Once in a while we get what we deserve. Thank you to all the students who took the time to fill in the NSSE surveys; to the faculty who help create the engagement; and to the staff who support the whole enterprise. Bravo. The following is from Ken Steele's Academica Top Ten which was posted today.
Trent surpasses provincial average in NSSE: Trent University reports that it has surpassed Ontario results in all 5 survey categories in this year's National Survey of Student Engagement. The university also exceeded the North American average for Level of Academic Challenge and Supportive Campus Environment. 88% of first-year students and 87% of senior-year students surveyed rated their education experience at Trent as either "excellent" or "good," compared to 82% and 77%, respectively, in Ontario and 86% and 85% in North America. 87% of first-year Trent students said they would attend the institution if they could start over again, compared to an average of 85% across Ontario and North America. 82% of senior-year students at Trent affirmed their choice as well, compared to 76% in Ontario and 82% in North America. Trent News Release | Add/Read Comments
Thursday 1 December 2011
Thursday 24 November 2011
Brenda's Top Ten
Today it's a pleasure to host a guest blog from Dr Brenda Smith-Chant, Chair of Psychology. Bravo!
This is an email I received from a prospective student along with my response. My response is somewhat rough (it was quickly written to ensure that my response was rapid), but it articulates my perspective as a Trent Alumni (Undergraduate Class of 1994), faculty member, and a colleague in the Department of Psychology. It is based on our departmental discussions on our OCAV expectations for students and learning. It reflects what we have identified as our ‘value added’ and ‘unique identity’ for our program at Trent. It also encompasses our reflections on how our program fits into our Trent Mission. This is also how we want to properly recruit students.
The email I received:
Hi!
Thank-you for taking the time to email me. What I'd like to do is to figure out if I'm a good fit for your program.
I've read everything I can get my hands on about your psych department. Out of all the Universities that I've seen, it interests me the most. I like the course descriptions and overviews. As well as general vibe of the University.
From a professor's standpoint what do you see in the students that excel that sets them apart?
Thank-you again,
M**
My response:
Dear M**
We are having an open house in Oshawa this Saturday from 10-2. I will be there along with some of our other faculty. I would love to meet you if you can come by.
For fun, here are the top 10 things you can do to ensure that you 'stand out' from the crowd:
10. Sit near the front in lecture. Really. Make sure you go to EVERY lecture. We actually notice people near the front and care about having them there. My best students are usually in the first few rows.
9. Avoid texting, updating your FB status, or watching downloaded Twilight episodes while in class. We really, really hate that.
8. Take notes. According to lots and lots of research, taking lecture notes is highly associated with improved academic performance. It seems to be due to 2 factors: The act of forcing you to process and summarize the content and also preventing passive listening.
7. Ask great questions. Avoid asking questions about things in the syllabus (that’s what we call the course outline we are required to give at the beginning of a course). Know and refer to the syllabus for dates, details and such. Instead, ask questions that reflect you are thinking about the material and trying to make sense of it. In this, there are no 'dumb' questions. Some of the most amazing questions are about trying to sort through a supposedly simple concept.
6. Realize that being 'wrong' is important. Putting up your hand and being right is actually boring for me. When people put up their hand and say something different than expected--as a Prof, I have a teachable moment. There is something I can do to help you work through a concept. As a student--stop worrying about being wrong. Take chances. Make mistakes. Get messy! (Magic School Bus had it right).
5. Take responsibility for your own learning. Got a boring (or less than optimal) prof? Don't expect them to provide YOUR motivation and challenge. Can't understand a concept and find it dull? Find the fascination for yourself. Read about it. Talk about it. There is more to content than just the assigned readings.
4. Be a critical thinker--but this means more than being negative. Examine what you believe and learn. What is the evidence supporting or in conflict with this belief? Be like a thoughtful judge--weigh the evidence and make your own decisions based on a reasoned approach. Be open to new ideas.
3. Make sure that your academic career is balanced. Don't think that we want obsessive students who do nothing but study! Get out and have other interests! Have hobbies--see shows--go dancing! Join clubs and associations--Whatever good clean fun you can have. Learn to balance academics with fun. Your outside interests will sustain you through the difficult times (which there will be) and also help you to become a more interesting person.
2. Make contact with your professors. We hold office hours and often no one comes. Talk to us about an assignment or test. Ask for help. Let us do what is part of our life's work: Mentor you.
and
Number 1: Find your passion and joy and follow it. Put your heart into your work. If you find something interesting, if you find something touching, if you find something enraging--follow it up. Academics is not about learning content (that is just the vehicle for the work). It is about discovering what you need to meet the challenges that you will face all your life. It is about identifying the conditions and resources you need to foster to become the best person you can endeavour to be. It is about finding a way to meet the bar that will be set for you and exceeding expectations. As a professor, my job and my passion is to support my students to excel. I succeed when you succeed. I want all my students to surpass what I am able to accomplish myself. To do this--you need to love what you do. We want you to find your passion.
M**, I know this may not have been what you expected--but it is what I truly believe. It is our philosophy at Trent and in our Department of Psychology. I believe these ideas make Trent unique. I know it is what makes our students some of the top students in Canada.
Brenda Smith-Chant
Chair, Department of Psychology
Trent University
This is an email I received from a prospective student along with my response. My response is somewhat rough (it was quickly written to ensure that my response was rapid), but it articulates my perspective as a Trent Alumni (Undergraduate Class of 1994), faculty member, and a colleague in the Department of Psychology. It is based on our departmental discussions on our OCAV expectations for students and learning. It reflects what we have identified as our ‘value added’ and ‘unique identity’ for our program at Trent. It also encompasses our reflections on how our program fits into our Trent Mission. This is also how we want to properly recruit students.
The email I received:
Hi!
Thank-you for taking the time to email me. What I'd like to do is to figure out if I'm a good fit for your program.
I've read everything I can get my hands on about your psych department. Out of all the Universities that I've seen, it interests me the most. I like the course descriptions and overviews. As well as general vibe of the University.
From a professor's standpoint what do you see in the students that excel that sets them apart?
Thank-you again,
M**
My response:
Dear M**
We are having an open house in Oshawa this Saturday from 10-2. I will be there along with some of our other faculty. I would love to meet you if you can come by.
For fun, here are the top 10 things you can do to ensure that you 'stand out' from the crowd:
10. Sit near the front in lecture. Really. Make sure you go to EVERY lecture. We actually notice people near the front and care about having them there. My best students are usually in the first few rows.
9. Avoid texting, updating your FB status, or watching downloaded Twilight episodes while in class. We really, really hate that.
8. Take notes. According to lots and lots of research, taking lecture notes is highly associated with improved academic performance. It seems to be due to 2 factors: The act of forcing you to process and summarize the content and also preventing passive listening.
7. Ask great questions. Avoid asking questions about things in the syllabus (that’s what we call the course outline we are required to give at the beginning of a course). Know and refer to the syllabus for dates, details and such. Instead, ask questions that reflect you are thinking about the material and trying to make sense of it. In this, there are no 'dumb' questions. Some of the most amazing questions are about trying to sort through a supposedly simple concept.
6. Realize that being 'wrong' is important. Putting up your hand and being right is actually boring for me. When people put up their hand and say something different than expected--as a Prof, I have a teachable moment. There is something I can do to help you work through a concept. As a student--stop worrying about being wrong. Take chances. Make mistakes. Get messy! (Magic School Bus had it right).
5. Take responsibility for your own learning. Got a boring (or less than optimal) prof? Don't expect them to provide YOUR motivation and challenge. Can't understand a concept and find it dull? Find the fascination for yourself. Read about it. Talk about it. There is more to content than just the assigned readings.
4. Be a critical thinker--but this means more than being negative. Examine what you believe and learn. What is the evidence supporting or in conflict with this belief? Be like a thoughtful judge--weigh the evidence and make your own decisions based on a reasoned approach. Be open to new ideas.
3. Make sure that your academic career is balanced. Don't think that we want obsessive students who do nothing but study! Get out and have other interests! Have hobbies--see shows--go dancing! Join clubs and associations--Whatever good clean fun you can have. Learn to balance academics with fun. Your outside interests will sustain you through the difficult times (which there will be) and also help you to become a more interesting person.
2. Make contact with your professors. We hold office hours and often no one comes. Talk to us about an assignment or test. Ask for help. Let us do what is part of our life's work: Mentor you.
and
Number 1: Find your passion and joy and follow it. Put your heart into your work. If you find something interesting, if you find something touching, if you find something enraging--follow it up. Academics is not about learning content (that is just the vehicle for the work). It is about discovering what you need to meet the challenges that you will face all your life. It is about identifying the conditions and resources you need to foster to become the best person you can endeavour to be. It is about finding a way to meet the bar that will be set for you and exceeding expectations. As a professor, my job and my passion is to support my students to excel. I succeed when you succeed. I want all my students to surpass what I am able to accomplish myself. To do this--you need to love what you do. We want you to find your passion.
M**, I know this may not have been what you expected--but it is what I truly believe. It is our philosophy at Trent and in our Department of Psychology. I believe these ideas make Trent unique. I know it is what makes our students some of the top students in Canada.
