A short post tied to Chris Long. He's going to be a faculty fellow with ETS this summer. He is asking some interesting questions that remind me of what Michael Wesch is doing with his students at Kansas State University. Here is an example of one of Wesch's students' videos:
I love this stuff.
Yesterday, I went to a presentation from a group of students who were being paid to redesign a computer lab in Pattee Library. After hearing about the meeting, one of the people on the invitation list made a sarcastic comment about students being motivated by money. That's B.S. Money can motivate people to do the bare minimum they need to do to complete a mundane task. This video is certainly more than the minimum and the student wasn't paid to make it. It looks like they got other young people to contribute to it as well. Likewise, the creative ideas I saw in the lab design project went well beyond the minimum requirements.
Back to Chris Long: During the panel discussion on Tuesday, Steve Thorne asked a question about being able to explore new forms of media when the tenure and promotion process is very tied to the written word. Chris Long said that he was glad he had tenure because his colleagues are already asking him why the hell he's doing what he's doing.
I was lucky enough to ask the next question and started off by saying that Chris was demonstrating why tenure exist. People in the room laughed that laughter is still ringing in my ears. I said that I was completely serious with that remark. Tenure isn't meant to be a finish line that faculty cross so they can be lazy and quit publishing. Tenure exists so people like Chris can do things that make his colleagues question him. It exists so people can take risks without needing to worry about job security. It is fundamental to advancing scholarship.
I had a conversation with him and Steve Thorne after a presentation and panel discussion by NMC's Alan Levine (aka CogDog). We talked about Cultural Historical Activity Theory, Virtue, Excellence, Research, Tenure, and other topics. After Alan's presentation, the panel, and the discussion, I felt like I had a fever. All of my neurons had fired and I'm just now recovering.
I had a very good week.
I love this stuff.
Yesterday, I went to a presentation from a group of students who were being paid to redesign a computer lab in Pattee Library. After hearing about the meeting, one of the people on the invitation list made a sarcastic comment about students being motivated by money. That's B.S. Money can motivate people to do the bare minimum they need to do to complete a mundane task. This video is certainly more than the minimum and the student wasn't paid to make it. It looks like they got other young people to contribute to it as well. Likewise, the creative ideas I saw in the lab design project went well beyond the minimum requirements.
Back to Chris Long: During the panel discussion on Tuesday, Steve Thorne asked a question about being able to explore new forms of media when the tenure and promotion process is very tied to the written word. Chris Long said that he was glad he had tenure because his colleagues are already asking him why the hell he's doing what he's doing.
I was lucky enough to ask the next question and started off by saying that Chris was demonstrating why tenure exist. People in the room laughed that laughter is still ringing in my ears. I said that I was completely serious with that remark. Tenure isn't meant to be a finish line that faculty cross so they can be lazy and quit publishing. Tenure exists so people like Chris can do things that make his colleagues question him. It exists so people can take risks without needing to worry about job security. It is fundamental to advancing scholarship.
I had a conversation with him and Steve Thorne after a presentation and panel discussion by NMC's Alan Levine (aka CogDog). We talked about Cultural Historical Activity Theory, Virtue, Excellence, Research, Tenure, and other topics. After Alan's presentation, the panel, and the discussion, I felt like I had a fever. All of my neurons had fired and I'm just now recovering.
I had a very good week.
Hopefully there is not a cure for your fever ;-) I'm caught in your observation on the laughter; it's from people like Chris who have Gotten There, from people like me, who Don't Have to Get There, or those in the audience who are optimistic to One Day Being There.
So the interesting question is what is the system/environment where those in a pre-tenure position can have some of the freedom to experiment and those in a post-tenure position can have some of the responsibility of having to keep proving themselves (not that they don't- I struggle for the words of that state where tenured profs can have some of the driver/hunger that comes a bit from not being in an assured place).
Might not exisit....
That's what Steve Thorne was asking in his 10,000-foot question to the panel. How can he, as a tenure-track faculty member, experiment in "disruptive technologies" while still being able to work toward his professional benchmarks that focus almost exclusively on publications in peer-reviewed journals.
The four faculty we have as part of the Faculty Fellows program either have tenure or aren't seeking it.
First, I would like to thank you Allan, for this post, the question you asked and the recognition you offered for the work I am doing. I appreciated your comment about how important tenure is in allowing us to press the activity of education forward; and if I laughed, it was the laughter that comes with humility in the face of your very kind words of praise.
I do, however, also want to pick up on the question of the "disruptive" nature of the technologies with which we are engaged. There are disruptive aspects, to be sure, but it might be more helpful to think of the technologies as potentially transformative rather than as disruptive. Of course, transformation is most often both generative and destructive, so we need to think about the nature of the transformation we want to cultivate.
This was what was so exciting about our discussion on Tuesday: it began to focus on the critical question concerning the sorts of excellences, intellectual and otherwise, that we need to develop in ourselves and in our students if the technologies that are operating always upon us are to deepen our engagement with the world in ways that press it toward the better, the more just, the more beautiful.
From my perspective, this is just an extension of what the philosophical life, the human life, is supposed to be about: to live deliberately, to think and act in ways that are animated by a concern for the necessarily elusive good. How do these emerging technologies help us weave the elusive good into human community? How do they hinder us? And how can we respond to emerging technologies in ways that cultivate the sort of transformation education has, at its best, always sought?
Hey Chris. "Disruptive" is a loaded term. In education, a classroom disruption is most often considered to be a negative distraction. In the technology sector, "disruptive technologies" are ones that change the game or challenge the status quo.
To your peers in philosophy, what you are doing may be considered disruptive. To me and my peers, what you are doing is exploring, transforming, innovating, and sharing. I'm happy to be a part of that journey.
Your other questions are the ones that give me the fever and have made me think about the implications of some of the things we are doing. Honestly, I didn't think about the power of tenure until you made the remark about your colleagues' reactions to what you've been doing. And our discussion of excellence afterward was a rare conversation that I don't often get to have about the fundamental principles of what we are doing and why.
Thanks Allan. Just to be clear and fair to my colleagues, some of them really do get the importance of the sort of project I am undertaking and I am heartened by the number of people in my Department and around the University to support and applaud the attempt to engage technology in the ways we are.
Hi all ... a little late to the party here, but I loved the video and am psyched to hear how excellent your week was Allan! It was so satisfying to be a part of it and to see our guest walk away with such a positive impression of our community. To me, that is what still has me buzzing!
To the notion of exploration, disruption, or whatever all I have to say is -- bring it on! My thoughts rest in the idea that disruption makes us all think a lot harder about things we haven't before and I can't be part of an environment/community that isn't engaging in those ideas. The work Chris is doing is amazing to me -- to be a part of the journey is even more exciting. Watching Carla challenge so many of us last summer to raise our games and think hard about how what we do can fundamentally challenge scholarship was a game changer. This summer have Carla back, with Chris, Ellysa, and Stuart joining us will be a major turning point for our organization. I predict that what we learn this summer will forever change those of us who are interested in paying attention. Disruption will lead to transformation ... our conversations will never be the same. Thanks for the great post ... really enjoyed the conversation.