Author: Amos Kalua

Teaching for the 21st Century – Connecting the Dots

There is a general awakening that seems to have driven the realization that much of the contemporary pedagogical practices seldom produce the desirable well-rounded professionals. With this awakening, have come calls for a paradigm shift towards a pedagogy that is critical. Teaching and learning must be interactive where the teacher and learner exchange roles at different times with the ultimate objective of enabling the learner to create their own knowledge with which they may be able to perceive of their wider contexts beyond the classroom walls.

As we teach for the 21st Century, in heeding the calls for the pedagogical paradigm shift, it must be borne in mind that a new kind of professional is desirable. According to Parker J. Palmer in his paper A New Professional: The Aims of Education Revisited, we must seek to produce professionals that do not only possess the knowledge, but they must also recognize the same. They must be able to stand up for the greater good of humanity over and above what might be tyrannical institutional establishments. The professionals must be able to apply their objective technical knowledge and subjective emotional knowledge in order to remain relevant in varying contextual situations.

The simultaneous pursuit of objectivity and subjectivity, however, is something that can only be possible with a certain measure of innovation. Important as it is in this new paradigm, Dan Edelstein points out in his article How is Innovation Taught?, that innovation is something that can be very hard to teach. Notwithstanding this difficulty in teaching, he argues that students within the humanities, as opposed to those in the sciences, get exposed to situations that demand and subsequently develop innovative skills at an earlier stage of study. This might be true considering that in the sciences, serious innovation usually follows the development of a solid theoretical foundation. Much as a similar prerequisite foundation might be required in the humanities, perhaps there might not be need for as much time and material devoted towards the theoretical foundation before higher levels of innovation become demanded of the students. The early exposure may therefore mean that at the same level of study, students from the sciences and humanities may demonstrate varying levels of innovation.

Edelstein’s article cites a number of scholars who make a case for the humanities on the basis of the value that they may add in the pursuit of science. The scholars argue that, knowing how closer innovation is to the humanities, it is important that the sciences be blended with some humanities subjects in order to foster development of innovation amongst the sciences students. However, this may seem to position the humanities as nothing more than just a tool for the advancement of the sciences and with little inherent value in themselves. This accurately captures the status quo as demonstrated by diminishing funding towards the humanities research. If the humanities are to be portrayed in this way, would we still be staying true to the desire of creating the new kind of professionals? Perhaps what might need to be emphasized is the collaboration between those in the sciences and the humanities to create homogenous teams working collectively towards the ultimate human good. In order for this kind of collaboration to work well, just as those in the sciences would be getting a blend of the humanities, those in the humanities may also need to blend in with some science subjects to build a common ground.

In efforts to create the new professional, we perhaps, inadvertently, seek to create individuals that do not merely collect the dots but also connect them, the kind that Seth Godin argues for in his TEDX presentation Stop Stealing Dreams. This connection of the collected dots would be akin to innovation. However, to argue that school in its present form only strives for obedience and that it poses a hindrance to innovation as Godin does, may not be entirely accurate. In the present form, perhaps, school with all the obedience that it fosters sets forth one aspect of innovation out of the two, namely, the collection of the dots. What needs to happen is an enrichment of the process for the collection of the dots so that it advances into the higher realm where the dots are connected. To be sure, it is only those dots that have been collected that may be connected.

 

Inclusive Pedagogy as a Way of Life

Diversity and inclusivity constitute a burning issue in higher education. Several research studies have shown the many benefits that diversity brings in many different situations. It has also been shown that embracing diversity, beneficial as it is, may not always be a natural thing to do as there is always a ‘hidden brain’ that functions on our individual implicit biases to inform decision-making processes of our unconscious persons, potentially, against the tenets of inclusivity. Discourse on ways of overcoming these implicit biases to make way for more inclusive pedagogical environments has abounded. In the thick of this discourse, a number of questions come to the fore: How long has it been known that inclusivity is beneficial? Whose duty is it to champion inclusivity? Is it good enough if one temporarily suspends their biases for the sake of creating a more inclusive pedagogical environment and then return to their original self afterwards? What can be done to ensure that inclusive pedagogy is more sustainable?

It would appear that knowledge on the benefits of diversity and inclusivity has been around for a long time. However, to this very day, embracing diversity remains a challenge not only in higher education institutions, but also in many others. Others have argued that very little is being done to create inclusive pedagogical environments as the spectrum of diversity continues to grow and its bands remain only partially understood. In spite of the many years that it has been known that inclusivity is beneficial, why is it still unnatural for others to embrace diversity? Perhaps in order to gain insight into this question, we need to figure out whose duty it is to champion inclusive pedagogy.