Brenda Smith-Chant
Chair, Department of Psychology
Trent University
Wednesday 23 November 2011
Cannibals, Divas
I've been thinking a lot lately about the meaning and etymology of the word "collegium". Most dictionaries define the word as a "college" but also--surprisingly--as either a board of officials that administered a commissariat in the former Soviet Union or The College of Cardinals in the Vatican. Signs taken for wonders. I certainly didn't expect the last two definitions. But in a way I shouldn't have been that surprised, given the nature of the academic community. We are both a collective and a hierarchy. We are both/and, and not either/or. We were always a community of scholars who shared certain common goals, and in this sense we were something of a community collective. But as a "vocation" or calling, academia has always had an air of evangelicalism about it and, as such, has always had its share of extraordinary, virtually shamanistic practitioners. Some good (Newman), some not so much (Svengali). As highly complex organizations, moreover, universities have always had political dynamics that at times bordered on both the autocratic and the democratic. Both/and.
What fascinates me in thinking about the contemporary Collegium is, not so much how such noble roots continue to underpin our enterprise, but how often these ancient roots have also, simultaneously, been allowed to wither. I am mesmerized by how many of our founding ideals both persevere, yet have also become corrupted in the 21st-century university. Consider, for example, two founding principles: collectivism and evangelical enthusiasm.
The sense of a collective enterprise with common goals is extraordinarily difficult to sustain in a resource starved environment. The notion of a cooperative where everyone works for the common good can (and has) easily become an individualistic marketplace of competing aspirations and ambitions. There are obvious examples like the high-marks-at-any-cost oriented student, or the erstwhile former colleagues who now fiercely compete for the gold rings of tenure, research fame, or public awards. People on desert islands revert to cannibalism; in lean times academic citizens become territorial, baronial, or at worst, utterly indifferent to the good of the whole. And who can blame a demented Head, driven mad by hunger, who sacrifices the good of the whole for his or her own particular slice of the world? The imperative, then, for all members of the Collegium is to clearly articulate their common goals and directions, and then to demand that we collectively put our money where our mouth is and allocate resources fairly--which does not necessarily mean equally.
Another wrinkle on this notion of an old root persisting, yet simultaneously deforming in its contemporary manifestation, is the notion of being "sacred" or "special". Needless to say, not all university people in the past were saints, but I want to acknowledge how post-secondary participation in the past WAS reserved for an elite body of students taught by an elite professoriate that held a position of social privilege. That this elitism is no longer the norm is a good thing. But the deformed legacy of this past is the narcissistic sense of entitlement that has replaced respect as a way of being in the Collegium. Make no mistake: the vast majority of academic citizens are salt of the earth people who work and study hard, care about each other, and do the right thing. But a small percentage has mistaken "privilege" for "right". Hence the individual who disses a staff member, or another who disrespects a colleague. Hence the sad need for a policy around a respectful workplace and learning environment. A sad day when we need a policy to ensure that our citizens act in a civil manner to each other. But better a policy and civility than no policy and brutish behaviour.
The short version is that as we move into the future at Trent our Collegium should have no time for divas, no time for the sense of entitlement that leads to disrespect or toxicity. No time for cannibals either for that matter.
What fascinates me in thinking about the contemporary Collegium is, not so much how such noble roots continue to underpin our enterprise, but how often these ancient roots have also, simultaneously, been allowed to wither. I am mesmerized by how many of our founding ideals both persevere, yet have also become corrupted in the 21st-century university. Consider, for example, two founding principles: collectivism and evangelical enthusiasm.
The sense of a collective enterprise with common goals is extraordinarily difficult to sustain in a resource starved environment. The notion of a cooperative where everyone works for the common good can (and has) easily become an individualistic marketplace of competing aspirations and ambitions. There are obvious examples like the high-marks-at-any-cost oriented student, or the erstwhile former colleagues who now fiercely compete for the gold rings of tenure, research fame, or public awards. People on desert islands revert to cannibalism; in lean times academic citizens become territorial, baronial, or at worst, utterly indifferent to the good of the whole. And who can blame a demented Head, driven mad by hunger, who sacrifices the good of the whole for his or her own particular slice of the world? The imperative, then, for all members of the Collegium is to clearly articulate their common goals and directions, and then to demand that we collectively put our money where our mouth is and allocate resources fairly--which does not necessarily mean equally.
Another wrinkle on this notion of an old root persisting, yet simultaneously deforming in its contemporary manifestation, is the notion of being "sacred" or "special". Needless to say, not all university people in the past were saints, but I want to acknowledge how post-secondary participation in the past WAS reserved for an elite body of students taught by an elite professoriate that held a position of social privilege. That this elitism is no longer the norm is a good thing. But the deformed legacy of this past is the narcissistic sense of entitlement that has replaced respect as a way of being in the Collegium. Make no mistake: the vast majority of academic citizens are salt of the earth people who work and study hard, care about each other, and do the right thing. But a small percentage has mistaken "privilege" for "right". Hence the individual who disses a staff member, or another who disrespects a colleague. Hence the sad need for a policy around a respectful workplace and learning environment. A sad day when we need a policy to ensure that our citizens act in a civil manner to each other. But better a policy and civility than no policy and brutish behaviour.
The short version is that as we move into the future at Trent our Collegium should have no time for divas, no time for the sense of entitlement that leads to disrespect or toxicity. No time for cannibals either for that matter.
Tuesday 22 November 2011
Open Response Letter to CUPE
November 22, 2011
Dear CUPE Colleagues:
Thank you very much for your thoughtful, critical, and civil open letter which I have read very reflectively. (See http://cupe3908.org/index.php?id=264).
Yours is a substantive letter that surely merits a thoughtful response; you raise many excellent issues, pose solid critiques, and ask thoroughly legitimate questions. May I take this opportunity to respond?
You are absolutely spot on when you comment that "the Academic Plan was meant to provide an overarching framework – a vision of the university – that would serve as the foundation for long-term financial planning". This is why the draft plan begins with an affirmation that the academic enterprise is paramount at Trent. And why it argues that we must stop "chasing the money" and concentrate, rather, on 72 recommendations that cross all executive portfolios (Academic, Administrative, External Relations, and Research.) These recommendations are designed to articulate clearly Trent's unique academic identity.
You are also spot on when you remark that "money continu[es] to be a driving concern." Financial instability is a major concern across the post-secondary sector in Ontario and only a very foolish academic citizen would ignore this reality. This was one of the major challenges in writing the draft: how to be realistic about money yet maintain one's academic vision and integrity? With great respect, I think you are inaccurate in the statement that "the Academic Plan has become something of an adversarial exercise; somehow, imagining a vision of Trent University has got lost in the shuffle.". I would like to point out (a) that the Plan remains, at this point, a living draft (which was posted on the Trent website November 21) and offered to the entire community for more critique and feedback throughout the rest of November and all of December; and (b) with over thirty-five consultation meetings (many of which were attended by LTAs) the process has been anything but adversarial. On the contrary, the draft could not exist in its present form without collective input. I say this with respect.
It is true "that the Academic Plan Committee comprises only full-time faculty members and [one member of] administration [me ]." The Committee was struck in late May/early June through an extensive consultation with the Chairs and Deans. No one disputes the incalculable contribution that CUPE members and LTAs make at Trent, but the feeling around the Provost's Planning Group was that preliminary long-term planning should be initially restricted to tenured faculty who are presumably here for the long term, conditional upon extensive consultations with all members of the community (many of whom are also here for the long term). I agreed (and still agree) with this sentiment; not an ideal solution but one for which I am totally responsible. Quite simply, the Committee needed to be small enough to be nimble and efficient, yet it had to be flexible enough to share "authorship" of the Plan with all who provided input. For this latter reason we were meticulous about seeking input from all of our bargaining units--CUPE, OPSEU, TUFA, as well as many student groups, alumni, and other academic colleagues.
Once again, I thank you for your letter and for the tone it adopts. Please do read through the draft plan and continue to provide feedback. In my opinion, it's only through honest debate and civil argumentation that we can achieve true solidarity and collegiality.
Dear CUPE Colleagues:
Thank you very much for your thoughtful, critical, and civil open letter which I have read very reflectively. (See http://cupe3908.org/index.php?id=264).
Yours is a substantive letter that surely merits a thoughtful response; you raise many excellent issues, pose solid critiques, and ask thoroughly legitimate questions. May I take this opportunity to respond?
You are absolutely spot on when you comment that "the Academic Plan was meant to provide an overarching framework – a vision of the university – that would serve as the foundation for long-term financial planning". This is why the draft plan begins with an affirmation that the academic enterprise is paramount at Trent. And why it argues that we must stop "chasing the money" and concentrate, rather, on 72 recommendations that cross all executive portfolios (Academic, Administrative, External Relations, and Research.) These recommendations are designed to articulate clearly Trent's unique academic identity.
You are also spot on when you remark that "money continu[es] to be a driving concern." Financial instability is a major concern across the post-secondary sector in Ontario and only a very foolish academic citizen would ignore this reality. This was one of the major challenges in writing the draft: how to be realistic about money yet maintain one's academic vision and integrity? With great respect, I think you are inaccurate in the statement that "the Academic Plan has become something of an adversarial exercise; somehow, imagining a vision of Trent University has got lost in the shuffle.". I would like to point out (a) that the Plan remains, at this point, a living draft (which was posted on the Trent website November 21) and offered to the entire community for more critique and feedback throughout the rest of November and all of December; and (b) with over thirty-five consultation meetings (many of which were attended by LTAs) the process has been anything but adversarial. On the contrary, the draft could not exist in its present form without collective input. I say this with respect.
