It's About Learning

Employers Want Broadly Educated New Hires, Survey Finds – Students – The Chronicle of Higher Education via kwout

The Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) survey “It Takes More Than a Major: Employer Priorities for College Learning and Student Success,” reveals that most employers don’t think colleges are doing a very good job of preparing students for work. In response to the survey results, 160 employers and 107 college presidents agreed to sign a compact and work toward helping the public:

understand the importance of a “21st-century liberal-arts education,” comprising broad and adaptive learning, personal and social responsibility, and intellectual skills.

While I admire this initiative I am somewhat skeptical of its impact. Why? It was only 6 years ago that AAC&U conducted a similar survey that revealed similar findings. In the 2008 report How Should Colleges Assess and Improve Student Learning?) Peter D. Hart Research Associates revealed the following 6 Key Findings:

When it comes to preparedness for success at the entry-level, one-third of business executives think that a significant proportion of recent college graduates do not have the requisite skills and knowledge.
When asked to evaluate recent college graduates’ preparedness in 12 areas, employers give them the highest marks for teamwork, ethical judgment, and intercultural skills, and the lowest scores for global knowledge, self-direction, and writing.
Most employers indicate that college transcripts are not particularly useful in helping evaluate job applicants’ potential to succeed at their company.
Few employers believe that multiple-choice tests of general content knowledge are very effective in ensuring student achievement. Instead, employers have the most confidence in assessments that demonstrate graduates’ ability to apply their college learning to complex, real-world challenges, as well as projects or tests that integrate problem-solving, writing, and analytical reasoning skills.
Employers deem both multiple-choice tests of general content knowledge and institutional assessments that show how colleges compare in advancing critical-thinking skills of limited value for evaluating applicants’ potential for success in the workplace. They anticipate that faculty-assessed internships, community-based projects, and senior projects would be the most useful in gauging graduates’ readiness for the workplace.
When asked to advise colleges on how to develop their methods for assessing students’ learning, employers rank multiple-choice tests of students’ general content knowledge and institutional scores for colleges as conspicuously low priorities.

This report focused on assessment and learning and offered some very specific and practical recommendations that, if followed, should have resulted in a different findings in the latest AAC&U survey. Why hasn’t higher education made any progress in this area over the past 6 years? Theodore Sizer, the former Harvard Graduate School of Education Dean and Educational Reformer, argues in his book, The Red Pencil, that little has changed in education since his experiences in the information and test based classroom he endured in 1946. Why does higher education perpetually find itself in a state of paralysais by analysis?

We need to heed the advice often attributed to Albert Einstein. Although he never actually offered the following quote this notion of challenging conventional thought is still useful:

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

We can stop this insanity only if we stop hiring so many traditional risk adverse leaders and faculty. As I detailed in my post Pick Two – Innovation, Change or Stability we need to search out individuals who are outside-of-the-box thinkers with entrepreneurial spirits and unconventional career paths if we really want to bring about the changes we so desperately need in education.

http://chronicle.com/blogs/next/2011/10/20/where-will-innovation-begin/?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en

Next – The Chronicle of Higher Education via kwout

Reviewing Jeff Selingo’s article Where will Innovation Begin in the Chronicle of Higher Education was the culminating event for the past two weeks of travel, meetings, presentations and conference attendance. Selingo points to the creation of the Harrisburg University of Science and Technology as an example of Educational innovation because the four year university focuses first on the learning needs of its students, has no departments, offers interdisciplinary instruction, has direct involvement from the corporate community, requires students to participate in internships and doesn’t require students to come to class to learn. While this collection of characteristics may sound incredibly innovative to those who are only familiar with Tier 1 research universities, for those in the academic community who have been involved in liberal arts instruction everything other than the lack of classrooms is generally the norm. When we consider focusing on learning, a well rounded foundation of instruction from an interdisciplinary perspective, and real world learning experiences as innovative is there any wonder that there is a looming crisis in Education in the US and in many other countries that follow the US model. Most social constructivists (myself included) would view the type of learning environment that Harrisburg University has created not as innovative but simply effective if one expects to enable students to think critically and analytically and prepare them learn how to learn in any environment. This focus on, what I would like to refer to as, the fundamentals of effective teaching and learning was also central to all of my activities over the past several weeks.

The four days that I recently spent at EDUCAUSE 2011 in Philadelphia confirmed that even the technology leaders in Higher Education are recognizing that technological innovations are often wasted on Higher Education if they are done outside of a foundation of teaching and learning. EDUCAUSE is the annual conference of Educational Technology and Academic leaders who come together to share their insight on how technology can be used to improve Higher Education. I co-presented in a session titled, Assessing for Deeper Learning, with my colleague from Abilene Christian University as well as colleagues from Wake Forest University, Indiana University at Purdue and from the SimSchool. We all shared our progress in our NGLC/Gates Foundation funded research. In this session we discussed how teaching simulation (SimSchool) can be used to prepare future teachers, how a biology textbook (BioBook) doesn’t have to be a tradition book but can be collection of online resources, media and interactive technologies that can be used to engage learners, how a Peer instruction model (CPLTL) can be moved online using Adobe Connect Pro and finally how mobility can be used to enhance inquiry-based learning (MEIBL). The central focus of all this research was how the learning environment could be enhanced using technology–the emphasis was the learning NOT the technology. In all these cases the technology essentially “went away” and simply enabled the students to learn more effectively. Many of the concurrent and keynote sessions that I attended had this same focus of technology enhancing and enabling learning or providing a level of engagement that was otherwise not attainable.

