[1605] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: [Mit-talk] Chronicle of Higher Education: An Alternative to
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jimmy C. Wu)
Mon Sep 12 17:03:28 2005
From: "Jimmy C. Wu" <jimmbswu@alum.mit.edu>
To: <MIT-Talk@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 16:02:58 -0500
Errors-To: mit-talk-bounces@mit.edu
I think mit-talk, as it used to be, and as it is, served fairly well the
function of disseminating educational thought. institvte, back in its day,
also brought educational thought to campus.
This overall question of student involvement in the thinking of education,
as Jeff posed, really concerns two issues:
1. Can theory and practice co-exist in the same forum? Or are the two
better served by separating the forums, such that there may be cross-talk,
but people can choose to be in one, but not the other? mit-talk was
primarily a forum for practice, but also had good discussions on theory.
iltfp was meant to be a forum for practice. What Jeff proposes, is to
create a forum to disseminate theory. By answering this question, we can
better understand the expected utility of this new forum.
2. How do we include a continuum of participation, from newspaper-level
interest to theorists and community activists? Would it be better to divide
this continuum into discrete classes, with independent forums/media, or an
all-inclusive forum/medium? What we have right now seems to be discrete
classes. Many students read the Tech and other campus publications to
understand campus issues, but do not actively participate in discussions
about them. The various student governments and committees work directly to
resolve these issues and discuss them in semi-confidential settings. There
are many "issue" groups who only participate for their causes. And there
are some people who are more interested in the discussion than the action.
Are we better served by our current division into discrete classes, or can
we create a super-forum/medium to bring everyone together? At various times
mit-talk tried to bring in more people, with mixed results.
Our answers to these two questions will tell us what we should do.
Jimmy
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Belcher" <jbelcher@mit.edu>
To: <mit-talk@mit.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Mit-talk] Chronicle of Higher Education: An Alternative to
theCampus as Club Med
> Hi Jeff
>
> I think this is a good idea. Question is how to advertise it so that it
> gets significant readership. And who runs it? But there are a lot of
> articles out there on higher ed, and about mit, etc. that could use a
> central clearing house and easy availability (the faculty newsletter
comes
> to mind as sometimes having articles that alum's and students would be
> interested in, see
>
> http://web.mit.edu/fnl/
>
> but I would image that site gets very little traffic).
>
> John Belcher
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mit-talk-bounces@MIT.EDU [mailto:mit-talk-bounces@MIT.EDU] On Behalf
> Of Jeff Roberts
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 10:38 AM
> To: mit-talk@mit.edu
> Subject: [Mit-talk] Chronicle of Higher Education: An Alternative to the
> Campus as Club Med
>
> Does anyone else think there should be something set up expressly for
> posting news articles relating to MIT, higher ed. campus issues, &c.?
> I know that there are a lot of current students not subscribed to "the
> talk", and I bet a number of those students (particularly those who
> deal with administrators, who are reading these types of articles
> every day) would be interested in reading stories like the one posted
> below, but would prefer not to hear the pointless rantings and ravings
> of alums like myself ...
>
> Anyway, once again, it looks like MIT is ahead of the curve but
> doesn't know it ...
>
> http://chronicle.com/temp/email.php?id=a9x6somzmw62an22tri2chzl8xl7xrch
>
> Text included below (with nod to jhawk).
>
> ---
> An Alternative to the Campus as Club Med
>
> By ADAM WEINBERG
>
> Jacuzzis and multimedia theaters, juice bars and hot tubs, sports
> centers and coffee shops -- they are increasingly part of the college
> landscape as higher-education institutions seek to attract more
> students by offering ever-fancier facilities and frills. But in our
> relentless quest to woo undergraduates, are we creating climates in
> which our academic programs can thrive and our students can learn? Or
> are our campuses becoming simply mini-versions of Club Med?
>
> Colleges could significantly increase the depth and breadth of student
> learning if they dropped out of the amenities arms race and instead
> became more intent on capturing the educational moments that take
> place outside the classroom. We need to ask some tough questions about
> the student-affairs programs on our campuses.