It is true "that the Academic Plan Committee comprises only full-time faculty members and [one member of] administration [me ]." The Committee was struck in late May/early June through an extensive consultation with the Chairs and Deans. No one disputes the incalculable contribution that CUPE members and LTAs make at Trent, but the feeling around the Provost's Planning Group was that preliminary long-term planning should be initially restricted to tenured faculty who are presumably here for the long term, conditional upon extensive consultations with all members of the community (many of whom are also here for the long term). I agreed (and still agree) with this sentiment; not an ideal solution but one for which I am totally responsible. Quite simply, the Committee needed to be small enough to be nimble and efficient, yet it had to be flexible enough to share "authorship" of the Plan with all who provided input. For this latter reason we were meticulous about seeking input from all of our bargaining units--CUPE, OPSEU, TUFA, as well as many student groups, alumni, and other academic colleagues.
Once again, I thank you for your letter and for the tone it adopts. Please do read through the draft plan and continue to provide feedback. In my opinion, it's only through honest debate and civil argumentation that we can achieve true solidarity and collegiality.
Monday 21 November 2011
First Base
Sorry for the long silence, but I've been busy with the Committee putting the final touches to the discussion draft of the Academic Plan. Radical Recovery: The First Academic Plan for Trent University (2012-2015) was posted this morning on the Trent homepage and can be accessed at:
http://www.trentu.ca/vpacademic/documents/Trent%20Academic%20Plan%202012-2015.pdf.
This version of the draft has been created by the Academic Planning Committee which first met in June 2011 at the start of the planning process. Members of the Committee were elected by the Provost's Planning Group from a slate of nominees put together by the Chairs and Deans during the Spring of 2011. The Committee needed to be representative of the Collegium, but also small enough to meet and act with the maximum of efficiency. Members of the Committee are Gary Boire (Chair); Cathy Bruce (Education); Craig Brunetti (Biology); Jim Buttle (Geography); Sally Chivers (English & Canadian Studies); James Conolly (Anthropology); Doug Evans (Environmental Resource Science); Moira Howes (Philosophy); Joe Muldoon (Secretary); David Newhouse (Business & Indigenous Studies); and Colleen O'Manique (Political Studies).
Since the late summer there have been over thirty-five consultations with as many members of our community as possible. This draft is very much a distillation and articulation of what the Committee has heard since late August until now. But this document is still very much a draft, merely the first stab at charting what directions we wish Trent University to follow over the next three years.
As a first draft, this document also constitutes an invitation of sorts to all members of the Trent community. Nothing herein is written in stone; everything written is necessarily open to debate and further discussion. Our final draft will be presented for approval at Senate and at the Board of Governors, in January and February 2012 respectively. Between now and then we invite you to read, reflect, critique, and to send your recommendations for improvement to apfeedback@trentu.ca. The Committee will then reconsider and revise our draft in light of the feedback received over the next couple of months.
The Committee will continue to engage the Collegium on revisions and recommendations through Faculty Board, Senate, and divisional meetings within the Faculty of Arts and Science, as well as the Schools of Education, Nursing, and Graduate Studies. Dates of meetings will be provided shortly via internal email to Chairs and Deans.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and critiques as we work as a Collegium to refine and improve our University.
http://www.trentu.ca/vpacademic/documents/Trent%20Academic%20Plan%202012-2015.pdf.
This version of the draft has been created by the Academic Planning Committee which first met in June 2011 at the start of the planning process. Members of the Committee were elected by the Provost's Planning Group from a slate of nominees put together by the Chairs and Deans during the Spring of 2011. The Committee needed to be representative of the Collegium, but also small enough to meet and act with the maximum of efficiency. Members of the Committee are Gary Boire (Chair); Cathy Bruce (Education); Craig Brunetti (Biology); Jim Buttle (Geography); Sally Chivers (English & Canadian Studies); James Conolly (Anthropology); Doug Evans (Environmental Resource Science); Moira Howes (Philosophy); Joe Muldoon (Secretary); David Newhouse (Business & Indigenous Studies); and Colleen O'Manique (Political Studies).
Since the late summer there have been over thirty-five consultations with as many members of our community as possible. This draft is very much a distillation and articulation of what the Committee has heard since late August until now. But this document is still very much a draft, merely the first stab at charting what directions we wish Trent University to follow over the next three years.
As a first draft, this document also constitutes an invitation of sorts to all members of the Trent community. Nothing herein is written in stone; everything written is necessarily open to debate and further discussion. Our final draft will be presented for approval at Senate and at the Board of Governors, in January and February 2012 respectively. Between now and then we invite you to read, reflect, critique, and to send your recommendations for improvement to apfeedback@trentu.ca. The Committee will then reconsider and revise our draft in light of the feedback received over the next couple of months.
The Committee will continue to engage the Collegium on revisions and recommendations through Faculty Board, Senate, and divisional meetings within the Faculty of Arts and Science, as well as the Schools of Education, Nursing, and Graduate Studies. Dates of meetings will be provided shortly via internal email to Chairs and Deans.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and critiques as we work as a Collegium to refine and improve our University.
Monday 7 November 2011
What experiment?
Have you heard the one about the prof who walks into a classroom and engages with students face to face? Apparently this innovative experiment is a smash hit out west. Indeed, universities across the land are thinking about equally radical interventions in the post-secondary classroom.
Thanks to Bill Atkinson (Physics and Astronomy) who flipped me the link, you too can read all about it at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/universitynews/experiment-giving-undergrads-more-face-time-with-profs-a-hit/article2218337/
Now, I am delighted that students in Calgary are gaining access to profs and that profs across Canada are experimenting to create face time (as best they can) within the constraints of large lectures. But I'm also feeling slightly smug knowing that this is exactly what Trent has been doing for over forty years. The academic plan will have to recommend some hard choices, but sacrificing an interactive pedagogy is not an option. It's one of our differentiating practices and one, that for my money, makes this place so very special.
Thanks to Bill Atkinson (Physics and Astronomy) who flipped me the link, you too can read all about it at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/universitynews/experiment-giving-undergrads-more-face-time-with-profs-a-hit/article2218337/
Now, I am delighted that students in Calgary are gaining access to profs and that profs across Canada are experimenting to create face time (as best they can) within the constraints of large lectures. But I'm also feeling slightly smug knowing that this is exactly what Trent has been doing for over forty years. The academic plan will have to recommend some hard choices, but sacrificing an interactive pedagogy is not an option. It's one of our differentiating practices and one, that for my money, makes this place so very special.
Wednesday 2 November 2011
Outing the Elephant (on commuters)
One of the more vexatious issues confronting small 21st century universities, ones that happen to be located close to a metropolitan centre, is the issue of commuters. Certainly "commuting" is an elephant in the room for many universities just outside the GTA--one thinks of WLU, Guelph, Waterloo, Brock, and Trent--and it's time to out the elephant before putting it to rest once and for all.
On one hand there are clearly good reasons to live in the same city as your place of University employment. You can easily attend guest lectures, run back to the office if you've forgotten your notes, regularly enjoy college food (!), save on gas, and participate in the politics of everyday life around the coffee maker more than once a week. Most importantly you can have spontaneous face time with students and colleagues and actually be a part of a culture of presence. I reckon these are some of the reasons that some European universities (like Zurich) actually have residency requirements for employees.
On the other hand there are also sound reasons why some individuals choose to live in a different city than where they are employed. They may well have family obligations, may need proximity to research intensive libraries like the Robarts, or may well simply prefer, in our case, Toronto or Ottawa or Kingston (or somewhere else) to Peterborough. As one colleague remarked to me last week, gone are the days of a family packing up the house to follow the main breadwinner to wherever the job may be. And of course there is always Skype, telephones, email, WebCT, and so on. We live in a global village and there's no need to insist on an old-fashioned physical presence. Moreover, many so-called commuters actually show up regularly for everything; many absentee colleagues live around the corner and/or have darn good reasons for staying at home in the evenings and on weekends.
I've thought a lot about these two options and have heard arguments on both sides. I've been taken to task for using the word "commuter" as short hand for absenteeism; I've also been reminded that where one lives is irrelevant so long as one fulfills the terms of ones employment. Fair enough. If the shoe fits and so on.
In the end I reckon the real issue is not really about physical face time or spontaneity or the politics of hallway presence. The real issues, I think, are about the quality of education provided, about the accessibility of professors to their students in ways that both parties are satisfied, and finally about workload equity, fairness, and collegiality. So long as every student is educated well, every professor provides access to students and has access to what she or he needs to do the job, and so long as no one member consistently gets the peach teaching times or meetings are not consistently and tediously scheduled around one individual's timetable, then what we need to do is think about, not what constitutes a "culture of presence," but rather about what we need to do to cultivate and foster a Collegium of engagement, be it physical or virtual.
On one hand there are clearly good reasons to live in the same city as your place of University employment. You can easily attend guest lectures, run back to the office if you've forgotten your notes, regularly enjoy college food (!), save on gas, and participate in the politics of everyday life around the coffee maker more than once a week. Most importantly you can have spontaneous face time with students and colleagues and actually be a part of a culture of presence. I reckon these are some of the reasons that some European universities (like Zurich) actually have residency requirements for employees.
