To say that, over the past few years, our federal government has failed to govern is an understatement. Congress has become polarized by ideologues who see their role not as finding workable solutions to problems, but simply to stand by their ideologies at all costs. Our representatives are beholden to corporations--who are NOT "people" as some have suggested and are NOT citizens--rather than to the voters who they were elected to represent.
There are many reasons for this failure, but one that has not been discussed much is the fact that our children receive very little by way of civic education as part of the secondary school curriculum. When I was in high school in the 1960s, one class in ninth grade was devoted to Pennsylvania History and Civics--an introduction to the Constitution and the structure of our federal government. Then, in 12th grade, we had a full year of "Problems of Democracy," a course that looked at how the government worked to solve problems. Sadly, it appears that many schools have dropped these requirements over the past generation. As a result, fewer voters know what to demand of the people they elect to represent them.
So, I was delighted to learn that the Pennsylvania Department of Education will require a graduation exam in "Civics and Government" beginning in 2020, with the exam available to schools as early as 2016. It seems like a long time to wait, but I am nevertheless happy that the Commonwealth has acted to ensure that all Pennsylvanians receive some level of citizenship education.
Now, then, it would be great to see our colleges and universities require a capstone general education course in all professional curricula that gives students a sense of what the citizenship responsibilities are of professionals in different fields.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
MOOCS and the Land Grant Mission
In the November 29, 2012 issue of Inside Higher Education, W. Joseph King and Michael Nanfito of
the National Institute for Technology in Liberal Education, make that
case. “The MOOC,” they write, “. .
. is essential a high-tech extension of the traditional industrial age
university lecture-hall experience.”
However, they add that one can look beyond MOOCs as a simple delivery
mechanism and see its potential as a “connectivist” tool that gives
institutions the ability to integrate four functions:
1. Aggregation,
allowing students to bring together different sources of knowledge provided
within the course as well as beyond the course.
2. Remixing
information and ideas by communicating with peers about what they are learning.
3. Repurposing
information to create new knowledge.
4. Feeding
forward their learning by applying it to new situations and publishing the
results.
“The key here,” they write, “is thinking of the MOOC not in
the standard way, as asynchronous video lectures and course readings, but in
the connectivist way . . . to provide participatory space.”
Embedding MOOCs in
the Land Grant Mission
I would add that another key to ultimate success with this
new model is to base it firmly in the institution’s mission. Some of us can remember how, at the beginning of the online
learning revolution, Fathom—a project that involved some of the same
institutions as are now innovating with MOOCs—failed because the initiative
simply was not within the institution’s core mission and culture. Today, I would argue that
institutions should not simply emulate what Harvard and others are doing with
MOOCs but ask how this new generation of online learning can best extend their
own missions.
I have spent my entire career—from student to
administrator—in land grant universities.
There are several ways that MOOCs can advance the land grant mission at
a time when that mission is being challenged by radical changes in the society
it serves. Here are a few:
Revitalizing General
Education – Like the big private research universities, our land grant
universities offer large lecture sections for many of its general education
courses. Obviously, MOOCs have the
potential to make these courses more engaging and relevant. However, they also hold potential for
transforming general education from a discipline-based distribution curriculum
to a more comprehensive interdisciplinary curriculum by providing a
“participatory space” where faculty from multiple disciplines can share ideas
around common themes and encourage students to create new knowledge to address
major societal problems. When I
was an undergraduate at Penn State in the 1960s, the general education
curriculum included interdisciplinary core courses in the humanities, social
sciences, biological sciences, and physical sciences, as well as innovative
Science, Technology, and Society courses that focused on the interaction of
disciplines around major social issues.
MOOCs could support this approach at scale for large, multi-campus
institutions like Penn State and other land grants.
Extending the Impact
of Research and Technology Transfer -- MOOCs offer a particularly powerful way for research faculty
to connect with the communities that can most benefit from applying their
research. Imagine videos or other
media that present the results of research, combined with the ability for
individuals in the community (whether it be industry, business, government
policy makers, other educational sectors, health care, etc.) to explore the
impact on their own practices and to share ideas among each other as well as
with the faculty researchers in order to identify new practices that
effectively build on new research.
Re-Imagining
Cooperative Extension – Cooperative Extension was created during the
Industrial Revolution to ensure that American agriculture would keep pace with
industrialization and urbanization.
The idea was to distribute expertise to the county level, so that
academic specialists could work directly with farmers in their fields. Cooperative Extension remains essential
to quickly translating agriculture and environmental research into effective
practice. MOOCs could greatly
facilitate the university’s ability to bring practice communities around
agricultural research and issues (new strands of plant and animal diseases, the
impact of climate change, etc.) to greatly enhance the ability of agriculture
and environmental resource professionals to respond to new needs.
Continuing Education
and Outreach – Just as MOOCs offer new opportunities to create change
communities around agriculture and technology transfer, they can be used to
better empower relationships with other community stakeholders normally managed
through the university’s continuing education or outreach function. Examples: small business development centers, urban renewal centers,
teacher in-service programs, etc.
One of the great advantages of MOOCs in this environment is that
geography is no longer a restraint; these online programs can create
communities of people who share common problems or common environments, even though
they are separated by geography, government boundaries, etc.
Institutional
Collaboration – Our land grant universities have already shown great
willingness to work with each other across state boundaries to improve the
resources available to their in-state clientele. A good early example is the American Distance Education
Consortium, which encourages sharing of Extension resources across states. Similarly, the CIC’s CourseShare
initiative is using online learning to aggregate student audiences for courses
in rarely taught languages and other specialties, while the Great Plains
Inter-institutional Distance Education Alliance (IDEA) allows large state
universities in the Midwest to offer graduate programs that share expertise
from multiples institution. MOOCs
can be used to enhance these relationships and build new ones where two or more
institutions share a commitment to a distributed clientele.
In the long run, the initial use of MOOCs to open access to
large lecture courses may or may not transform undergraduate education. However, it is clear that this new
generation of online learning has the potential to help transform our
institutions to meet the needs of individuals and communities in the new
knowledge economy.
Reference
King, W. Joseph, and Nanfito, Michael. “To MOOC or Not To MOOC?” Inside
Higher Education, November 29, 2012. http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/11/29/essay-challenges-posed-moocs-liberal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)