This far, it has largely been suggested that the teacher plays a primal role in ensuring that an inclusive pedagogical environment prevails. This approach seems to ignore the multidimensionality of the issue at hand. As has already been pointed out by others, most of the implicit biases that plague one’s unconscious decision-making processes develop outside of the classroom. If the sources of these biases are not adequately addressed, attempts at creating an inclusive pedagogical environment will only succeed in so far as what results portrays an isolated momentary experience that is not only detached from reality, but that is also superficial and vulnerable to catastrophic failure at any time. The classroom and the world that exists beyond it must be understood as a totality so that the responsibility of creating inclusive pedagogical environments is shared by teachers, learners, parents and the general public.

In an effort to create inclusive pedagogical environments, there are certain things that one may need to do. This approach, essentially, enables one to temporarily suspend their biases just so that they can be seen to be accommodative of diversity and then, once the need is over, they revert back to their original self. Is this good enough an approach? Probably not as it comes through as just being a convenient show off. Unfortunately, it would be very hard to tell if one is genuinely committed to diversity or they are just trying to side with the convenient truth at any given moment.

When all is said and done, we must all aspire for inclusive pedagogical environments that are sustainable. There are many things that might be done in order for this to happen one of which might be the exploration of the idea that the classroom and the world beyond it are a totality and that the duty of ensuring the prevalence of sustainable pedagogical environments belongs to not only the teachers, but us all. Inclusive pedagogy must become a way of life.

 

 

Discovering One’s Authentic Teaching Self

The works by Professor Fowler and Sarah Deel on discovering one’s authentic teaching self are very enlightening. In these works, the authentic self as an entity is presented as something that is integral to good teaching practice. As I struggle to find my authentic teaching self, these works have stocked up a number of questions in my mind. What is at the core of this authentic teaching self? How does one discover it? Does this entity help in making one a good teacher? Or Is there any chance that one’s authentic self would, actually, be detrimental to good teaching practice? Can the authentic self be re-engineered?

Perhaps at the core of the self would be the crystallization of one’s character, the remnant being once all the unnatural externalizations are stripped off. This would be the unique being that is in its purest natural form complete with fears and inhibitions and reflexes to stimuli. The authentic teaching self would be the same, just understood within the context of the teaching needs. This would be the unique being that is in its purest natural form when responding to stimuli within the teaching environment. As this authentic self is unique to each different individual, it could manifest in many different ways. It could manifest as nervousness in one individual, for example, and composure in another.

The individual self may be discovered once all the externalizations are shut out and stripped off. With regard to teaching, the authentic self might be discovered once all the externalizations are shut out with the exception of the teaching environment. The being that remains once the outside world is shut out to a world where only the teaching environment exists with respect to the individual self becomes the authentic teaching self.

The varied manifestations of the authentic teaching self give rise to the next important questions. Does this entity help in making one a good teacher? Or Is there any chance that one’s authentic self would be detrimental to good teaching practice? In its purest form, it may not be said that the authentic teaching self can inevitably contribute to good teaching practice. For instance, it would be highly unlikely that an authentic teaching self that manifests itself through fits of nervousness would make one a good teacher, in spite of this being the one’s authentic teaching self. To be sure, this teaching self would only characterize a less than desirable teaching experience. However, for those individuals whose teaching self manifests through composure, it would be unsurprising if that makes them good teachers.

Can the authentic teaching self be re-engineered? Surely, those individuals whose authentic teaching self is detrimental to their teaching practice must not be led into belief that they are condemned to being sub-optimal teachers. Perhaps this authentic teaching self can be altered to take out the undesirable manifestations and replace them with the desirable ones. It should be encouraged for individuals to copy what has worked elsewhere and use it to train their authentic teaching selves in unlearning the undesirable traits. Overtime, a new authentic teaching self should be able to awaken.

The discovery of one’s teaching self can be seen as being integral to good teaching practice in so far as it helps individuals learn of their weaknesses and strengths, whereby, if the former is undesirable it can be unlearned and replaced altogether. Adequate preparation and repeated best practices, for example, could be some ways through which an authentic teaching self that manifests itself as fits of nervousness could be unlearned and replaced.

 

The Duality of Mindful and Mindless Learning

When we talk of learning, what exactly is it that we talk about? There may be many things that one may draw reference to, nonetheless, there is a likelihood that amongst other things, knowledge and the process of acquiring the same would come through as being common. These two can be understood from many divergent ontological and epistemological viewpoints. The commonality remains in the fundamental structure of learning – let there be knowledge and a pathway to it.

When one engages in the act of learning, they come with an expectation to go through some process that culminates into the acquisition of knowledge. They come to seek the unconcealment. This expectation is their way of acknowledging their knowledge of their lack of it. This acknowledgement can take either form of being voluntary or involuntary. The act of learning is an attempt to unlearn their lack of knowledge in order for them to obtain it, synonymous with an attempt to deconstruct before construction. The process of unlearning the lack of knowledge can be a conscious one such as when one embarks on a journey to learn a particular subject. It could also be a subconscious one under which most natural learning takes place such as learning to breathe. The process could also be experiential, a duality of both the conscious and subconscious processes such as when one, in the course of learning a particular subject, ends up learning the medium of instruction too. The conscious process is a function of rational thought while the subconscious is beyond the scope of control being second to nature. One must either deliberately commit their rational self to the learning process or circumstances will enforce the learning. Either way, learning occurs.

Ellen Langer in her ‘Mindful Learning’ paper sets forth the concept of mindful learning which she distinguishes from mindless learning. She describes mindful learning as being characterized by open, uninhibited responses to contextual stimuli. This, she sets aside from mindless learning, the kind of which is routine-based and akin to programmed responses to stimuli. Accordingly, when one learns that 1+1 must equal to 2, they have mindlessly learnt and the result of this operation becomes second to nature. On the other hand, when one learns that 1+1 could equal to 2, they have mindfully learnt as this operation could take on a wide range of values depending on the context.

It is clear, at this point, that Langer’s distinction is drawn from the process aspect of learning, particularly, the availability of control and lack thereof in the mindful and mindless learning processes respectively.

Under mindless learning, when one decides to go and learn what 1+1 yields and not what subject-verb agreement means, it needs to be pointed out that, clearly, they are in control. However, as the learnt knowledge becomes second to nature when 1+1 must equal to 2 at all times, the scope of control yields in to the subconscious. This can be seen to demonstrate that mindless learning could be a blend of both the conscious and subconscious processes. On the other hand, the mindful learning process can be seen to be a predominantly conscious undertaking.  This seems to suggest that the classification of learning into either mindful or mindless ignores the existence of a third kind of classification, namely, the purely subconscious learning.

The symbiotic relationship between the conscious and subconscious as demonstrated in the mindless learning process seems to suggest the existence of a totality whose essence can not remain the same if the entity is broken.

It is important to note that the presence of control to initiate the mindless learning process seems to remotely suggest there being some mindful learning at play. Further, the mindful learning process seems to have subtle elements of ‘second to nature’ mindless learning such as the addition operation in the 1+1 learning example. Much as the individual values of 1 could be contextual, the addition operation may not. This begs the question; is mindful and mindless learning not a duality? Mindful learning seems to make possible mindless learning in much the same way that the latter sets forth the former.

 

 

 

Networked Learning

My uninformed understanding of networked learning paints a picture in which the learner acquires knowledge by way of linking interconnected nodes wherein presences the tiny bits of the building blocks of knowledge.

Interestingly, not very far from this layman’s viewpoint, Gardner Campbell in his ‘Networked Learning as Experiential Learning’, notes that networked learning is of the kind that seeks to go beyond the satisfaction of career pursuits and the attainment of competencies, rather, being inherently imbued with an additional aspiration towards reaching for the self-actualization of the learner. Being this multidimensional, networked learning, thus, transcends the narrow realm of contemporary assessment as founded on easily observable outcomes.

Campbell further defines this concept by delving into a thinly veiled methodology towards the attainment of networked learning. He points out four key aspects that, presumably, ought to be characteristic of learning if at all it is to be networked.

Networked learning ought to be learner oriented wherein the process is built by the learner and merely facilitated by instructor, all this, within the context of the digital web. A vital component of networked learning is introduced here, the digital web. Tim Hitchcock in his ‘Twitter and blogs are not just add-ons to academic research, but a simple reflection of the passion underpinning it’, adds reverence to the role of the digital web in the academia. He notes that the web is so important that it forms the very gist of academic research. He argues, the digital media can be used for reaching out to the wider audience and enhancing one’s research impact in the process. The anticipation of reaching out to the wider audience can also passively enhance the quality of one’s academic work, he contends. Doug Bershaw in his ‘Working openly on the web: a manifesto’, breaks down some tips on making the best of the digital world namely; having an own web portal, working openly and, finally, using optimized language that is easily readable by both machines and humans.

Further, networked learning must embrace both curricular and co-curricular activities. This duality must provide a deliberate opportunity for the learner to experience and solve real life problems.

In addition, networked learning must be seen to be desirous of developing the individual learning within the wider context of the societal picture.

It is clear, at this point, that networked learning seeks to produce a multi-dimensional, well-rounded individual complete with the skills set needed for a career and knowledge of oneself and indeed the wider context in which existence occurs. It is a very beautiful concept.

Notwithstanding the beauty of this concept, it would seem that there lurks a danger of it coming off as being more of an abstract concept with unlimited definitions.

If networked learning must transcend the narrow realm of easily observable outcomes, then it presents itself as being beyond the scope of many contemporary learning progress assessment mechanisms. This would portray it as being widely abstract, immeasurable and subject to chance. From this viewpoint, the ontological challenges of understanding this concept would be mundane.

In the current environment, the concept may be seen to be contradictory of a widely held truth whereby many a learner primarily embark on formal learning with the motivation to acquire a set of skills that would enable them to earn a living. In this environment, it would seem that the primary purpose of learning is to satisfy career needs. The self-actualization and the wider picture appear to be secondary aspirations. Formal learning contracts, in predominant use today, prioritize the career-oriented learning. The non-curricular aspirations are left out to chance, whenever that arises. However, knowing that networked learning is a totality of both curricular and co-curricula activities, where the former precedes the latter, it becomes interesting how the totality may be attained.

 

Higher Education for Sale?

The Cambridge English Dictionary defines education as the process of teaching or learning in school or the knowledge that one obtains out of this process. Higher education, on the other hand, is defined by Brittanica as any of various types of post-secondary education whose objective is the preparation of students for entry into various fields of specialization. Overtime, the proliferation of higher education institutions has spawned an unprecedented competition for survival and relevance. This has seen higher education advertising become conventional, so much that one wonders, is higher education for sale?

Access to higher education can be quite competitive depending on a wide range of factors including reputation of institution, level of specialization, field of study, affirmative action and funding amongst others. Higher education institutions go to great lengths to build a reputation for themselves. The media is awash with adverts touting such and such an institution as being the best around the world.

Advertising makes great economic sense for the institutions’ survival; a good reputation is directly proportional to the numbers of student applications for admission and with the numbers comes the money. Nonetheless, is it ethical to advertise higher education? Does it not inhibit focus on the essence of the institutions’ existence?

When higher education institutions claim that they are the best, the credibility of such claims becomes questionable. It remains unclear whether such claims are made objectively within the context of other institutions, or, they are just arbitrary claims amounting to deceptive advertising. Perhaps instead of focussing such great attention towards advertising, the institutions must better redirect their efforts towards the primary aspect of their existence, education. The quality of their education must be allowed to speak for itself.

Higher education institutions need to tone down on advertising. Higher education is not for sale.

 

Usage of Social Media in Higher Education

The past decade has seen an unprecedented growth in social media usage. The social media effect has spread across all avenues of daily life. This post seeks to explore what has become of the interaction between social media and higher education. It particularly shines the spotlight on the usage of social media by faculty.

An important departure point in this pursuit would be a centralized definition of social media. Be that as it may, such a definition is hard to find owing to the very fluid nature of social media. In broad terms, the essence of social media beings in it being a technological system that facilitates collaboration and community. Guided by this characterization, social media can be said to include social networking sites such as Facebook, Linked In, Twitter and others. It can also include blogs, wikis and virtual gaming environments.

As social media takes hold, some quarters of the academia have sought to provide pedagogical and philosophical justification for its use in higher education. It has been argued that the nature of the modern student who comes to the university with a very developed social media footprint must be considered as a factor to motivate the usage of social media in higher education, presumably, as a way to provide familiarity and thus facilitate a smooth transition for the learner. Others have argued that the usage of social media in higher education is in keeping with the theory of social constructivism, in so far as the former encourages learning as a conversational process where dialogue is primal. It has also been argued that social media fosters the development of a connectedness that can be equated to the ideals of the theory of situated learning where context and environment are important considerations.

Members of faculty are widely aware of the existence of social media. In a study supported by Pearson education, it is reported that about 80% of faculty, regardless of age and years of experience, are aware of the existence of social media. The study also reports a wide usage of the same by faculty. The usage is conveniently split into three categories namely; personal, professional and teaching.

The study reports of a high general personal usage, pegging it at about 75%. However, only about 50% of the faculty are reported to actively engage in social media activity. This seems to be determined by the level of experience, with the active usage being characteristic of newer less experienced faculty.

About 80% of faculty are reported to use of social media for their professional career purposes, albeit the usage not being very frequent. This usage is reported to be more than the same in regular non-higher education work places, contrary to widely held speculation.