On the other hand there are also sound reasons why some individuals choose to live in a different city than where they are employed. They may well have family obligations, may need proximity to research intensive libraries like the Robarts, or may well simply prefer, in our case, Toronto or Ottawa or Kingston (or somewhere else) to Peterborough. As one colleague remarked to me last week, gone are the days of a family packing up the house to follow the main breadwinner to wherever the job may be. And of course there is always Skype, telephones, email, WebCT, and so on. We live in a global village and there's no need to insist on an old-fashioned physical presence. Moreover, many so-called commuters actually show up regularly for everything; many absentee colleagues live around the corner and/or have darn good reasons for staying at home in the evenings and on weekends.
I've thought a lot about these two options and have heard arguments on both sides. I've been taken to task for using the word "commuter" as short hand for absenteeism; I've also been reminded that where one lives is irrelevant so long as one fulfills the terms of ones employment. Fair enough. If the shoe fits and so on.
In the end I reckon the real issue is not really about physical face time or spontaneity or the politics of hallway presence. The real issues, I think, are about the quality of education provided, about the accessibility of professors to their students in ways that both parties are satisfied, and finally about workload equity, fairness, and collegiality. So long as every student is educated well, every professor provides access to students and has access to what she or he needs to do the job, and so long as no one member consistently gets the peach teaching times or meetings are not consistently and tediously scheduled around one individual's timetable, then what we need to do is think about, not what constitutes a "culture of presence," but rather about what we need to do to cultivate and foster a Collegium of engagement, be it physical or virtual.
Tuesday 1 November 2011
This and That
Two new press releases are of great interest to all of us involved in postsecondary education. The first, from the Council of Ontario Universities, deals with "learner outcomes;" the second, from Harvey Weingarten at HEQCO, deals more extensively with the issues associated with these learner outcomes: quality assurance, differentiation, and mandate meetings with the government.
Happy Reading.
New COU report focuses on defining what students gain from their university degrees
Toronto, November 1, 2011 – Ontario universities are at the forefront of Canadian efforts to ensure that students, employers and universities in other jurisdictions know what skills, knowledge and understanding students have gained from their programs, according to a recent report about the new approach to quality assurance at the province’s universities.
Ensuring the Value of University Degrees in Ontario explains how universities define degree level expectations – the intellectual and creative development that students will acquire from a particular degree, and how these expectations are integrated into curriculum and the learning outcomes of specific courses.
Degree level expectations and learning outcomes are at the heart of Ontario’s new Quality Assurance Framework, which sets out requirements for approval of new programs by the independent Quality Council, for cyclical reviews by the universities, and for periodic auditing by the Quality Council.
“Across all academic programs, our faculty and staff are actively engaged in defining what students acquire at every degree level,” says Alastair Summerlee, Chair of the Council of Ontario Universities (COU) and President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Guelph. “Our students are the beneficiaries of this commitment to quality assurance, which ensures that Ontario university degrees are respected locally and internationally by graduate schools and employers.”
Ontario’s degree level expectations and quality assurance framework were developed in the context of international efforts to create more comparable, compatible and coherent higher education systems. They are also aligned with a directive from the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC), which called for the provinces to develop more detailed frameworks that describe degree credentials.
“Ontario’s quality assurance system is one of the strongest in the world. We have been quick to evolve in response to international trends and internal demands for mechanisms that protect the quality of our degrees and set out clearly the learning outcomes students will have achieved at graduation,” says Bonnie Patterson, COU President and CEO.
And for a slightly different tweak, check the following link to Harvey Weingarten's most recent blog on the HEQCO site:
http://www.heqco.ca/en-CA/blog/archive/2011/10/31/the-diminishing-quality-of-ontario’s-universities-can-the-system-be-fixed.aspx
Happy Reading.
New COU report focuses on defining what students gain from their university degrees
Toronto, November 1, 2011 – Ontario universities are at the forefront of Canadian efforts to ensure that students, employers and universities in other jurisdictions know what skills, knowledge and understanding students have gained from their programs, according to a recent report about the new approach to quality assurance at the province’s universities.
Ensuring the Value of University Degrees in Ontario explains how universities define degree level expectations – the intellectual and creative development that students will acquire from a particular degree, and how these expectations are integrated into curriculum and the learning outcomes of specific courses.
Degree level expectations and learning outcomes are at the heart of Ontario’s new Quality Assurance Framework, which sets out requirements for approval of new programs by the independent Quality Council, for cyclical reviews by the universities, and for periodic auditing by the Quality Council.
“Across all academic programs, our faculty and staff are actively engaged in defining what students acquire at every degree level,” says Alastair Summerlee, Chair of the Council of Ontario Universities (COU) and President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Guelph. “Our students are the beneficiaries of this commitment to quality assurance, which ensures that Ontario university degrees are respected locally and internationally by graduate schools and employers.”
Ontario’s degree level expectations and quality assurance framework were developed in the context of international efforts to create more comparable, compatible and coherent higher education systems. They are also aligned with a directive from the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC), which called for the provinces to develop more detailed frameworks that describe degree credentials.
“Ontario’s quality assurance system is one of the strongest in the world. We have been quick to evolve in response to international trends and internal demands for mechanisms that protect the quality of our degrees and set out clearly the learning outcomes students will have achieved at graduation,” says Bonnie Patterson, COU President and CEO.
And for a slightly different tweak, check the following link to Harvey Weingarten's most recent blog on the HEQCO site:
http://www.heqco.ca/en-CA/blog/archive/2011/10/31/the-diminishing-quality-of-ontario’s-universities-can-the-system-be-fixed.aspx
Friday 21 October 2011
$Teaching or Research$
I spent Thursday at Wilfrid Laurier University where there was a one day symposium entitled "Re-imagining the University in a Changing World". It was better than most gatherings of this type because speakers were asked to speak for only 5-10 minutes and then engage with the audience for an extended period. This engagement was most intense after Ian Clark's presentation on the cost effectiveness of universities.
Clark is one of the authors of both Academic Transformations and the upcoming Academic Reform, the former emanating from the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO). One of Clark's startling arguments is that teaching only undergraduate universities as envisaged by the current government would cost less than research focused universities and would produce surpluses which could then be reinvested into the hiring and training of more "teaching stream faculty".
Another iconoclastic argument was that there is no reliable research that shows any correlation between excellence in teaching and research productivity. Once the audience regained its collective breath he then delivered the coup de grace: there is some indication in his own research, he remarked, that excellent teaching and excellent research are actually independent of each other and bear no relation whatsoever. Check out the following link to another source: http://www.heqco.ca/en-CA/Pages/Home.aspx.
Talk about deconstructing an academic gospel.
Personally I find the arguments a challenge; even moreso when I realize that this separation of two activities which have long been assumed to be inter-relational is driving both the media coverage of undergraduate education in Ontario and government thinking about the postsecondary sector. Not to mention the shift of enrolments from universities to college training programs Have a happy weekend.
Clark is one of the authors of both Academic Transformations and the upcoming Academic Reform, the former emanating from the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO). One of Clark's startling arguments is that teaching only undergraduate universities as envisaged by the current government would cost less than research focused universities and would produce surpluses which could then be reinvested into the hiring and training of more "teaching stream faculty".
Another iconoclastic argument was that there is no reliable research that shows any correlation between excellence in teaching and research productivity. Once the audience regained its collective breath he then delivered the coup de grace: there is some indication in his own research, he remarked, that excellent teaching and excellent research are actually independent of each other and bear no relation whatsoever. Check out the following link to another source: http://www.heqco.ca/en-CA/Pages/Home.aspx.
Talk about deconstructing an academic gospel.
Personally I find the arguments a challenge; even moreso when I realize that this separation of two activities which have long been assumed to be inter-relational is driving both the media coverage of undergraduate education in Ontario and government thinking about the postsecondary sector. Not to mention the shift of enrolments from universities to college training programs Have a happy weekend.
Wednesday 19 October 2011
Navigating
Sorry for the long hiatus. It's been a busy month what with the start up of the new term and the need to navigate our way through the various drafts of the Academic Plan. A quick update:
All 26 academic units have been visited; we've also consulted with the library, TCSA and college cabinet members, the exec committees of CUPE and OPSEU, as well as the TIP Office. Still to come are the various other stakeholder groups--grad students, student affairs (including the Registrar's Office), TUFA exec, a town hall for all and sundry, and the SEM Committee. The Provost's Planning Group has begun discussing intersecting issues such as the upcoming mandate meetings with government, new program proposals, and the staffing plans for 2012-2013. Kudos to all the colleagues who provided candid and honest input. I especially enjoyed the thoughtful recommendation to abolish all administrators at Trent. Really.
I started drafting the plan from the first day of meetings and as each consultation ended the draft would undergo a variety of revisions. At 35 pages I decided it was time to test the waters with the committee who are now, at my request, critiquing the draft. Once we have a draft that we're comfortable with I hope to post it as a discussion paper on the intranet so that all members of the community can wade into the discussions. We're aiming to have a version ready for initial discussion at Faculty Board in November and/or December, an advanced draft for the Board in early December, Senate (which has exclusive authority over the academic parts) in January. with a final version ready for the Board to approve the fiduciary/financial parts in February.
