1 / 9

The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty. CIRTL Forum I November 6, 2003. Cathy A. Trower, Ph.D. Harvard University. Key Dimensions of Change. Commercialization Licensing, patenting, strategic alliances, money generation Corporate sponsorship

andromeda-marinos
Télécharger la présentation

The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty CIRTL Forum I November 6, 2003 Cathy A. Trower, Ph.D. Harvard University

  2. Key Dimensions of Change • Commercialization • Licensing, patenting, strategic alliances, money generation • Corporate sponsorship • Political pork • The “collegium” is gone • ETOB • Star faculty • Fragmentation • Few shared beliefs

  3. Key Dimensions of Change • Academic freedom has eroded • PC rules the day • The faculty job is tougher • Tenure elusive • Stakes are higher

  4. The 21st Century University MODE 1 MODE 2 Emphasis on individual Emphasis on teams Academic control and authority Research direction shaped by interaction between researchers and users Discipline-based Problem and issue-based; transdisciplinary Local organizational knowledge Organizational diversity, networks, connectivity Quality judged by peer review Broad-based quality control; peer review and users (social & economic impact) Gibbons (1998)

  5. Most scientists regarded the new streamlined peer-review process as ‘quite an improvement.’

  6. What Aspiring Faculty Want What they want/believeWhat they find Openness Equity Fairness Transparency Secrecy Cronyism Bias Opaqueness Collaboration improves collective performance and enhances overall productivity; creates a healthier workplace. Competition improves individual performance and survival of the fittest enhances productivity.

  7. What Aspiring Faculty Want What they want/believeWhat they find • Paradigm II, where facts are: • Concrete • Situated • Historical • Particularistic • Paradigm I, where facts are: • Abstract • General • Ahistorical • Universal Scientist is part of what s/he studies. Scientist is completely detached. • Merit is recognized as: • Socially constructed • Subjective • Contextual • Merit is: • Empirically determined • Objective • Absolute

  8. What Aspiring Faculty Want What they want/believeWhat they find Research organized around problems. Research organized around disciplines. Traditional research is the coin of the realm. Teaching and service should be valued and rewarded. Life of the mind AND of the heart; we need balance. Life of the mind ONLY; make sacrifices.

More Related