>
> Before the 1970s, "student affairs" consisted of some athletics
> programs and a few administrators who essentially acted as surrogate
> parents, enforcing rules and order. In the late 1960s, however, as
> institutions struggled to confront race relations, sexual violence,
> drug and alcohol abuse, and other controversial issues, they hired
> professional administrators to deal with those concerns. By the 1990s,
> that trend had led to an explosion of student-affairs offices and
> departments, charged with managing programs, residential units,
> cultural centers, campus safety, career services, and virtually all
> other nonacademic aspects of campus life.
>
> The student-services model has allowed colleges to become more open
> and welcoming to students from all backgrounds and helped us cope with
> the increase of students arriving on campus with learning
> disabilities, emotional and social problems, and psychological
> disorders. But that model has many drawbacks, as well.
>
> Too many colleges have become obsessed with providing the newest and
> most-lavish services and amenities to keep up with the competition,
> diverting resources away from other, more valuable educational
> programs. In addition, by hiring so many trained professionals, we
> have robbed students of opportunities to learn through their own
> problem solving. We have encouraged a sense of entitlement among them,
> so that they increasingly view themselves as clients that our
> institutions are obliged to serve -- isolated individuals with
> problems to be fixed -- rather than members of a community who work
> together to develop solutions.
>
> Yet some colleges are experimenting with new residential models that
> focus on educating students. They are creating entrepreneurial
> cultures where students think of themselves as innovators and problem
> solvers, as opposed to cynical consumers mired in needs. For example,
> the University of Illinois at Chicago, borrowing from a model
> developed by the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, is shifting
> control of its residential units away from trained professionals.
> Students run their own dormitories through "consensus agreements" and
> work together to set standards, hold one another accountable, and make
> decisions about daily life. Their experience differs significantly
> from students who check into residential halls that look and feel like
> hotels.
>
> Living-learning communities have emerged at a wide range of
> institutions. Wright State University, for instance, offers first-year
> students on its main campus the opportunity to take three classes
> together while living on the same floor. At St. Lawrence University,
> every freshman lives in one of 18 residential colleges and takes the
> same interdisciplinary course during the first semester as the rest of
> the students in the same college. At Colgate University, we have built
> on those models by reframing our student-affairs program around the
> notion of "residential education," to take advantage of learning
> opportunities that occur outside classes.
>
> To develop more programs along these lines and make campus activities
> truly educational, colleges and universities must confront a number of
> myths that have long surrounded our approach to student affairs:
>
> Myth 1: More programming is better. The growth of student
> organizations with access to large amounts of money generated by
> activities fees has led to an explosion of poor-quality
> student-affairs programs. A dean at a small New England college
> recently confided that his institution has one organization for every
> 12 students.
>
> Such groups usually plan earnest and well-meaning activities like
> lectures and films, but many students are jaded by years of sitting
> through such events and find them uninteresting and unhelpful. For
> example, when I visited another campus, a student told me,
> "Orientation was filled with lectures on race. Lectures on race don't
> help me. I need opportunities to meet and talk with people who are
> different, and I need somebody to help me learn how." Students often
> respond to the overflow of programs by tuning out or by ignoring them
> altogether: Attendance at many programs is low, which not only wastes
> money but also sends a message to other students that it is not "cool"
> to attend such events.
>
> A better approach would be to teach students how to plan fewer,
> higher-quality activities. Too often, as they participate in student
> organizations, young adults learn poor skills. They get in the habit
> of running meetings without agendas, accepting failed events
> noncritically, and developing strategies that have little relationship
> to the goals of a project. Yet student organizations can be great
> educational venues. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, for example, has
> designed workshops that teach communication skills, team building, and
> goal setting to help students learn how to manage their programs.
>
> At Colgate, our focus has also shifted to working with students to
> develop the skills they need to run organizations and plan meaningful
> events. Previously, with 130 student groups for 2,800 students, we
> were overwhelmed with programs that were often poorly attended and
> offered few benefits to students or the campus. We now emphasize
> creating fewer programs, ones that actually serve educational
> purposes.
>
> Breaking Bread, for example, supports student efforts to interact with
> peers from different backgrounds and with different views. A student
> group can tap into a special college fund only if it sponsors an event
> with another group with whom it doesn't normally collaborate. The two
> organizations must draft a written proposal for the event over a
> dinner for which they must buy food and cook together. Our staff helps
> the groups identify what they hope to accomplish, find ways to make
> the programs more interactive, and encourage people to attend the
> event.
>
> As case in point: The College Republicans and the Rainbow Alliance --
> a social and support group for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,
> and queer/questioning students -- collaborated to bring Andrew
> Sullivan, a conservative gay-rights activist, to speak at Colgate.
> They organized a large reception with faculty members before the event
> and, afterward, led a reflective conversation during which students
> discussed their reactions to Sullivan's remarks.
>
> As a result of our new approach, well-defined events have replaced
> poorly planned ones, attendance is up, and we are spending less money.
> What's more, students have learned to solve problems, be creative, and
> listen actively to other viewpoints.
>
> Myth 2: Alcohol is bad and must be avoided at all cost. When an
> institution has many rules prohibiting alcohol, the only people who
> sponsor parties are the students who don't mind breaking those rules.
> Typically, the object of such parties is consuming as much alcohol as
> possible. Colleges should consider how they can provide safe, legal,
> and responsible venues for students to develop good lifelong habits.
> That requires assuming some risk, entering into more honest
> conversations with students, and giving them space to create a social
> life.
>
> Hamilton College, for example, has identified particular venues where
> students can hold social events with alcohol, ranging from small
> lounge areas to large halls. It has also built a new campus pub for
> faculty members and students. Bowdoin College has taken a similar
> approach by opening social clubs in several free-standing houses. Both
> colleges are working with students to help them learn to hold
> responsible parties. In the process, the social life at those
> institutions is becoming more varied than a huge campuswide beer
> blast. More important, students are learning to take responsibility,
> hold their peers accountable, and socialize in an environment where
> alcohol is present but not the focus.
>
> We have followed a similar course at Colgate. After a year of
> structured conversations with various student groups, we reversed a
> policy that had banned alcohol in free-standing theme houses (those
> for specific groups like athletes or students involved with outdoor
> education, for example). Students can even obtain financial support
> from the administration for events that include alcohol if they write
> a short memo describing what they want to do and how it will enhance
> the community. The parameters are simple: Each event has to be safe,
> legal, and reasonable, and its focus must be on something other than
> alcohol.
>
> Last year the houses organized 127 social events with no problems.
> Examples included a Halloween party with a faculty and student band, a
> series of debates among faculty members and students, and several
> improvisational-theater presentations. In the process, our theme
> houses are becoming strong communities that anchor our campus life.
> And as many students view the role of alcohol in new and different
> ways, the social life on our campus has changed significantly for the
> better.
>
> Myth 3: More rules improve behavior. Students may follow the rules,
> but that doesn't teach them to think for themselves. It's best to set
> high expectations for students, communicate with them clearly, and
> support them in creating their own paths to meet those expectations.
>
> Nowhere is that better exemplified than with resident assistants,
> whose roles are poorly defined and often contradictory. Resident
> assistants serve as front-line judicial officers and, at the same
> time, mentors and friends to other students. A resident assistant at a
> Southern college asked me, "How can I be a mentor they trust when I am
> the disciplinary officer who writes them up?" We should train resident
> assistants to neither police nor indulge other students but to be
> community organizers who encourage innovation and teamwork.
>
> A good example involves roommate conflicts. The vast majority of
> incoming students have never shared a room with another person, so we
> should not be surprised when difficulties arise. Too often,
> residential advisers have approached roommate conflicts as
> professional staff members who listen to complaints and then create
> rules to deal with them. Yet such problems present opportunities for
> students to voice a problem, hear a different view, and learn to get
> along. The University of Illinois at Chicago has articulated this well
> on its Web site: "The traditional authority figure becomes a person
> who helps this process to happen instead of someone who fixes things
> for people. If every student lived in perfect isolation, he or she
> could conduct him or herself in any way. Since in reality we exist
> within a tightly networked society, we all need to learn to work,
> live, and learn together."