The title, "Navigating," has been chosen deliberately. The plan is developing in an environment of incredibly radical changes on the horizon. We have government talking of three new "teaching only" undergraduate campuses being built in Ontario; HEQCO is just about to release its second volume on restructuring the post-secondary sector, entitled Academic Reform, and both MTCU and the Council of Ontario Universities are struggling with the complex issue of "learner outcomes". Not to mention mandate meetings between MTCU and the Universities to discuss "differentiation" and possible new funding formulae not based on growth; and being beaten up in the Globe and Mail and Toronto Star for not providing a good "return on investment" in the marketplace. Writing our plan in this environment has hardly been a cakewalk; au contraire, it's beena difficult navigation amongst competing interests, colliding expectations, and impinging external and internal pressures. But I digress.
Short version: we have a fantastic community who cares deeply about this beautiful little quirky gem of a university. We have brilliant committee members who are working extremely hard on developing the best plan possible; we have students who are unabated in their passion for this place; and colleagues across the board who really do want this thing to work. As someone very wise remarked today, "I'm beginning to feel optimistic again. Sort of." Stay tuned.
All 26 academic units have been visited; we've also consulted with the library, TCSA and college cabinet members, the exec committees of CUPE and OPSEU, as well as the TIP Office. Still to come are the various other stakeholder groups--grad students, student affairs (including the Registrar's Office), TUFA exec, a town hall for all and sundry, and the SEM Committee. The Provost's Planning Group has begun discussing intersecting issues such as the upcoming mandate meetings with government, new program proposals, and the staffing plans for 2012-2013. Kudos to all the colleagues who provided candid and honest input. I especially enjoyed the thoughtful recommendation to abolish all administrators at Trent. Really.
I started drafting the plan from the first day of meetings and as each consultation ended the draft would undergo a variety of revisions. At 35 pages I decided it was time to test the waters with the committee who are now, at my request, critiquing the draft. Once we have a draft that we're comfortable with I hope to post it as a discussion paper on the intranet so that all members of the community can wade into the discussions. We're aiming to have a version ready for initial discussion at Faculty Board in November and/or December, an advanced draft for the Board in early December, Senate (which has exclusive authority over the academic parts) in January. with a final version ready for the Board to approve the fiduciary/financial parts in February.
The title, "Navigating," has been chosen deliberately. The plan is developing in an environment of incredibly radical changes on the horizon. We have government talking of three new "teaching only" undergraduate campuses being built in Ontario; HEQCO is just about to release its second volume on restructuring the post-secondary sector, entitled Academic Reform, and both MTCU and the Council of Ontario Universities are struggling with the complex issue of "learner outcomes". Not to mention mandate meetings between MTCU and the Universities to discuss "differentiation" and possible new funding formulae not based on growth; and being beaten up in the Globe and Mail and Toronto Star for not providing a good "return on investment" in the marketplace. Writing our plan in this environment has hardly been a cakewalk; au contraire, it's beena difficult navigation amongst competing interests, colliding expectations, and impinging external and internal pressures. But I digress.
Short version: we have a fantastic community who cares deeply about this beautiful little quirky gem of a university. We have brilliant committee members who are working extremely hard on developing the best plan possible; we have students who are unabated in their passion for this place; and colleagues across the board who really do want this thing to work. As someone very wise remarked today, "I'm beginning to feel optimistic again. Sort of." Stay tuned.
Friday 23 September 2011
Fetishes
I am fascinated with the concept of the fetish. According to Dictionary.com, the word has, in its simplest forms, three definitions; a fetish is either (a) “an object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency; or (b) any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion: to make a fetish of high grades; or (c) any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.”
What fascinates me is that the fetish is a nexus point, an intersection of desire, separation, and obsessive compulsive attention. A fetish is often a small part of a larger whole and that part is invested with a disproportionate significance of something else. This “something else” then becomes the object of either a distorted desire or an unhealthy fixation.
Those who make a fetish out of money, for example, often confuse monetary value with an overall self-image of “worth” or successful living. Acquisition of the money-object, in effect, becomes a horribly unhealthy pursuit of one small part of a whole (the entire economic realm) and this desired “part” comes to signify something else altogether: selfhood. I am rich therefore I am “worth” something. The fetishist thus devolves into an abject subject caught within a grotesque cycle of desire and anxiety. Norman Bates from Hitchcock’s Psycho is perhaps one of the more well known sad fetishists.
But I digress. The question that prompts this little meditation on grotesque desire is this: to what extent has the North American academy become abject? To what extent does it fetishize either research or teaching or service? These three traditional pillars of academic labour seem to have drifted apart over the past few decades and now, in some quarters, only one of the three becomes the object of desire. In an odd mimicry the academy has become a marketplace of individualistic acquisition where members of the Collegium are positioned EITHER to overvalue research (or more specifically research income); OR good teaching is deemed good teaching only if it receives an award; OR service is fixated upon to the exclusion of the other two pillars.
I exaggerate, of course. But my point, I think, is solid. The North American academy has strayed from its original path of educating responsible citizens and in some cases the academy has been transformed into an acquisitive economy of pathetic desires. Only one part of the job has become invested with a disproportionate meaning which is then overvalued or fixated upon. This is not a good thing.
At Trent Canada
Tuesday 13 September 2011
Sobriety
I once travelled to Wuhan where I visited one of the many wondrous universities of China. I was given a tour of a relatively spartan residence where the rooms were very small and amenities were of the minimalist kind. I joked that one wouldn't want to have a party in such a tiny room. My host, with great restraint, looked me dead in the eye and said courteously, "But students don't come here to have fun. They come here to work". A sobering moment.
I once read Maclean's magazine (in May 2011) where the current Ontario Minister of Training, Colleges, and Universities, John Milloy, is quoted as saying: "Putting Students First, is a response to a single goal of Ontario families that can be summarized as: “I want my kids to go on in school and get a good job.”. Another sobering moment.
I once asked a Trent alumna (who is very well employed) to tell me what she valued most about her time at Trent. Her answer was the transformational experiences she had while living and learning in one of the Colleges. She recalled particularly one professor who regularly met with students outside of class hours, usually over food and beverages, and would argue, discuss and debate long into the wee hours of the night. Sobering in its way.
Ah. But am I beginning to indulge myself in the very nostalgia I decry? Or am I articulating one of the critical pivots of the academic planning exercise?
One of the many challenges we face in developing an academic plan for Trent is the imperative of addressing exactly what kind of institution we want to be. Equally important is the necessity to examine how feasible our desires may be in the contexts of the 21st century university and the realpolitik of offering a postsecondary education--and a postsecondary venue--that is both transformational and marketable. Fun as well as "useful". To do this we need change.
Certainly we have seen a shift in the kinds of graduate degrees being offered south of the border. Now one can opt for the "professional doctorate" or the "professional Masters" which are essentially course based graduate degrees without the necessity to produce an original contribution to knowledge known as the dissertation. Likewise, we have seen a shift toward more job-oriented universities such as UOIT here in Ontario whose Act clearly states their responsibility to offer market driven programming. Recent stats have similarly shown a marked increase in applications to applied science programs. Even the Council of Ontario Universities has launched a website devoted to the pragmatic: myeducationhasvalue.ca (which folks should check out).
But whither curiosity based research? Whither critical inquiry that may not always be politically popular?
All of which is a preamble to the burning question: is Trent's original mandate--to provide a solid education in the liberal arts and sciences--still viable? Or have we reached a turning point where we must change our mandate? Do we wish to resist curricular change, programming change, pedagogical change, or do we wish to embrace change? Are we in fact wedded to the past (to our detriment) as some colleagues feel? Must "a view to the future" categorically exclude the past? Is the choice so clearly either/or?
These are the questions we are asking ourselves. The challenges are enormous. But the consequences of not asking them are unthinkable. A very sobering moment indeed.
I once read Maclean's magazine (in May 2011) where the current Ontario Minister of Training, Colleges, and Universities, John Milloy, is quoted as saying: "Putting Students First, is a response to a single goal of Ontario families that can be summarized as: “I want my kids to go on in school and get a good job.”. Another sobering moment.
I once asked a Trent alumna (who is very well employed) to tell me what she valued most about her time at Trent. Her answer was the transformational experiences she had while living and learning in one of the Colleges. She recalled particularly one professor who regularly met with students outside of class hours, usually over food and beverages, and would argue, discuss and debate long into the wee hours of the night. Sobering in its way.
Ah. But am I beginning to indulge myself in the very nostalgia I decry? Or am I articulating one of the critical pivots of the academic planning exercise?
One of the many challenges we face in developing an academic plan for Trent is the imperative of addressing exactly what kind of institution we want to be. Equally important is the necessity to examine how feasible our desires may be in the contexts of the 21st century university and the realpolitik of offering a postsecondary education--and a postsecondary venue--that is both transformational and marketable. Fun as well as "useful". To do this we need change.
Certainly we have seen a shift in the kinds of graduate degrees being offered south of the border. Now one can opt for the "professional doctorate" or the "professional Masters" which are essentially course based graduate degrees without the necessity to produce an original contribution to knowledge known as the dissertation. Likewise, we have seen a shift toward more job-oriented universities such as UOIT here in Ontario whose Act clearly states their responsibility to offer market driven programming. Recent stats have similarly shown a marked increase in applications to applied science programs. Even the Council of Ontario Universities has launched a website devoted to the pragmatic: myeducationhasvalue.ca (which folks should check out).
But whither curiosity based research? Whither critical inquiry that may not always be politically popular?
All of which is a preamble to the burning question: is Trent's original mandate--to provide a solid education in the liberal arts and sciences--still viable? Or have we reached a turning point where we must change our mandate? Do we wish to resist curricular change, programming change, pedagogical change, or do we wish to embrace change? Are we in fact wedded to the past (to our detriment) as some colleagues feel? Must "a view to the future" categorically exclude the past? Is the choice so clearly either/or?
These are the questions we are asking ourselves. The challenges are enormous. But the consequences of not asking them are unthinkable. A very sobering moment indeed.
Tuesday 6 September 2011
(Re) Signing the liberal arts and sciences
It's a sobering moment when the world changes around you and you suddenly realize you hadn't even noticed. Suddenly you are passé. I still remember my Dad's face when I played Hendrix on volume 500 for the first time; bye bye blackbird. I'm sure my oldest son remembers my face when he played Motörhead for me at volume 1000. Bye bye Stones. Suddenly one's cherished harmonies seem irrelevant or, at best, strangely quaint. Passé.
As the Provost of a brilliant University renowned for its liberal arts and science programs, its commitment to social justice, its proud traditions of activism and engagement, it's been a sobering few days. We've read announcements that York has a first year cohort of 6100 students, due to more applications in the university's health, science, and applied science programs; that Nipissing has experienced a 26% increase in part time studies and in new programs in science, math, technology and commerce. In addition, both federal and provincial governments have provided material support for the STEM disciplines (science, technology, engineering, and math), as well as Business and commerce.
Have we suddenly become quaint, mildly outdated, strangely cute, like a bewildered old uncle, in our insistence on the value of a liberal university education? Have we become passé? I think NOT.
The apparent "change" in the post-secondary landscape has elicited an intriguing dialectic between those who trumpet the arrival of a new pragmatism amongst students (can I get a job with that?) and those who traipse out the by-now tired arguments about safeguarding civilization against the barbarian hordes. What interests me in this binarism is (a) the seductive allure of a utilitarian defence of the liberal arts and sciences (these are critical disciplines, we bleat, that teach students how to think critically, analyze, make connections and so on); (b) the risible assumption that today's students are totally market driven; and finally, (c) the bovine notion that science, technology, engineering, math, health sciences, professional programs, business, and commerce are somehow devoid of imagination, elegance, and wonder. These rigorous disciplines are, apparently, merely pragmatic preparations for an interview. Right. Tell that to Asaf Zohar.
What intrigues me in all of this discourse is the official desire for purity, the unspoken authoritarian need for disciplinary tidiness. Somehow the "hard" subjects seem better because they are pragmatic and utilitarian; the "soft" subjects seem useless and irrelevant to the real world of the marketplace. What a paltry vision of both the world and the human mind.
What interests me (and buoys me up) is the fact that the liberal arts and sciences were long ago re-signed (i.e.,"re-signatured") at Trent. Whether it's Chemistry or Philosophy, Business or International Development Studies, Indigenous Studies or Physics, these disciplines at Trent all embody a creative messiness, a delicious ragged-edginess of interdisciplinarity, of critical inquiry that crosses lines and troubles pundits. Maybe it's time we point this out in our advertising; maybe we need to be less shy about blowing our own horns. But the simple fact is that at Trent the liberal arts and sciences, as well as the professional programs, educate our people, not only in order to get jobs, but more importantly n order to wonder and to ask "why?". We're not an either/or sort of institution. We're more the both/and type.
Whatever shape our academic plan takes it will need to respect these qualities of a Trent education; the plan will have to be messy, interdisciplinary, and utterly devoted to creativity, imagination, and wonder.
Thoughts?
As the Provost of a brilliant University renowned for its liberal arts and science programs, its commitment to social justice, its proud traditions of activism and engagement, it's been a sobering few days. We've read announcements that York has a first year cohort of 6100 students, due to more applications in the university's health, science, and applied science programs; that Nipissing has experienced a 26% increase in part time studies and in new programs in science, math, technology and commerce. In addition, both federal and provincial governments have provided material support for the STEM disciplines (science, technology, engineering, and math), as well as Business and commerce.
Have we suddenly become quaint, mildly outdated, strangely cute, like a bewildered old uncle, in our insistence on the value of a liberal university education? Have we become passé? I think NOT.
The apparent "change" in the post-secondary landscape has elicited an intriguing dialectic between those who trumpet the arrival of a new pragmatism amongst students (can I get a job with that?) and those who traipse out the by-now tired arguments about safeguarding civilization against the barbarian hordes. What interests me in this binarism is (a) the seductive allure of a utilitarian defence of the liberal arts and sciences (these are critical disciplines, we bleat, that teach students how to think critically, analyze, make connections and so on); (b) the risible assumption that today's students are totally market driven; and finally, (c) the bovine notion that science, technology, engineering, math, health sciences, professional programs, business, and commerce are somehow devoid of imagination, elegance, and wonder. These rigorous disciplines are, apparently, merely pragmatic preparations for an interview. Right. Tell that to Asaf Zohar.
What intrigues me in all of this discourse is the official desire for purity, the unspoken authoritarian need for disciplinary tidiness. Somehow the "hard" subjects seem better because they are pragmatic and utilitarian; the "soft" subjects seem useless and irrelevant to the real world of the marketplace. What a paltry vision of both the world and the human mind.
What interests me (and buoys me up) is the fact that the liberal arts and sciences were long ago re-signed (i.e.,"re-signatured") at Trent. Whether it's Chemistry or Philosophy, Business or International Development Studies, Indigenous Studies or Physics, these disciplines at Trent all embody a creative messiness, a delicious ragged-edginess of interdisciplinarity, of critical inquiry that crosses lines and troubles pundits. Maybe it's time we point this out in our advertising; maybe we need to be less shy about blowing our own horns. But the simple fact is that at Trent the liberal arts and sciences, as well as the professional programs, educate our people, not only in order to get jobs, but more importantly n order to wonder and to ask "why?". We're not an either/or sort of institution. We're more the both/and type.
Whatever shape our academic plan takes it will need to respect these qualities of a Trent education; the plan will have to be messy, interdisciplinary, and utterly devoted to creativity, imagination, and wonder.
Thoughts?
Friday 2 September 2011
Short & Sweet
Labour Day Parade, Toronto c. 1900s
Labour Day Parades. The Last Long Weekend of the Summer. A Canadian tradition. A Worker’s tradition to celebrate the accomplishments of working people everywhere--as well as the trade union movement responsible for the eight hour workday amongst other achievements. Here’s wishing all readers a happy labour day weekend.
And here's also a small plug to check out the new comments on various postings below. Some red hot peppers there. Definitely to be enjoyed.
Tuesday 30 August 2011
Happy New Year
September is an academic's new year. It's a special time with returning students, new students, profs getting ready for the start of classes, folks getting back into the University groove, and so on. This wondrous quirky place is beautiful in the Fall, a unique environment for all committed and engaged members of our community.
Today's top ten things about Trent:
- A river runs through it
- The Seasoned Spoon
- The word “critical” appears more than any other word in course descriptions
Transformations happen regularly on campus
- Arguments are free
- Research has an impact
- My (microscopic) office has a view
- We have trees instead of concrete office blocks
- People--from OPSEU, CUPE and TUFA--all give a damn
- Trent students think around corners and look at the world unblinkingly
Best wishes to all colleagues. Have an excellent 2011-2012. Have a happy new year!
GB
Thursday 25 August 2011
Glitches, Caveats
A number of colleagues have been unable to post comments using non-windows operating systems. If you are having difficulties please send your comment directly to provost@trentu.ca and I will post it for you.
A reminder: this blog is a venue that values academic freedom. As such I am committed to posting comments that are respectful yet vigorous, collegial yet uncompromising. I am not in the business of censorship so will moderate only comments that are vituperative or disrespectful (and so far I have received none that fit into this category).
GB
A reminder: this blog is a venue that values academic freedom. As such I am committed to posting comments that are respectful yet vigorous, collegial yet uncompromising. I am not in the business of censorship so will moderate only comments that are vituperative or disrespectful (and so far I have received none that fit into this category).
GB
Tuesday 23 August 2011
Measuring Nostalgia
One of my more precious research interests is nostalgia. It’s precious because it grows out of some very personal areas of my own life and because it is a core concept in one of my research interests, postcolonial theory.
At its most fundamental level nostalgia is based on the loss of home—either real or perceived. In postcolonial terms nostalgia could refer to a longing for an amputated past or to the nightmare experience of a missing history. In this sense, nostalgia is very much akin to either mourning or psychosis. The object of nostalgia, like a real lost (or phantom) limb exists in the past whilst the longing for it exists in the present. The question, of course, is this: is the nostalgia directed toward something real in the past that is genuinely lost? Or is it directed to something that has been unconsciously created in the present and then projected backward into the past? Not exactly a myth, this desire is for a created narrative, a story that fulfills some kind of psychic need for painful remembrance. As it were, a present “re-membering” of what is now perceived as a “dis-membered” time.
