9
The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty Cathy A. Trower, Ph.D. Harvard University CIRTL Forum I November 6, 2003

The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

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 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future

STEM Faculty

Cathy A. Trower, Ph.D.Harvard University

CIRTL Forum INovember 6, 2003

Page 2: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

Key Dimensions of Change

1. Commercialization Licensing, patenting, strategic alliances,

money generation Corporate sponsorship Political pork

2. The “collegium” is gone ETOB Star faculty Fragmentation Few shared beliefs

Page 3: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

Key Dimensions of Change

3. Academic freedom has eroded PC rules the day

4. The faculty job is tougher Tenure elusive Stakes are higher

Page 4: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

The 21st Century University

MODE 1 MODE 2

Emphasis on teamsEmphasis on individual

Research direction shaped by interaction between researchers and users

Academic control and authority

Quality judged by peer review

Organizational diversity, networks, connectivity

Local organizational knowledge

Discipline-based Problem and issue-based; transdisciplinary

Broad-based quality control; peer review and users (social & economic impact)

Gibbons (1998)

Page 5: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

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

Page 6: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

What Aspiring Faculty Want

What they want/believe What they find

SecrecyCronyismBiasOpaqueness

OpennessEquityFairnessTransparency

Collaboration improves collective performance and enhances overall productivity; creates a healthier workplace.

Competition improves individual performance and survival of the fittest enhances productivity.

Page 7: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

What Aspiring Faculty Want

What they want/believe What they find

Paradigm I, where facts are:• Abstract• General• Ahistorical• Universal

Paradigm II, where facts are:• Concrete• Situated• Historical• Particularistic

Merit is:• Empirically determined• Objective• Absolute

Merit is recognized as:• Socially constructed• Subjective• Contextual

Scientist is part of what s/he studies.

Scientist is completely detached.

Page 8: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty

What Aspiring Faculty Want

What they want/believe What they find

Research organized around disciplines.

Research organized around problems.

Life of the mind ONLY; make sacrifices.

Life of the mind AND of the heart; we need balance.

Teaching and service should be valued and rewarded.

Traditional research is the coin of the realm.

Page 9: The Changing Institutional Context and Implications for Preparing Future STEM Faculty