There are several unspoken, unwritten conditions that I (and hopefully other faculty members) feel must be met in order to be effective at our jobs and to enjoy what we do. Be aware, these are not inalienable rights, nor are they necessarily directly “student centered.” But also, recall that it is impossible to do the best job that we can for students without the quality of confidence in ourselves and our universities. I may add to this statement in future posts as new ideas and thoughts arise or as fellow colleagues on the road (faculty and students) share their ideas.
Article 1: Academic Freedom is a Central Principal in University Education. For some (many?) members of the general public, the relationship between research and teaching is unclear. My research energizes my teaching, and I believe such is the case for most of my colleagues. By “energizes,” I mean my teaching would be uninspired, less accurate, and less meaningful if I did not have the freedom to explore through research. Academic freedom means the freedom to spend time thinking about ideas, to pursue research, gather information, and answer questions in one’s chosen area of interest, and to be able to share what has been learned through publication and teaching.
Article 2: Tenure is Necessary. Academic freedom is a fairly liberal entity, hence the use of the word ‘freedom.’ Its status must be protected because ideas and argumentation have the potential to create divisiveness, which can (inevitably will) offend one or another party. Tenure does not guarantee a right to be offensive; it protects the professor from being fired for the integrity of generating and sharing new ideas, which can be controversial. Tenure should never be considered a protection that allows unethical behavior, and it should be treated as a responsibility by those who obtain it, not only as a position of power and status.
Article 3: Administrative Leadership as Service. In order to have confidence in the leadership above me in the university hierarchy I need to believe that they believe that their job is first and foremost to serve the university community. The university community consists of three entities: students, faculty members, and staff. Students are the ‘razon de etre,’ faculty are the semi-permanent to permanent members of the community, and staff members hold the university together. If a university was a blimp, the students would be the helium, faculty would be the skin of the blimp, and the rivets, bolts, et cetera would be the staff. Administrators are entrusted with flying the ship. There is a big difference between ‘service’ and ‘management.’ Service does not mean that administrators exist to grant my wishes, but it does mean that they represent my interests. Service is a labor of love and dedication, but management is just a job.
Article 4: The Limits of Student Centeredness. This may seem controversial, but it is really just common sense. We cannot be so overly student centered that we forget the differential in experience between those who take and those who teach classes. My simplistic impression is that there is mild antagonism these days between students and faculty. This could stem from a variety of problems, but the most important condition is that students deserve our respect. What this means is that each student deserves our attention and help as long as they are trying to learn. There is a judgment-call in this for the professor. We must gauge when we think a student really is trying; there are times when we will be wrong. However, most professors have a vast amount of experience in the classroom (as students if not yet as instructors) and can tell the difference, subjective as this process is. More important is that student centeredness does not mean ‘making students feel comfortable.’ To the contrary, learning is an uncomfortable process. If a student argues that he/she “is not a math person,” and if he/she needs to study math to succeed, then it is our job to help him/her become aware that becoming more of a math person is possible. If the student persists in her/his belief in “non-math people,” then there must be no pretense about it; she/he must choose a different “non-math” oriented path.
The issues reflected in these articles permeate my thinking much of each day. I think that many of our educational institutions and traditions in America are threatened these days. Some traditions are under direct attack, others suffer from neglect. Knee-jerk reactions by faculty only entrench holders of opposing perspectives. We must explain what we do, share our enthusiasm, and clarify what we need to do our jobs. If we choose not to do this in a constructive, thoughtful manner, then we only have ourselves to blame, and we have much to lose.
0 comments:
Post a Comment