In addition to the focus on teaching and learning the predominant focus at EDUCAUSE 2011 was mobility. This theme was also the predominate focus at EDUCAUE in 2010 but the difference between the two years is that compared to 2010 there were NO questions that mobility is a given and there is NO denying that this is not just a passing trend but a reality that is unleashing the true connective power of the Internet. The explosive growth of IOS and Android devices means that most people are carrying or have immediate access to some sort of a device that will connect them to the Internet. While this was initially a consumer growth, the adoption of iPads and all other forms of mobile technology in the corporate world as well as education indicate that this is a global trend that is changing the way we learn, work and play. A PEW presentation on the trends in mobile learning revealed 2/3 of all people access the internet via a wireless connection. The research revealed by the PEW foundation also revealed that people in the lowest socio-economic categories primary access to the internet was through a mobile phone or other mobile device. (Watch the full PEW foundation presentation)

This use of mobile technology also means that we are moving away from the push economy where corporations, governments and academia decide what everyone will want or need and attempt to fill that need without fully exploring the actual needs of the constituent. Mobility creates a much higher degree of engagement and interactivity and is a key factor in the emerging pull economy which shifts the focus to understanding what is needed first and then coordinating or pulling together resources as they are needed to fill the need or want. The key change is that there is a more significant focus on the end user. From an educational perspective this means that the students needs are more closely examined and resources are then utilized as they are needed-which results in a much more learner centric perspective.

This emphasis on the learner and the pulling together of diverse resources was a sentiment that was presented repeatedly at the National Vice-Presidents’ Academic Council (NATVAC) conference I attended a week before EDUCAUSE. In a presentation to our group, Chad Gaffied the President of Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council stated:

An international consensus is now emerging around a people-centered model of innovation for successful change in businesses, government, and communities. In contrast to the linear lab-to-market approach of the 20th century, the new model puts people—ideas and behaviour—at the centre of an expanded and dynamic innovation picture that better portrays the complex interplay of creativity, technology and society. ―NATVAC, October 2011

Gaffied also pointed out that some of the most innovative corporations are looking for graduates who have the ability to work in an interdisciplinary setting and are able to pull together and condense information from a variety of perspectives. For example, of the 6000 people Google will be hiring in the next year more than 5000 will come from the Humanities and Social Science. Similarly, OpenText and Canadian technology company will be looking to hire 4000 university graduates in the next year and they expect to take more than 3000 from the Humanities and Social Sciences. The global marketplace is extremely diverse and requires leaders who are able to work within and through that diversity to solve problems in flexible and unique ways. It appears that while we still need high specialized graduates we need even more generalists who are able to embrace a future that we are unable to predict.

This same message, that we need many more broadly prepared graduates, was also shared by Paul Davidson the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada at NATVAC. Davidson shared how both the Federal and Provincial governments are starting to question the value of the past 15 years of intensive research funding and how they believe a greater emphasis must be placed on teaching and learning. He also referred to the newly released book, Academic Reform: Policy Options for Improving the Quality and Cost-effectiveness of Undergraduate Education in Ontario that is highly critical of the current focus on research and strongly recommends a greater emphasis on undergraduate instruction and a much greater focus on teaching and learning.

Over the past few weeks this same message “higher education must have to adopt a greater emphasis on teaching and learning and our graduates must have a more diverse interdisciplinary foundation” keeps on coming across loud and clear from a variety of sources. What the critics and pundits are asking for is a return to a more traditional Liberal Arts education which is the mainstay of institutions like Concordia University College of Alberta. Concordia’s challenge is not changing our curriculum and focus to meet these newly identified needs–our challenge is that the consumer needs to be educated as to the value of the education that our institution provides. Our innovation has to come from a unique and vibrant marketing message that promotes the exceptional educational foundation that students will receive at Concordia without denigrating other institutions who have a much more significant focus on research.

We also face challenge of convincing our potential students that what is good for them is really what they need. Unfortunately, we all know the challenge of getting enough fruit and vegetable into our diet…just because it is good for you doesn’t mean you will want it. Richard Arum in his book, Academically Adrift, argues the higher education consumer really isn’t interested in teaching and learning. His research shows that just under 60% of students who finish a four year degree in US institutions scored no better on the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) which test critical thinking and problem solving skills than when they first started university. The remedy for this problem is to have students read and write more which can be achieved by a greater emphasis on teaching and learning. Unfortunately, Arum doesn’t see this happening any time soon and points to research that shows that potential students are more interested in campus life, the sports teams, recreational activities and an institutions research reputation rather than on how well an institution can prepare them to think and to learn. Similarly, student’s parents are more concerned about return on investment (ROI) than on how well their children will learn how to learn. They want the most significant and prestigious degree for their children in the least amount of time. Arum is doubtful that Higher Education will improve in the US because institutions will continue to give their consumer what they want.

While the challenges for Higher Education in the Canada and the US are significant they are not insurmountable. Ironically the highly funded and highly acclaimed research institutions will have the hardest adjustment because they have more the farthest away from a foundation of teaching and learning. In contrast, Institutions like Concordia that have always had a focus on teaching and learning can take a leadership role in promoting a learning environment that prepares students to work in an interdisciplinary setting where they will be required to pull together and condense information from a variety of perspectives.