[Last Monday and
Tuesday I had the honor of being invited to attend Rice University’s De Lange Conference IX as a Social Media Fellow, helping to create
conversations about and around the conference theme (“Teaching in the
University of Tomorrow”) and talks. It was a wonderful experience, and I wanted
to follow it up this week with posts on a number of the issues and ideas I
encountered there. Whether you attended as well, followed on
Twitter, or just have thoughts on any of these topics, I’d love to hear
from you!]
On three provocative
questions raised by the conference’s keynote addresses (not including Ruth
Simmons’, about which I blogged yesterday). To be clear, I don’t have any
answers to any of today’s questions, but I wanted to make sure to highlight
them here, so we can all continue to think about them!
1)
What we
can learn from MOOCs?: All of Tuesday’s
keynotes (by Anant Agarwal, Kevin Guthrie, Daphne Koller, and David
Pritchard) focused on one or another aspect of MOOCs, the
open-access online courses that have become such a central part of 21st
century higher education. I’ll admit that I have considered MOOCs entirely as
an alternative to, and thus competition for, traditional universities. But all
of these speakers argued for versions of the opposite, that instead we can and
must learn from MOOCs, find ways to make some of their work part of ours,
bridge the gap between these two modes. If you’ve taken or taught a MOOC, and/or
otherwise have any thoughts on whether and how we might connect these modes, I’d
love to hear them!
2)
How do
administrations and faculties best work together?: Many of our speakers
were current or former university presidents: José Antonio Bowen, William
Bowen, Nancy Cantor, George Rupp, and Ruth Simmons. So it’s probably no
surprise that a frequent topic was shared governance, and more specifically the
challenges that such governance (especially as it often plays out) seems to
present to changing, reforming, and improving universities. It’s fair to say
that all of the speakers called upon faculty to accept changes to such models
in one way or another, although with greatly varied emphases (William Bowen’s
the most overtly critical of faculty inaction and intransigence, for example).
I understand that position, but would also emphasize the need for
administrations to be equally willing to accept changes and new options. What
do you think?
3)
How do we
change external perceptions of higher ed?: The first two questions are
about internal conversations, in one way or another; but I think it’s fair to
say, as many of our speakers did (especially Nancy Cantor in her Monday lunch
address), that addressing increasingly negative external perceptions of higher
ed (especially its costs, but also its separation from the rest of society and
other related issues) presents at least as vital a challenge for the
universities of tomorrow. Cantor focuses specifically on building fuller
connections to and relationships with local communities, which is an
ongoing goal and passion of mine as well. But there’s no one or right
answer for how we impact these perceptions and narratives, I don’t think. So I’d
love to hear some of your thoughts, as with all these questions!
Next follow up
tomorrow,
Ben
PS. So what do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment