near 10%, employers have their pick of workers willing to accept less secure positions.

In 2005, the government estimated that 31% of U.S. workers were already so-called contingent workers. Experts say that number could increase to 40% or more in the next 10 years.

via money.cnn.com

This started long ago in higher education. Lots of contract workers (given nicer monikers, like adjunct professor, or simply graduate students). The reality is, if you don’t distinguish yourself, you’re going to have to schlep to half jobs. You’re more likely to get ahead if you do something you’re passionate about.

Why Do Korean Universities Lag Behind Hong Kong’s? – And then some of my reasons

Why Do Korean Universities Lag Behind Hong Kong’s?

The University of Hong Kong was named the best university in Asia for the second straight year in a study by the Chosun Ilbo and Quacquarelli Symonds of 448 universities in 11 Asian countries. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology came second and Chinese University of Hong Kong fourth.

But in Korea, Seoul National University was the only one to make it into the top 10, ranking in sixth place. Hong Kong has a population of 7 million, a mere seventh of Korea’s, but when it comes to the competitiveness of universities, Hong Kong does far better than Korea.

The government of Hong Kong provides financial support to eight universities through a funding committee affiliated with the education ministry. The size of the support depends strictly on performance, which prompts universities to compete to attract the best faculty and students and to improve the quality of their education and research. At the University of Hong Kong, 56 percent of faculty and 31 percent of students are foreigners from 80 countries. Using English as the preferred language of education, the university manages to draw the best academics in each field. At its engineering faculty, 96 percent rank among the top one percentile group in the ISI (Information Sciences Institute) ranking of most cited research papers.

via english.chosun.com

First, I have to question how these universities are ranked. I’ve yet to see anything about data collection and analysis, but I’m weary of any of these rankings.

This is a good, surface-level analysis, but it ignores some of the reasons why Hong Kong universities can attract these high-performing faculty.

1. HK Uni’s pay for these folks. Real salaries (with benefits) are around double of those in Korea.

2. HK is simply more foreigner-friendly (primarily European/North American) than Korea. Heck, it was a British protectorate for a 100 years and this is obvious when visiting the city.

3. HK Uni’s offer research release time. Translation, not as much teaching leaves time for more research.

4. Lastly, HK Uni’s attract mid-/end-of-career professors who are looking for new opportunities (travel, research, weather, etc.) and the high salaries mentioned in #1 make this an easier transition. Can you imagine one of these professors coming to Seoul with a middle/high school aged kid and a spouse for $80,000/yr (humanities)? Before you say, that’s not too bad, think about the high cost of housing, of shopping (clothes and food), and..oh yeah… $25,000/yr for international school tuition and fees. Forget about it. Not going to happen.

There are also some things that I’m not sure about. They may be different and they may not be.

1. Korean universities, while ruled from above (hierarchical), are run like fiefdoms. There is very little central planning focused on standardizing student/faculty experiences: classroom equipment, technology infrastructure, and faculty/staff training (for a few examples). This not only effects student experiences (and thus evaluations), but also faculty productivity. This lack of standardization results in extra planning time and loss of opportunities to streamline their teaching and class management. This also tends to result in over-lapping documentation requirements due to the fractured nature of the organizations.

2. Heavier teaching loads result in less time for good quality research. This leads to more publications in lower-ranked journals. It’s easier and faster to write 2 mediocre articles and publish in non-SSCI journals than it is to write 1 high-quality article and publish in an SSCI journal. This is a general problem throughout academia, but it seems particularly problematic here, especially considering most schools have tenure systems that actually take 10 years. That means that pre-tenure professors are struggling to publish about 2-4 articles/yr (depending on school) for nearly 10 years. Talk about burn out. Unless they can be assured of meeting their minimums, they have a hard time shooting for SSCI pubs that can take 2 years to actually get published. By then, they are looking for a new job 🙁

I’m not really down on Korean universities, particularly the top-tier ones. They are doing quite well in the science and technology areas. They do seem to be  able to both staff from within and recruit from abroad. As with most large organizations, universities must continuously strive to both take care of their existing customers (students) and innovate to attract new customers and employees. If they ignore one group, it will hurt both the satisfaction of existing and the recruitment of new faculty and students.  This is what, in the long run, will help universities improve and even do well in these stupid popularity contests.

