For the past few weeks I have had many opportunities to reflect on the purposes of public and higher education—and our roles as leadership preparation professionals within those contexts. Most of us wear multiple hats—professor/instructor, community activist, researcher, parent—and knowing when to wear which hat can be problematic at times. We represent ourselves, our institutions, and our families when we speak and act. Some of my friends and colleagues have been encountering instances lately where they’ve been called upon to identify which hat(s) are most needed at a particular moment and how to reconcile the differences in actions resulting from a particular hat’s boundaries. Finding ways to remain true to our values and beliefs, educating others about those values and beliefs, and doing so in ways that are proactive and respectful of others requires that we are reflective and purposeful about our efforts.
The institute that I run at Auburn (www.auburn.edu/trumanpierceinstitute) has a three-fold mission to educate, conduct research, and take actions to improve the quality of teaching, leadership, and learning. I try to interpret this mission broadly and using the words of one of my former students, “think as though there is no box” when approaching our work. One current effort, our Second Annual Anti-Bullying Summit (see www.auburn.edu/antibullying for more information, our call for proposals, and free access videos of last year’s presentations), was initially created to educate multiple audiences about how and why to address instances of bullying in multiple settings. Bullying influences many students’ decisions to miss school or drop out. Therefore, addressing bullying becomes one way to have an impact on the achievement gap while addressing other social justice issues. Acts of oppression and aggression based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, class, or nationality, whether they are institutionalized policies and practices or individual acts, have the potential to alienate, repress, or otherwise marginalize the educational and employment opportunities that should be available to all students and citizens. Alabama’s Immigration Law is, in my mind, a classic example of institutionalized oppression that directly impacts student opportunity to learn (or even attend school). For me, educating others about bullying (individual, organizational, and systemic/political) is an important area for leaders to embrace and share in their schools and programs for many reasons, some of which are more obvious than others.
Recently, I have been preparing to serve on a panel that will engage in discussion related to the educational achievement gap, particularly as it exists in Alabama. This event will be held the evening of February 1st. The panel discussion, part of a new effort on the part of Auburn’s Vice President for Student Affairs, in collaboration with the Student Government, was created to raise student awareness about critical social issues and how students can become involved in helping to address these issues. The other panelists are: Alabama State Superintendent of Education, Dr. Tommy Bice; Dr. Marilyn Strutchens, a distinguished professor of math education; Lauren Hayes, the Teaching Advocacy Director at Tennessee Charter Schools; and Lauren Hayes, an Auburn graduate and Teach for America Core Member. We’ll have an hour to respond to initial questions and 30 minutes to answer questions from the general audience. It should be a fascinating event with lively discussion and I’m hoping that the comments made will challenge the assumptions of at least some who are in attendance.
While I commend our administrative and student leaders for his efforts to inform and engage our undergraduate student body, I remain cautious about expectations for the event. We may reach a few students, but I believe it is more likely that those in attendance will hear reinforcement for the messages they brought with them, rather than having their core beliefs challenged enough so that they are willing to take action. In many ways this event, while well intentioned, is symbolic rather than substantive. I’m also cautious that some of those involved will feel that they’ve done their part by attending the event and perhaps even participating in a follow up activity rather than realizing that a systemic, long-term commitment is needed to influence change that can result in closing (or dare we say it-eliminating) the achievement gap. Still, it is a start and I’m glad to be a member of the panel. For me, sharing compelling research-informed content, advocating for what we know is right and just, and helping to develop an engaged well-informed citizenry are other important purposes of education.
Shifting gears…As I read today’s issue of Inside Higher Education I was particularly concerned about one piece and the implications for our work if this policy change occurs. In President Obama’s State of the Union Address colleges were given a heads up that policy changes related to higher education may be in the wind. As stated in Inside Higher Education[i], “The White House has proposed expanding the program to $10 billion per year and revamping the formula for distributing both Perkins loans and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants. Money would be directed to colleges that do well on three criteria: setting a “responsible tuition policy,” providing “good value” to students, and enrolling and graduating relatively large numbers of low-income students. Colleges that do not meet those standards could see their funding for campus-based programs cut.”
Also as stated today, Diane Ravitch recently criticized many trends in higher education policy and specifically, President Obama's new plan. “An increasing reliance on productivity and outcomes data will result in a generation of students who cannot learn or think for themselves,” she warned. "The more we attempt to quantify what cannot be quantified, the more we narrow the purposes of higher education, Ravitch said, calling on college presidents to stand up for academic freedom and resist the ‘accountability juggernaut’." [ii]
I think most of us would agree that being accountable is necessary, but how we define what counts as important in higher education and the ways we address measuring outcomes requires far more research and thinking. As Ravitch argued, trying to quantify intangible qualities and outcomes will limit the breadth and depth of our work. We don’t have the luxury of endless time for efforts to identify what counts as important—others are well-poised to do this for us. Rightn now, well-funded and politically connected organizations are changing the way leaders are prepared (a few of these include Academic Partnerships, Broad Foundation, and Laura Bush’s work).
Having responsible tuition policies and increasing educational opportunities for low-income and/or under-represented groups of students are important goals. Most of us would agree with these goals. But, I am concerned about the definition of providing “good value” to students that is being touted. According to today’s Inside Higher Education, “The plan calls for linking federal aid not only to net price increases but to whether colleges provide “good value” to students -- a “quality education and training that prepares graduates to obtain employment and repay their loans.” [iii] I believe it is essential that we educate ourselves and others about these recommendations and then advocate for what we know to be right and just.
As stated in our 2012 UCEA conference theme, The Future is Ours: Leadership Matters! We need to be the leaders, researchers, and advocates we expect our students and program graduates to be. We operate from privileged positions and as such have a responsibility to not only speak our truths, but to engage others in efforts to influence policy and practice locally, state-wide, nationally, and internationally. We need to work in ways that are proactive, reflective, engaging and purposeful. I’m fearful that if we don’t educate ourselves and involve our students and others (and ourselves) in our engaged scholarship and practice—and do this soon--we may become irrelevant. I encourage you to share examples of the advocacy work you are doing and the influence it is having with others in UCEA. Responding to this post is one way to do that. I suspect that we are already doing far more than most would suspect—and it would be exciting to see the breadth and depth of efforts already underway.
[i] Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/01/30/obama-higher-education-plan-signals-policy-shift#ixzz1l3Czgf1r
Inside Higher Ed
[ii] Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2012/01/31/diane-ravitch-takes-obamas-higher-ed-plan#ixzz1l3A9PQzk Inside Higher Ed
[iii] Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/01/30/obama-higher-education-plan-signals-policy-shift#ixzz1l3QFEnJi Inside Higher Ed
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 1:50PM