>
> Certainly, problems can lead to student unrest, upset parents, and
> even lawsuits. But problems are inevitable, and instead of trying to
> prevent or solve every one, we should use them as opportunities to
> learn.
>
> Myth 4: Community service is the only way to conduct civic education.
> Civic education is about getting students to do public work. As Harry
> Boyte, the co-director at the Center for Democracy and Citizenship at
> the University of Minnesota, has noted, "Democracy ... is what happens
> when ordinary people get together and make things happen. They do the
> public work that revives a park, saves a wetland, starts a church, or
> tackles racism in their community."
>
> Community service is one way to accomplish that work, but it attracts
> only certain students. Residence halls, on the other hand, are ideal
> sites for civic education as they involve a broad range of people. For
> example, Broward Community College, Naropa University, Minneapolis
> Community and Technical College, and other institutions are
> participating in Public Achievement, a program sponsored by Boyte's
> center that trains college students to coach elementary and secondary
> students to support their local communities.
>
> At Colgate, we are adapting that program for resident assistants and
> encouraging them to organize teams of students, which we call
> Community Councils, to tackle problems or take advantage of
> opportunities to serve the college and the neighboring community. The
> program has inspired a surge of civic involvement in our residential
> units. For example, in one residence hall, students started a theater
> in an empty basement as a way to build community and raise political
> ideas on the campus.
>
> Myth 5: Students lack fundamental values on important public issues.
> In general, today's students are concerned about the environment,
> believe in civil rights, and want to live in a just world. Yet while a
> recent National Survey of Student Engagement found that more than half
> of all students care about and talk about public-policy issues, far
> fewer actually act on their views and values.
>
> For instance, our student groups often bring controversial political
> speakers to the campus to speak about issues of race. Although
> students have claimed that they want opportunities to discuss racial
> concerns with people who hold different views, their actions have
> suggested otherwise. Rather than engage, students have held rallies or
> protested events.
>
> Last year we started to use such moments to train students in the
> skills of civil discourse. As a result students formed the Political
> Student Network, which explores ways to encourage more campus debate,
> including organizing student-led forums after a controversial speaker
> comes to campus. The forums, which involve the group that sponsored
> the speaker and those from dissenting groups, provide wonderful
> moments of fierce but respectful conversations over issues of race,
> class, and public policy.
>
> For example, students in the College Republicans and conservative
> faculty members brought Ed Koch to campus last fall. Koch made some
> bold comments about the relationship between Islam and terrorism. At
> the old Colgate, our Muslim Student Association and the College
> Republicans would have spent weeks writing letters in the school
> newspaper and trading nasty e-mail messages. With our new model, they
> came together and quickly designed a follow-up session that many other
> students attended. Led by student leaders from both groups, as well as
> conservative and progressive Muslim faculty members, the forum was
> framed around how to have an honest but civil conversation about Islam
> in the post-September 11 era.
>
> Myth 6: Without the perks and frills, students will not come. Special
> entitlements are not the way to attract and retain students or to keep
> parents and other groups outside higher education happy. Parents are
> concerned about their children's life choices, while people outside
> higher education care increasingly about work-force development, civic
> education, and other broad societal needs. Since we've refocused our
> student-affairs programming, we have had two of our best admissions
> and fund-raising years, attracting students and reconnecting with
> alumni who have seen purpose and meaning in our new direction.
>
> I don't harbor the fantasy that a new model of residential education
> will solve every student-related problem. But we can spend less money
> and time on unnecessary programs, be more focused on the outcomes that
> we desire, and guide our campuses to become less about catering to
> students' whims and more about educating them to contribute to our
> society.
>
> Adam Weinberg is dean of the college and an associate professor of
> sociology at Colgate University.
>
>
> --
> "I'm a public servant, and not permitted to use my own judgement in any
> way."
> - Superintendent Chalmers
>
> _______________________________________________
> MIT-talk mailing list
> MIT-talk@mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
>
> _______________________________________________
> MIT-talk mailing list
> MIT-talk@mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
>
_______________________________________________
MIT-talk mailing list
MIT-talk@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