An essay on the impact of the digital age on scholarship and institutions

Daniel Craig Wrote:
Richard Katz is always an interesting read on the relationship between information technologies and the scholarly enterprise. As with the other essays, he does not provide a design or plan for the organization of scholarly activities, although he does suggest some principles or issues that academic institutions will need to address if they are survive in the digital age, which I greatly oversimplify below:

* the branding of higher education will be essential – but probably not ‘campus-focused’ branding
* the formulation of a general educational philosophy that also helps to distinguish scholarship from other forms of information or knowledge management
* an alignment around academic standards
* a consensus on the institution’s footprint, which may not be geographical, but will be distinctive and easily recognizable
* flexibility in the design and delivery of its academic activities, processes and services
* the need to be a global ‘citizen’, i.e., engaged at a global level

Katz, R. (2010) Scholars, Scholarship, and the Scholarly Enterprise in the Digital Age Educause Review, Vol. 45. No. 2, pp. 44-56

It is always interesting to peek over the fence to see what the neighbours are up to. I’m sitting here in Canada just across the border, watching the good citizens of the United States going through the angst of self-criticism about their higher education system, although occasionally, Canadians such as Don Tapscott, Stephen Downes, George Siemens and myself will occasionally join the battle, partly for fun, and partly because the outcome will eventually affect our own much more slowly moving – and less self-critical – institutions in Canada.

Katz’s is another essay that tries to grapple with the potential effects of the digital age on the university, somewhat similar to those by Anya Kamenetz and Tapscott and Williams. However, the Katz essay is much more interesting and substantial, because he examines how a core function of the university, scholarship, is being affected by the digital age, and from there, he looks at the implications for the institutional framework that supports (or could support) scholarship in a digital age. In particular, he questions the whole concept of place that is at the heart of traditional universities, and its necessity for scholarship in a digital age.

Richard Katz is always an interesting read on the relationship between information technologies and the scholarly enterprise. As with the other essays, he does not provide a design or plan for the organization of scholarly activities, although he does suggest some principles or issues that academic institutions will need to address if they are survive in the digital age, which I greatly oversimplify below:

* the branding of higher education will be essential – but probably not ‘campus-focused’ branding
* the formulation of a general educational philosophy that also helps to distinguish scholarship from other forms of information or knowledge management
* an alignment around academic standards
* a consensus on the institution’s footprint, which may not be geographical, but will be distinctive and easily recognizable
* flexibility in the design and delivery of its academic activities, processes and services
* the need to be a global ‘citizen’, i.e., engaged at a global level

Comments

While these discussions about the digital age and its impact on higher education are interesting and fun they do seem to be somewhat divorced from the day-to-day practicalities students and faculty are facing. Certainly speaking from a Canadian perspective, what Katz and the others are intelligently anticipating still seems far from the reality of everyday life in our universities and campuses. In particular the deadening hand of organizational culture stifles even the hint of innovation in teaching and learning in most institutions, at least here in Canada. So maybe they are doomed, but not for a while yet.

What seems to be shaking up the thinking in the USA is the financial crisis, particularly in states such as California and New York, and the ever-growing cost of higher education to those that directly use the system, through increasing tuition fees.

In Canada, we are not (yet) seeing the same pressures and angst. Even in a province with a $20 billion deficit (Ontario), the government continues to increase its spending in real terms on post-secondary education, in the belief that it will generate new business and jobs that will help clear the deficit (will Ontario become Canada’s Greece?). As anxious as I am to see change in our institutions, I’m not sure I want it to be the result of desperately responding to a crisis, because the students in particular are likely to suffer, at least in the short term. I would though like to see government spending more closely linked to innovation and change in our institutions, but few politicians seem to be up to that battle here in Canada.

What I liked about Richard Katz’s article (unlike those of Tapscott and Kamenetz) is that he doesn’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. He recognizes the value of the core functions of universities, but is seeking to find a way to foster and protect them and at the same time make them relevant in a rapidly changing world. For this reason, I strongly recommend the article to all those who want to find a way to change our universities without destroying them.

