Envisioning the Faculty for the 21st Century
Transcription
Envisioning the Faculty for the 21st Century
Envisioning the Faculty st for the 21 Century Adrianna Kezar Elizabeth Holcombe William Mallon Leslie Gonzales Nancy Hensel R. Eugene Rice Overview • Context and Need for New Faculty Models • Emerging Consensus about New Faculty Roles • Model for the Future of the Faculty: Faculty as Scholarly Educators • Medical Schools Leading the Way • Changing Demographics and New Opportunities for Faculty Work • Collaborative Evaluation and Holistic Departments • Academic Freedom in the 21st Century Context and Need for New Faculty Models Changes in Faculty Composition Composition of Instructional Faculty Among Nonprofit Institutions* *Excludes graduate students responsible for providing instruction Drivers of Change in Faculty Composition • Massification of higher education, with rising enrollments and new types of institutions • Market fluctuations, necessitating greater flexibility • Economic concerns, such as uncertain revenue streams and cost concerns • Corporatization of higher education • New ways of using technology • Assessment • More to come… Critiques of Adjunct Model Poor working conditions and lack of support leading to worse student outcomes Few professional development opportunities Exclusion from departmental and institutional service Little or no constructive evaluation of their work to allow for improvement Not provided with important information about programs, policies, and curricula Lack of job security leading to high rates of turnover and instability Viewed as merely a tool for content delivery, important role in student learning not respected • Professionalism degraded • Inequities in compensation, benefits, and working conditions • • • • • • • Critiques of Tenure-Track Model Overemphasis on research at expense of teaching Lack of flexibility Few incentives to improve teaching or focus on learning Lack of attention to other scholarly roles in service, civic engagement, or local leadership • Probationary period (tenure-track but before tenure is granted) constrains faculty to focus primarily on research and publication • • • • Faculty Matter for Student Learning and Institutional Mission • Abundance of research on importance of faculty-student interactions for student success • Particularly strong impact for students of color and firstgeneration college students • Depth and quality of interactions impact strength of outcomes • Institutional factors can promote or constrain positive studentfaculty interactions and shape outcomes Emerging Consensus Survey • Survey of over 1500 stakeholders in higher education, including faculty, campus administrators (deans & provosts), policymakers, trustees, and accreditors in 2014-2015 • Goal was to get key stakeholders to envision future faculty models and see if there were areas of consensus around a more effective model • Questions in 8 areas: faculty pathways; contracts; unbundling of faculty roles; status in the academic community; faculty development, promotion, and evaluation; flexibility; collaboration and community engagement; and public good roles Broad Consensus • General agreement on the attractiveness of many ideas presented in the survey • Strongest agreement on issues related to restoring professionalism of faculty • No major differences among faculty members in unions • Concerns about feasibility Consensus on Restoring Professionalism to Faculty Role • Elements of professionalism: Academic freedom Equitable compensation and access to benefits Involvement in shared governance Access to resources needed to conduct their role Opportunities for promotion Clearly defined expectations and evaluation criteria Clear notification of contract renewal as well as grievance processes • Continuous professional development • • • • • • • Other Areas of Consensus • Reduce reliance on part-time faculty by increasing number of full-time positions • Create differentiated faculty roles • Emphasize importance of teaching • Maintain some sort of scholarly component in all faculty roles, using Boyer’s expanded definition of scholarship • Allow more flexibility in working arrangements, such as creativity contracts • Foster more collaboration and community engagement • Revise incentives and reward structures • Promote public good roles Feasibility Concerns • Several feasibility “gaps,” where there were high levels of agreement but low perceptions of feasibility • • • • Creativity contracts Boyer model Consortium agreements Flexible work arrangements • Concerns cited in open-ended comments mostly around budgets or logistical complexity Hot Button Issues • Some key areas of disagreement to navigate carefully: • Phasing out vs. maintaining tenure • Termed tenure appointments • Concerns about emphasizing teaching to exclusion of other roles • Having faculty more closely align their work to departmental and institutional needs Model for the Future of the Faculty Faculty as “Scholarly Educators” • Emphasis on student success • 4 arcs of influence: • Mission, goals, and roles • Responsiveness to external forces • Reprofessionalization of professoriate • Reinforcing or restoring key values Resources to Help Redesign Faculty Roles • The Adapting by Design report goes into more detail on many of the ideas we discuss, and its accompanying Toolkit provides a practical guide for institutional leaders interested in taking concrete steps to redesign faculty roles on their campus • REPORT: http://www.uscrossier.org/pullias/wpcontent/uploads/2015/06/DELPHIPROJECT_ADAPTING-BY-DESIGN_2ED.pdf • TOOLKIT: http://www.uscrossier.org/pullias/wpcontent/uploads/2016/12/DelphiProject_Adapti ngByDesignTOOLKIT.pdf Other Delphi Project Resources • Dispelling the Myths: Locating the Resources Needed to Support Non-Tenure-Track Faculty • The Imperative for Change: Fostering Understanding of the Necessity of Changing Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Policies and Practices • Non-Tenure-Track Faculty on Our Campus: A Guide for Campus Task Forces to Better Understand Faculty Working Conditions and Necessity of Change • These and other resources can be found at http://www.thechangingfaculty.org Up Next • Medical Schools Leading the Way: William Mallon • Changing Demographics and New Opportunities for Faculty Work: Leslie Gonzales • Collaborative Evaluation and Holistic Departments: Nancy Hensel • Academic Freedom in the 21st Century: R. Eugene Rice Medical Schools Leading the Way William Mallon, Ed.D. Senior