I’ve been thinking a lot about nostalgia lately as the planning committee begins its task of discussing with colleagues where we want to go in the next Academic Plan. So far I have been struck by a deep nostalgia for the “old Trent
I don’t suggest that this nostalgia is misplaced or that this image of old Trent Trent
Quite simply, our colleagues long for a sense of academic community where everyone belongs; where everyone is present; where respectful dialogue is the order of the day, and where our collective time is filled, not by the relentless pursuit of brownie points, but by a tempered and sober discourse of teaching and learning. Perhaps our nostalgia is for a time before (or after) competition, a time characterized by collaboration and cooperation. This desire points directly to the need for an engaged citizenry, an academy dedicated to activism, development, internationalism, and community.
If this is true, then I wonder: do we need to consider our present environment by critically re-assessing the concrete metrics by which we measure and evaluate performance at Trent
PS. Working title: Radical Sustainability [Sustainable Radicalism?]: An Academic/Activist Plan created only for Trent University
Wednesday 17 August 2011
Facts & Figuring
Dear Colleagues:
1. Trent once enjoyed the reputation of being Canada’s outstanding small university. We were known for our student-centred pedagogy, small classes, interdisciplinary collaborative work, top rate research, and excellence in the liberal arts and sciences. Despite the fact that we still continue to practice what we preach, today this reputation has changed; many of Trent’s current superb accomplishments are hidden by endless discussions about shrinking enrolments, budgetary problems, and low morale. We have become what James Martin and James E. Samels describe as a “fragile" or "stressed" university.
2. Enrolment at Trent has been flat for 6 years while the system has grown. Compare, for example, Trent’s 0.08% growth with the 12.3% Ontario University system Undergrad FTE growth. This trend continues into 2011-12 with the university having a target of 152 new and retained FTE’s in 2011-12, but having zero growth. (As of August 15, 2011, Peterborough is up by 33; Oshawa is down by 31.
3. While the total student FTE has remained relatively constant, the overall mix at the institution has changed dramatically. We have seen a considerable increase in student numbers in some departments while others have shown a steady decline. This has meant that with no new net growth we receive no new funding from MTCU and as a result the university has been unable to allocate resources to departments that have grown. The current staffing of academic departments in recent years, moreover, is a product of evolution rather than planning; it seems inappropriate that any future academic changes should be driven by retirements rather than by planning.
4. Trent’s financial situation continues to be highly vulnerable, given its substantial dependence on enrolment. As of August 15, 2011, the University is experiencing a structural mismatch of revenues and expenses that results in annual budget reductions. In the 2009/10 budget year Trent University continued to rank second highest amongst our six comparator Ontario universities in the cost (academic salaries) of education per Basic Income Unit. Yet we cannot address this issue through increasing class sizes even if we wanted to: we are challenged by our own architecture and lack of large lecture halls.
5. The operating budget has been cut every year since 2008, resulting in significant reductions to the instructional budget. In 2010-11 the overall operating budget cost to operate Trent University was $91.3 million dollars; the overall revenue was $90.6 million dollars (this was after a $6.7 million dollar budget reduction)..
Departmental Discussion Questions:
1. Metrics
Given that quantitative metrics capture only a part of the teaching, research, and service excellence of an academic program, what kind of qualitative metric provides the most appropriate way to understand your program’s many activities (including graduate supervision)? Certainly teaching awards, Tri-Council or industrial funding, and external and internal recognition for service are some ways of measuring; what other ways are there distinct to your unit?
2. Areas of Expertise
In addition to its traditional focus on teaching excellence which will continue, Trent needs to focus and foreground its academic and research activities more effectively. Which three areas do you think define the reputational academic strength of the university most effectively at: a) a national level, and b) an international level? Which areas do you think define the reputational academic strengths of your own unit?
3. Prioritization
In terms of repairing the damage caused by recent cuts, can you suggest areas where the administration should focus its energies and resources? Some priority areas include library acquisitions, additional computer and IT support, more administrative support for units (especially those with graduate programs), and additional teaching faculty, but it would be helpful to suggest which of these areas needs to be tackled first.
4. Moving Forward
In terms of finances and enrolment, Trent University is facing a precarious future. Any implementation of the academic plan will have to contain a significant budgetary component. This means our academic plan will have to include cost-saving measures and innovative ways of maintaining the integrity of our academic enterprise while honouring all aspects of the Collective Agreement. Possibilities could include the amalgamation of units, the increased use of technology in our pedagogy, or totally out of the box solutions to problems. Where do you see your unit in 2015 and what part might it play in Trent’s academic recovery?
5. Recommendations
Can you provide three potential recommendations/outcomes from the academic plan that your unit would like to see implemented at Trent?
Gary Boire
Provost & Vice-President Academic
August 15, 2011
Welcome back to campus and to the start of a new term; I hope everyone has enjoyed a fruitful and rewarding combination of holidays and research time. I'm looking forward to a vibrant and challenging Fall as we work together to develop the Academic Plan.
What follows is a very long posting and I apologize in advance for that. But in order to provide a precise focus for unit discussions of the Academic Plan I am providing below some points of concern that have influenced my thinking to date. I look forward both to reading your thoughts in this blog and to hearing your unit's response to the academic planning discussion points.
1. Trent once enjoyed the reputation of being Canada’s outstanding small university. We were known for our student-centred pedagogy, small classes, interdisciplinary collaborative work, top rate research, and excellence in the liberal arts and sciences. Despite the fact that we still continue to practice what we preach, today this reputation has changed; many of Trent’s current superb accomplishments are hidden by endless discussions about shrinking enrolments, budgetary problems, and low morale. We have become what James Martin and James E. Samels describe as a “fragile" or "stressed" university.
2. Enrolment at Trent has been flat for 6 years while the system has grown. Compare, for example, Trent’s 0.08% growth with the 12.3% Ontario University system Undergrad FTE growth. This trend continues into 2011-12 with the university having a target of 152 new and retained FTE’s in 2011-12, but having zero growth. (As of August 15, 2011, Peterborough is up by 33; Oshawa is down by 31.
3. While the total student FTE has remained relatively constant, the overall mix at the institution has changed dramatically. We have seen a considerable increase in student numbers in some departments while others have shown a steady decline. This has meant that with no new net growth we receive no new funding from MTCU and as a result the university has been unable to allocate resources to departments that have grown. The current staffing of academic departments in recent years, moreover, is a product of evolution rather than planning; it seems inappropriate that any future academic changes should be driven by retirements rather than by planning.
4. Trent’s financial situation continues to be highly vulnerable, given its substantial dependence on enrolment. As of August 15, 2011, the University is experiencing a structural mismatch of revenues and expenses that results in annual budget reductions. In the 2009/10 budget year Trent University continued to rank second highest amongst our six comparator Ontario universities in the cost (academic salaries) of education per Basic Income Unit. Yet we cannot address this issue through increasing class sizes even if we wanted to: we are challenged by our own architecture and lack of large lecture halls.
5. The operating budget has been cut every year since 2008, resulting in significant reductions to the instructional budget. In 2010-11 the overall operating budget cost to operate Trent University was $91.3 million dollars; the overall revenue was $90.6 million dollars (this was after a $6.7 million dollar budget reduction)..
Departmental Discussion Questions:
1. Metrics
Given that quantitative metrics capture only a part of the teaching, research, and service excellence of an academic program, what kind of qualitative metric provides the most appropriate way to understand your program’s many activities (including graduate supervision)? Certainly teaching awards, Tri-Council or industrial funding, and external and internal recognition for service are some ways of measuring; what other ways are there distinct to your unit?
2. Areas of Expertise
In addition to its traditional focus on teaching excellence which will continue, Trent needs to focus and foreground its academic and research activities more effectively. Which three areas do you think define the reputational academic strength of the university most effectively at: a) a national level, and b) an international level? Which areas do you think define the reputational academic strengths of your own unit?
3. Prioritization
In terms of repairing the damage caused by recent cuts, can you suggest areas where the administration should focus its energies and resources? Some priority areas include library acquisitions, additional computer and IT support, more administrative support for units (especially those with graduate programs), and additional teaching faculty, but it would be helpful to suggest which of these areas needs to be tackled first.
4. Moving Forward
In terms of finances and enrolment, Trent University is facing a precarious future. Any implementation of the academic plan will have to contain a significant budgetary component. This means our academic plan will have to include cost-saving measures and innovative ways of maintaining the integrity of our academic enterprise while honouring all aspects of the Collective Agreement. Possibilities could include the amalgamation of units, the increased use of technology in our pedagogy, or totally out of the box solutions to problems. Where do you see your unit in 2015 and what part might it play in Trent’s academic recovery?
5. Recommendations
Can you provide three potential recommendations/outcomes from the academic plan that your unit would like to see implemented at Trent?