References

Kamenetz, A. (2010) DIY U: Edupunks, Edupreneurs, and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education White River Jct VT: Chelsea Green

Tapscott, D. and Williams, A. (2010) Innovating the 21st century university: It’s Time Educause Review, Vol. 45, No. 1

(see Kamenetz, A. (2010) Adapt or decline Inside Higher Education, March 26)Katz, R. (2010) Scholars, Scholarship, and the Scholarly Enterprise in the Digital Age Educause Review, Vol. 45. No. 2, pp. 44-56

It is always interesting to peek over the fence to see what the neighbours are up to. I’m sitting here in Canada just across the border, watching the good citizens of the United States going through the angst of self-criticism about their higher education system, although occasionally, Canadians such as Don Tapscott, Stephen Downes, George Siemens and myself will occasionally join the battle, partly for fun, and partly because the outcome will eventually affect our own much more slowly moving – and less self-critical – institutions in Canada.

Katz’s is another essay that tries to grapple with the potential effects of the digital age on the university, somewhat similar to those by Anya Kamenetz and Tapscott and Williams. However, the Katz essay is much more interesting and substantial, because he examines how a core function of the university, scholarship, is being affected by the digital age, and from there, he looks at the implications for the institutional framework that supports (or could support) scholarship in a digital age. In particular, he questions the whole concept of place that is at the heart of traditional universities, and its necessity for scholarship in a digital age.

Richard Katz is always an interesting read on the relationship between information technologies and the scholarly enterprise. As with the other essays, he does not provide a design or plan for the organization of scholarly activities, although he does suggest some principles or issues that academic institutions will need to address if they are survive in the digital age, which I greatly oversimplify below:

* the branding of higher education will be essential – but probably not ‘campus-focused’ branding
* the formulation of a general educational philosophy that also helps to distinguish scholarship from other forms of information or knowledge management
* an alignment around academic standards
* a consensus on the institution’s footprint, which may not be geographical, but will be distinctive and easily recognizable
* flexibility in the design and delivery of its academic activities, processes and services
* the need to be a global ‘citizen’, i.e., engaged at a global level

Comments

While these discussions about the digital age and its impact on higher education are interesting and fun they do seem to be somewhat divorced from the day-to-day practicalities students and faculty are facing. Certainly speaking from a Canadian perspective, what Katz and the others are intelligently anticipating still seems far from the reality of everyday life in our universities and campuses. In particular the deadening hand of organizational culture stifles even the hint of innovation in teaching and learning in most institutions, at least here in Canada. So maybe they are doomed, but not for a while yet.

What seems to be shaking up the thinking in the USA is the financial crisis, particularly in states such as California and New York, and the ever-growing cost of higher education to those that directly use the system, through increasing tuition fees.

In Canada, we are not (yet) seeing the same pressures and angst. Even in a province with a $20 billion deficit (Ontario), the government continues to increase its spending in real terms on post-secondary education, in the belief that it will generate new business and jobs that will help clear the deficit (will Ontario become Canada’s Greece?). As anxious as I am to see change in our institutions, I’m not sure I want it to be the result of desperately responding to a crisis, because the students in particular are likely to suffer, at least in the short term. I would though like to see government spending more closely linked to innovation and change in our institutions, but few politicians seem to be up to that battle here in Canada.

What I liked about Richard Katz’s article (unlike those of Tapscott and Kamenetz) is that he doesn’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. He recognizes the value of the core functions of universities, but is seeking to find a way to foster and protect them and at the same time make them relevant in a rapidly changing world. For this reason, I strongly recommend the article to all those who want to find a way to change our universities without destroying them.

References

Kamenetz, A. (2010) DIY U: Edupunks, Edupreneurs, and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education White River Jct VT: Chelsea Green

Tapscott, D. and Williams, A. (2010) Innovating the 21st century university: It’s Time Educause Review, Vol. 45, No. 1

(see Kamenetz, A. (2010) Adapt or decline Inside Higher Education

Original Link: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/tonybates/~3/oaZ5wsvd9KU/

via my6sense
%d bloggers like this: