The industrial model of the instructional paradigm is driven by competition, and this emphasis on competition fosters isolation. Students compete against one another within classes for grades. The competition among students for seats in certain high-profile programs exacerbates an overemphasis on grades and test scores at the expense of learning, encouraging students to take safe and easy choices in order to achieve the highest GPA. The same competition is fostered among faculty, who are judged in isolation for tenure, promotion, and merit by systems that, more often than not, privilege solo scholarship over collaborative works. And if faculty do collaborate, the hierarchy of lead author undercuts the concept of true collaboration. There may be no one more isolated than The industrial model of the instructional paradigm is driven by competition, and this emphasis on competition fosters isolation.
Students compete against one another within classes for grades. The competition among students for seats in certain high-profile programs exacerbates an overemphasis on grades and test scores at the expense of learning, encouraging students to take safe and easy choices in order to achieve the highest GPA. The same competition is fostered among faculty, who are judged in isolation for tenure, promotion, and merit by systems that, more often than not, privilege solo scholarship over collaborative works. And if faculty do collaborate, the hierarchy of lead author undercuts the concept of true collaboration. There may be no one more isolated than In the instructional paradigm, when a faculty member makes the transition to an administrative position, he or she, as well as others, often perceive the transition as moving to a different world and worldview. Faculty members often joke with their peers who move into administrative posts, saying things like “You’ve gone to the dark side,” in spite of the reality that most academic administrators retain their faculty status or hold tenure in an academic department. Stephen Brookfield (2006) examines what he labels “cultural suicide” in relation to adult learners who find themselves questioning their learning process because their family, peers, and social group act as if they have betrayed them by their choice to be a student, by making the choice to change. Although Brookfield’s discussion is related to students from minority groups or working class backgrounds, there is a strong parallel here to the faculty member who moves into administration. The person who makes this choice is sometimes seen as betraying the values and culture of his or her professional community. Brookfield describes students in this situation as feeling that their identities have been challenged, that they have become alienated from their families and social group.
The perceived divide between faculty and administration is at the very core of the problems we witness with the instructional paradigm. In the instructional paradigm, the faculty member who leaves the faculty position to become an administrator abandons the role of faculty and presumably adopts a new a set of values and ideals that are perceived to be in conflict with those previously held as a faculty member.
The overemphasis on competition and control in the instructional paradigm betrays a lack of respect for, as well as a fundamental distrust of, the individual. A colleague once described his institution as a place that valued jobs but not the people in them. Individuals at this institution typically became more embittered as the years passed because of the processes and decision making that perpetuated a climate of disrespect for all employees, faculty and staff alike. In places like this, rules and policies predominate; fear of legal reprisal governs decision making. At this institution legal counsel was so powerful that the university counsel sat next to the president on the stage at commencement. The prevailing attitude in the instructional paradigm is that students, faculty, and staff need to be controlled by rules, processes, and practices, which is demoralizing and limits creativity and innovation.
Students compete against one another within classes for grades. The competition among students for seats in certain high-profile programs exacerbates an overemphasis on grades and test scores at the expense of learning, encouraging students to take safe and easy choices in order to achieve the highest GPA. The same competition is fostered among faculty, who are judged in isolation for tenure, promotion, and merit by systems that, more often than not, privilege solo scholarship over collaborative works. And if faculty do collaborate, the hierarchy of lead author undercuts the concept of true collaboration. There may be no one more isolated than In the instructional paradigm, when a faculty member makes the transition to an administrative position, he or she, as well as others, often perceive the transition as moving to a different world and worldview. Faculty members often joke with their peers who move into administrative posts, saying things like “You’ve gone to the dark side,” in spite of the reality that most academic administrators retain their faculty status or hold tenure in an academic department. Stephen Brookfield (2006) examines what he labels “cultural suicide” in relation to adult learners who find themselves questioning their learning process because their family, peers, and social group act as if they have betrayed them by their choice to be a student, by making the choice to change. Although Brookfield’s discussion is related to students from minority groups or working class backgrounds, there is a strong parallel here to the faculty member who moves into administration. The person who makes this choice is sometimes seen as betraying the values and culture of his or her professional community. Brookfield describes students in this situation as feeling that their identities have been challenged, that they have become alienated from their families and social group.
The perceived divide between faculty and administration is at the very core of the problems we witness with the instructional paradigm. In the instructional paradigm, the faculty member who leaves the faculty position to become an administrator abandons the role of faculty and presumably adopts a new a set of values and ideals that are perceived to be in conflict with those previously held as a faculty member.
The overemphasis on competition and control in the instructional paradigm betrays a lack of respect for, as well as a fundamental distrust of, the individual. A colleague once described his institution as a place that valued jobs but not the people in them. Individuals at this institution typically became more embittered as the years passed because of the processes and decision making that perpetuated a climate of disrespect for all employees, faculty and staff alike. In places like this, rules and policies predominate; fear of legal reprisal governs decision making. At this institution legal counsel was so powerful that the university counsel sat next to the president on the stage at commencement. The prevailing attitude in the instructional paradigm is that students, faculty, and staff need to be controlled by rules, processes, and practices, which is demoralizing and limits creativity and innovation.
