Learning Colleges -- Which Are & Which Aren't?

I have to admit that, so far, I've been reading O'Banion's book with the perspective of a teacher -- not a student. If I shift my focus, I think I can appreciate more of what's he's saying. In a nutshell, according to O'Banion, a Learning College:

• Creates substantive cfhange in individual learners.
• Engages learners as full partners in the learning process, with learners assuming primary responsibility for their own choices.
• Creates and offers as many options for learning as possible.
• Assists learners to form and participate in collaborative learning activities.
• Defines the roles of learning facilitators by the needs of the learners.
• Succeeds only when improved and expanded learning can be documented for its learners.

O'Banion's vision is mostly for community colleges. Not having that much experience with community colleges, I wonder if most would classify themselves as "learning colleges."

I went to a large public university -- the University of Colorado -- and I do not believe that CU is a "learning college." It is primarily a research institution. I felt like nothing more than a student number. When I returned to school to earn my teaching degree, I attended a small liberal arts school -- St. Mary's College -- in California. My experience there was much different. At CSU, my experience in the AET program has been largely positive; it's when I venture outside the AET program to other departments that I feel a bit like a "second class citizen" because I'm a "continuing education" student.

I suppose my question to the class is this: What has your experience been? Did you attend a college or university that put the learner at the center of its focus?

An experiment -- click here to listen

Well, I am learning about podcasts in the Teaching and Learning at a Distance course this summer, and while I wanted to create my own, I am settling for just adding a podcast to my blog -- which was actually no small feat. It took me several hours over two days to figure this out.

What I'm happy to know is that itunes has many educational podcasts, many of which are also free. So, I've included a podcast from the Chronicle of Higher Education because the general content is relevant to my blog.

If you're interested in my experiment, happy listening!

P.S. The podcast link was supposed to show on this post, but since it isn't, I made the title to this post the actual link. Hope it works.

Should I have ordered a different version?

A Learning College, published in 1997, is showing its age. At the time the book was written, the internet was just coming into its own. Understandably, teachers were worried about how this new technology would impact education. Again, however, O'Banion minimizes these concerns, and instead, lumps teachers into two camps:

• "hopeful educators looking to improve a process they know is not working well" (p. 67), or
• "faculty unions fighting fearfully to protect their current status and jobs." (p. 67)

O'Banion especially takes issue with the American Federation of Teachers, seeming to imply that their concerns about "jobs, compensation for time spent in learning to use technology, intellectual property rights, ... workloads ... [and] personal interaction between students and faculty ..." (p.66) are somehow red herrings standing in the way of innovation.

He further says that the AFT "opposes courses taught on the internet ... unless they meet standards of quality set by faculty [emphasis added]." These don't seem like roadblocks to me; they seem like legitimate concerns. To my mind, faculty members are just asking for a voice in how distance education is implemented.

I went in search of the AFT's current position on distance education, and I found a full report at:


http://archive.aft.org/topics/tech-highered/index.htm

In a nutshell, according to the American Federation of Teachers' Distance Education --Guidelines for Good Practice:

1. Faculty must retain academic control
2. Faculty must be prepared to meet the special requirements of teaching at a distance
3. Course design should be shaped to the potentials of the medium
4. Students must fully understand course requirements and be prepared to succeed
5. Close personal interaction must be maintained
6. Class Size should be set through normal faculty channels
7. Courses should cover all material
8. Experimentation with a broad variety of subjects should be encouraged
9. Equivalent research opportunities must be provided
10. Student assessment should be comparable
11. Equivalent advisement opportunities must be offered
12. Faculty should retain creative control over use and re-use of materials
13. Full undergraduate degree programs should include same-time same-place coursework
14. Evaluation of distance coursework should be undertaken at all levels

My question is this: Do the guidelines set forth by the AFT appear to be roadblocks, or are they reasonable?

The Failure of Reform

O'Banion notes in Chapter 1 that school reform itself is in need of reform. Some evidence is provided by Leonard, who says, "The painful truth is that despite the spotlight on schooling and the stern pronouncements of educators, governors, and presidents, despite the frantic test preparation in classrooms all over the country and the increased funding, school achievement has remained essentially flat over the past two decades" (as cited in O'Banion, 1997, p. 5).