Director, Strategy and Innovation Association of American Medical Colleges Innovations in Faculty Appointment and Career Pathways • Differentiated Faculty Tracks Full-time MD Faculty in Clinical Departments at U.S. Medical Schools, 1966-2013 70% 60% Non-tenure track 50% Tenured 40% 30% Tenure-track 20% 10% Other 0% 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 Innovations in Faculty Appointment and Career Pathways • Differentiated Faculty Tracks • Expanded Definition of Scholarship • Flexible Approaches to Tenure-Track Appointments Aspirations and Inclinations among Emerging & Early Career Faculty Members: Leveraging Strengths, Imagining Possibilities Chapter contribution by Leslie D. Gonzales & Aimee L. Terosky Purpose • Consider how colleges and universities striving to (re)imagine the roles, responsibilities, and reward systems for faculty can leverage the “strengths and aspirations” of emerging and early career faculty members. • Emerging faculty members defined as doctoral students in the latter phases of their doctoral programs (e.g., candidacy) or those within five years of their graduation (e.g., post-docs). Early career faculty members included both tenure and non-tenure-stream faculty within the first five years of their appointment. • To our knowledge, no current studies/organizations study faculty careers in this way, which means we relied on several data sources to understand who these faculty are. About Our Method • Examined several data sources to help us understand this cohort of emerging and early career faculty. • Data sources we used to construct and understand cohort: • National Center for Education Statistics, 2013, 2014, 2015 • National Survey of Doctoral Recipients, 2010 • Peer reviewed studies that considers how racial/gender/and other identity markers seem to shape faculty aspirations & strengths • Peer reviewed studies regarding inclinations and experiences of generation generation X, millennial generation • Peer reviewed studies regarding doctoral education experiences within the last 1.5 decades • Qualitative data sets that we collected over years 2010-2015 Based on our review of several data sources, here is a bit of what we learned about this cohort: • Represents folks born in the late 1970’s through early 1980’s. • More racially diverse than previous cohorts; in some fields, women constitute the majority; likely to have more fluid understandings of identity, overall. • Hold “non-traditional” views with regard to marital/familial roles and composition, meaning that women and men are likely to share family and household management. • Like earlier cohorts, this cohort aspires to work-life balance. • Hold strong commitments to community-based activities and research agendas. • Likely to have experienced on-line and/or hybrid classes over the course of their academic experiences. • Came to age alongside social media, used to obtaining news, knowledge, and information from many sources. How can colleges/universities leverage these strengths and aspirations? • Commitments among this cohort of faculty to work with local communities represent a crucial opportunity for colleges and universities to mend/improve relations with communities. • Their work will likely be community-based, action-oriented, and/or interdisciplinary. • Must be evaluative language and systems in place to support such engagement. • Non-tenure stream faculty, especially in applied fields, that are engaged in such activities must be recognized for this work as they often serve “informally” as bridges between departments/programs and communities. How can colleges/universities leverage these strengths and aspirations? • Comfort and familiarity with technology will mean that this cohort of faculty is likely to be more interested in and willing to teach online/hybrid formats and to use social media to distribute research and findings. • This is an opportunity for institutions to capture post-secondary education students that they have failed to appeal to, and to do so with a prepared and willing faculty. • However, colleges and universities must not assume that online teaching is not “easier” than face-to-face teaching (e.g., avoid overloading class-sizes). • Institutions should support faculty members who want to engage in blog writing, dissemination of their work through broader means, etc., as this represents an opportunity for faculty to engage with a broader public. • There must be evaluative language for this in reward systems; will likely require training for faculty evaluation committees. Final Thoughts • Any given year/semester, colleges and universities are hiring new faculty or asking departments to redesign programs. • Asking faculty to reflect on and share their biographical, professional, and academic strengths and aspirations can serve as a powerful start-point. • This is what we call an asset-based approach to redesigning faculty roles and evaluative systems. • Generational literature and literature that attends to doctoral student experiences can provide insight for administrators. Academic Freedom and Democratic Engagement: Two Imperatives for Faculty of the Future “Democracy has to be born every generation, and education is its midwife.” John Dewey “Liberty and duty. Freedom and responsibility. That is the deal.” John Gardner Academic Freedom Lehrfrieheit (definition by Fredrick Rudolph): “The right of the university professor to freedom of inquiry and to freedom of teaching, the right to study and to report on his (her) findings in an atmosphere of consent.” The consent was from the collegium: “the community of scholars” (peers with tenure) A Broader, More Integrated Understanding of Scholarly Work Epistemological Shift - A different relationship with students - Focus on student learning and development - Attend to the making of meaning - A different kind of research - Community-based research - Two-way street - Honoring local as well as cosmopolitan knowledge - A different relationship with community - Not “application of knowledge” - Practices that are collaborative, inclusive and reciprocal - Honoring wisdom of practice - “Stewardship of place” (AASCU) Toward a Different Kind of Academic Excellence Characteristics: 1. Integrative / Beyond Differentiation 2. Collaborative / Beyond Hierarchy & Competitiveness 3. Inclusive / Beyond Diversity 4. Engaged / Beyond Walls & Silos 5. Networked / Beyond the Split Between: - content - process - content - context - content - commitment The Democratization of Scholarship?