Gary Boire
Provost & Vice-President Academic
August 15, 2011
Tuesday 12 July 2011
Colonies, Satellites, Differences
The following quotation is taken from Elizabeth Laragy’s page on “hybridity” in Wikipedia; the page references are to Bill Ashcroft et al., The Post Colonial Reader. And this blog is an open invitation, particularly to our colleagues in Oshawa
The term hybridity has been most recently associated with Homi Bhabha . In his piece entitled ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences', Bhabha stresses the interdependence of coloniser and colonised. Bhabha argues that all cultural systems and statements are constructed in what he calls the ‘Third Space of Enunciation'. [6] In accepting this argument, we begin to understand why claims to the inherent purity and originality of cultures are ‘untenable'. Bhabha urges us into this space in an effort to open up the notion of an inter national culture “not based on exoticism or multi-culturalism of the diversity of cultures [sic], but on the inscription and articulation of culture's hybridity. ” [7] In bringing this to the next stage, Bhabha hopes that it is in this space “that we will find those words with which we can speak of Ourselves and Others. And by exploring this ‘Third Space', we may elude the politics of polarity and emerge as the others of ourselves”. [8]
I find this citation from Bhabha strangely apt when thinking about the Academic Plan and Trent in Difficult important questions we all need to answer.
Wednesday 6 July 2011
Terms of Reference
ACADEMIC PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Purpose
To develop an Academic Plan for Trent University
Objectives:
· To meet with all academic departments and to review the unit plans provided by all academic programs as part of the Integrated Planning Process (2009-2010);
· To set priorities for action in order to achieve the Vision and Mission
· To make pragmatic recommendations on how to achieve: increased enrolment, improved retention; and improved employee morale as it relates to the academic enterprise;
· To develop strategic recommendations regarding academic programming that will ensure academic integrity within the context of financial stability.
Timeframe
The Committee will aim to approve a draft for circulation to Faculty Board (December 9th ), Senate (January 17th ), and Board of Governors (February 3rd ).
Composition
Gary Boire, Chair, Provost and Vice President Academic
Joe Muldoon, Consultant, Director, Office of the Provost and Vice President Academic
Cathy Bruce, School of Education
Craig Brunetti, Sciences, (Biology)
Jim Buttle, Sciences, (Geography)
Sally Chivers, Humanities (Canadian Studies and English Literature)
James Conolly, Social Sciences, (Anthropology)
Doug Evans, Sciences, (Environmental Resource Science)
Moira Howes, Humanities (Philosophy)
David Newhouse, Social Sciences (Indigenous Studies and Business Administration)
Colleen O’Manique, Humanities (Gender & Women’s Studies and Political Studies)
Wednesday 29 June 2011
Different Strokes for Different Universities
Differentiation. An interesting concept. For many colleagues at Trent the word recalls back in the day when Trent was awarded a "differentiation grant" by the Ontario government to support its unique interdisciplinary mission and a pedagogy centred on small classrooms and intimate tutorials. There were trade-offs, of course, and in many ways our current graduate programs are a legacy of the commitment to offer interdisciplinary programs unavailable elsewhere. In fact, we still receive the grant which forms part of our overall operating budget.But today the concept of differentiation constitutes one of our major (controversial) challenges as we develop the academic plan. The brainchild of the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO), "differentiation" refers to the idea that each of Ontario's 20 universities should differentiate itself from all the others by dedicating its resources to "what it does best". As Harvey Weingarten argues in "The Benefits of Greater Differentiation of Ontario's University Sector," differentiation will allow each University to develop its own mandate with the government; for some universities it may mean a greater emphasis on teaching, for others on research intensiveness, for others a hybrid of the two, etc.
For someone as old as me this idea recalls two distinct events of both the distant and recent past: one is the Thatcherite division of the post-secondary system in the U.K. into teaching contra research institutions; the other is the paradigm shift at NSERC which now focuses most heavily on the production of "highly qualified personnel" or HQPs. Read one way, the big are getting bigger and the small are faced with just fading away. Read another (more cheerful) way, now is the chance to set our course and get budgetary support for it.
Which means that if we at Trent do not differentiate ourselves in our mandate meeting with the government in the Fall 2011 we will inadvertently position ourselves to have differentiation thrust upon us. Not a good thing. I would rather we define ourselves rather than be defined by an external body.
I would encourage all colleagues to read the HEQCO report, especially given that it is a formal recommendation to the government of Ontario. You can access the document at: http://www.heqco.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/DifferentiationENG.pdf. After reading it please do not burn, but rather give careful thought to the development of our academic plan which will be not only an academic "recovery" document, but also a survival manual.
Friday 24 June 2011
How It Will Work
The Committee had its first meeting on June 22, 2011. Discussion revolved around our shared sense of cautious (or cynical) optimism, trepidation, and a sober sense of just how important this undertaking will be. The Committee was particularly concerned about ensuring that we have accurate data and that we consult appropriately with all members of our community. Over the summer each member of the committee will familiarize him or her self with the unit plans that were developed during the Integrated Planning process as well as begin to think about how to construct a framework for dialogue with our colleagues. IE, what "shape" should consultations with individual units take?It was also agreed that during late August and September 2011the Provost will visit each academic program to conduct a dialogue with all members of each unit. The Provost will be accompanied by one member of the Academic Planning Committee who will share via email the nature of the dialogue with all other members of the Committee. The goal of these dialogues is to determine (a) the wishes and ideas of each unit; and (b) the role of the unit in
Of major concern is the demoralization that runs throughout our academy at the present time. Our biggest challenge will be, not to invent spectacular new programs, but to address and begin to change the culture of cynicism within which we find ourselves. Simply by acknowledging that this culture exists the Committee has begun its long journey toward creating a viable and engaged academic plan. Stay tuned.
Feel free to post a comment, a critique, a suggestion. A safe and happy weekend to all.
Gary
Monday 20 June 2011
"Begin at the beginning,"the King said, very gravely, "and go on till you come to the end: then stop”
This quotation from Alice in Wonderland seems a good choice to let folks know that the first meeting of the Academic Planning Committee will be this Wednesday, June 22, at 11 a.m.
The Committee will be discussing a variety of items, setting some parameters for its work, and beginning the difficult conversation about where we, as a University, want to go in the future. It will be the preface to a series of consultations in the Fall.
Until then, please share your ideas, your critiques, your vision for the Academic Plan at Trent. Don't be shy. Post a comment or two, short or long. Begin at the beginning.
The Committee will be discussing a variety of items, setting some parameters for its work, and beginning the difficult conversation about where we, as a University, want to go in the future. It will be the preface to a series of consultations in the Fall.
Until then, please share your ideas, your critiques, your vision for the Academic Plan at Trent. Don't be shy. Post a comment or two, short or long. Begin at the beginning.
Friday 17 June 2011
Who's Who (and how they got there)
I am grateful to the colleagues who have agreed to participate in the Academic Planning Committee: Cathy Bruce (Education), Sally Chivers, Moira Howes, and Colleen O'Manique (Humanities), Jim Buttle, Craig Brunetti, Doug Evans (Sciences), James Conolly and David Newhouse (Social Sciences). Many thanks.
For the folks wondering how these lucky people arrived on the committee: the Deans and AVPs on the Provost's Planning Committee (PPG) were asked to consult with their Chairs and Directors who in turn provided the names of colleagues who might be interested. The names were then collated and returned to PPG who voted to elect 2-3 colleagues from each division and school. I then approached those folks with the most votes. Some colleagues were unable to accept so I then approached runners up in the division or school. The names above represent the final roll out of this process. Stay tuned for more updates. Have a happy and safe weekend.
Gary
For the folks wondering how these lucky people arrived on the committee: the Deans and AVPs on the Provost's Planning Committee (PPG) were asked to consult with their Chairs and Directors who in turn provided the names of colleagues who might be interested. The names were then collated and returned to PPG who voted to elect 2-3 colleagues from each division and school. I then approached those folks with the most votes. Some colleagues were unable to accept so I then approached runners up in the division or school. The names above represent the final roll out of this process. Stay tuned for more updates. Have a happy and safe weekend.
Gary
Tuesday 14 June 2011
How many Trents does it take to make a University?
Some initial thoughts: the Committee needs to hear about the many "Trents" that make up Trent University; it needs to develop its own TOR; timelines; it needs to be small enough to be nimble yet large enough to share the labour among its members; and the Committee needs above all else to have an authentic mandate. That is: we need to develop and implement a plan for the future and not a wish list of predictable platitudes. Some hard topics that need to be explored while planning for our academic future include the way we have structured graduate studies at Trent; course delivery models; financial challenges; program development in a fiscally challenging environment; class size; scheduling; and so on.
13 Ways of Looking at an Academic Plan
Welcome to our academic planning blog. I hope to use this medium as one of many fora to communicate with the Collegium, to elicit comments, to share ideas, to debate issues, and to update the community on progress made toward developing a strong academic plan for our University. While the principal function of this blog is to provide a venue to discuss the development of the academic plan called for in the Integrated Plan, the blog is also intended to serve as a general platform for dialogue between the Provost and the academy at large. Faculty, staff, students--all members of our community--are invited to participate.
I look forward to your comments, critiques, recommendations, and, yes, even rants. Please feel free to leave comments or send email directly to me at provost@trentu.ca I cannot promise weekly updates but I can commit to "regular intermittent" updates of the blog and responses to emails within 2 weeks.
Gary Boire
Provost and Vice-President Academic
Trent University
I look forward to your comments, critiques, recommendations, and, yes, even rants. Please feel free to leave comments or send email directly to me at provost@trentu.ca I cannot promise weekly updates but I can commit to "regular intermittent" updates of the blog and responses to emails within 2 weeks.
Gary Boire
Provost and Vice-President Academic
Trent University
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)