O'Banion goes on to cite several reasons for this failure, including: bureaucrats, faculty, administration, support staff, students, and parents. Granted, enlisting the support of all of these different sectors is crucial if reform has any hope of success; however, in my opinion, the two most important factors in lasting change involve funding and faculty.

Funding: I think O'Banion is quite insightful when he says, "The problem is that ... business and political leaders believe that colleges and universities have been treated well with state appropriations for decades, and they are demanding better results without corresponding increases in resources" (p. 35). Sadly, the "good old days" are never coming back. I came into the public school system as an educator at a time when Baby Boomer teachers were retiring. Many complained about how much more difficult teaching had become. In some ways I wish I had never learned that department secretaries and graders were commonplace. In my 13 years in the classroom, I saw a host of resources vanish -- everything from planning periods to trash bags. (Literally, we received an e-mail in early May saying that trash liners would no longer be replaced because there was no budget to buy them.) I got the distinct sense that what O'Banion is saying is true. Even though there are different teachers now and different students, the current generation will me made to pay for the alleged "sins of the fathers."

A connection O'Banion doesn't make, and one I think is very important, is the relationship between fewer resources and staff morale. No reform effort is going to be successful unless the faculty is on board. And as I mentioned in a previous post, the "us and them" approach that O'Banion seems to ascribe to will only serve to further stall any efforts at change.

I looked in vain at the table of contents hoping to see a chapter on how to enlist faculty in reform efforts. Chapter headings may be misleading, but so far, I see none. I believe a huge part of the solution involves recognizing how hard the majority of faculty members work -- with fewer and fewer resources. If staff members feel that reform goals are being imposed from above, they won't buy in.

I think I'm With Dee ...

I think I was just in a foul mood yesterday because virtually everything I was reading in the book was ticking me off. I'm beginning to think I understand why Dee sold her copy. If Dee was a teacher, rather than an administrator, I'll bet she was just a little put off by some of what O'Banion is saying.

In Chapter 2, "The Student is First," O'Banion's point of view becomes apparent. He is an administrator -- not a teacher. And quite frankly, he seems to have lost touch with the faculty. His opinions seem blatantly anti-union. He accuses union members of having a "disregard for what students want" (p. 30). He includes, but then discounts, some very legitimate arguments from teachers at Chaffey College in California. Their resistance to a "learner-centered" task force is minimized as being shared only by "pockets" of faculty (p. 31). He claims to know that, "The views [of resistance] are often presented by the most articulate faculty members and are usually applauded by large numbers of faculty. In this way the views of a small group can become the views of 'the faculty.'" (p. 31). How would he know if the views are held only by a small group? Just because a few individuals stand up to speak doesn't mean the others don't agree. In faculty meetings, I've secretly cheered when someone with more guts than me actually iterates what I'm thinking. And usually, this individual is sharing what teachers have talked with each other about at length in classrooms, in hallways, and in the teacher's lounge.

While O'Banion acknowledges that administrators are not criticized as often as faculty members, administration is clearly where his allegiance lies. "Administrative survival is fragile compared to that of faculty; it is a wonder that administrators can muster any courage to lead ..." (32). Granted, it may be completely different at the college level than it is in K-12 education, but my experience is that administrators are no more likely to be let go than faculty. They are just shuffled around.

A used copy

"For Dee: A special friend and colleague who played a more important role in my early development than she will ever know. Remain ever beautiful! Love Terry 1/26/99."

So, I purchased a used copy of A Learning College for the 21st Century from Amazon.com. When I opened the book, I found the inscription included above. Terry O'Banion is the author of the book, so I'm assuming he gave a copy to Dee (whoever she is). Then Dee eventually sold it on Amazon. Hmmm ... how sad. If someone wrote a book and gave me a personalized copy, I don't think I'd put it up for sale -- even if I didn't like the book or the author. Poor Terry.