Over 75% of Faculty are reported to use social media for teaching purposes including direct usage in class and posting content for students to view outside class, communication, course management, data repository, and as a platform for sharing viewpoints.

Despite the positive light about the usage of social media in higher education, there are a number of limitations that come to the fore. In the absence of adequate research on the impact of social media on students’ achievement, attempts to attribute improved performance have been discredited as being incidental and likened to the ‘grocery truck’ analogy, where the delivery truck is credited for the achievement. It has also been posited that the usage of social media for the only reason that it is available might be inappropriate seeing that this was not developed specifically for higher education usage. Others have also noted the time consumption, privacy intrusion and copyright infringement issues that usage of social media presents as being problematic.

Sources:

Tess, P.A. (2013) The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual) – A literature review, Computers in Human Behavior

Moran, M. Seaman, J. Tinti-Kane, H. (2011) The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual) – A literature review, Pearson Learning Solutions and Babson Survey Research Group

 

 

 

Open Access in Architecture and Building Science

Publication is an important end in the pursuit of research. It constitutes the capstone to many research undertakings. It is not uncommon for researchers to find themselves caught in a dilemma as to whether to publish their research using open access journals or restricted access ones. Open access journals are globally available for free while restricted access journals require payment of fees for access. In resolving this dilemma, a number of factors come into consideration including the journals’ impact factor and indexing, the researcher’s targeted audience and institutional preference amongst others.

The subject of open access publishing has attracted mixed feelings from different quarters of the research community. On the one hand, open access publication has been heavily discredited as being a fraud where substandard research gets published so long as money is involved. It has been claimed that such publication platforms provide the pathway of choice for academics in desperate need for quick promotion and recognition. On the other hand, proponents for open access have argued that such a platform ensures that knowledge is as widely accessible as possible. They have labelled restricted access publishing as being elitist and so, a hindrance to the advancement of knowledge.

In architecture and building science, there are a number of open access journals. Out of these, the Buildings journal published by Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) seems to be the most popular. This journal is based in Basel, Switzerland and was founded in 1996.

The journal accepts submissions on a wide range of areas generally within the scope of architecture, building science and building engineering. These submissions are peer reviewed prior to publication.

Buildings describes itself as an open access journal that is available freely to readers. Authors and/or their institutions are responsible for the payment of article processing fees. Articles published in this journal are distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License where the author retains the copyright.

The journal positions itself as a strong advocate for open access publishing. The publisher, MDPI, has even claimed that it is on account of such advocacy that their journals have been marred in controversy bordering on the quality of the research that they publish.

 

 

Ethics in Research Conduct: Colleen T. Skau Vs The National Institutes of Health and The Office for Research Integrity

Introduction

This is a review of a case on ethical misconduct in research. It is important that all researchers understand the nature of ethical misconduct in matters of research and the wide-ranging implications that follow. This blog post is in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Preparing Future Professoriate Graduate Course for the Spring Semester, 2018. The course requires a review and analysis of a case drawn from the repository of cases handled by the Office for Research Integrity (ORI).

The ORI is an institution under the United States of America’s Department of Health and Human Services. It functions on behalf of the Secretary of Health and Human Services in ensuring that integrity prevails in all research activities by the Public Health Services. The ORI performs its duty by amongst others, developing policy on matters of research integrity, reviewing cases of misconduct and recommending decisions on the same.

The case at hand is one in which a researcher under the US Department of Health and Human Services was found guilty of misconduct in research supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), under the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Facts of the Case

The respondent in this matter, Dr.  Colleen T. Skau, was employed as a postdoctoral fellow in the Cell Biology and Physiology Center, NHLBI, NIH under the US Department of Health and Human Services. As part of her job, Dr Skau was actively involved in research supported by the Department of Health. In the course of her research undertaking leading towards the publication of 2 papers, it was discovered that she had intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly reported falsified and/or fabricated data and/or falsified and/or fabricated data. This amounted to a research misconduct.  Based on her own admission, an assessment by the NIH, and analysis by the ORI, Dr. Skau was found guilty of research misconduct.

Holding

The NIH and the ORI held, amongst others, and Dr. Skau agreed, as follows:

  1. That Dr. Skau’s research work be put under supervision for a period of 3 years
  2. That the 2 publications, being the origin of this matter, be corrected or retracted.

Analysis

This case and several others that have been handled by the ORI are proof that unethical conduct is real amongst researchers. The negativity of this conduct transcends the realm of ethics and poses a very real danger on the society that uses such research findings.

Despite the gravity of this conduct, it would seem that the punitive measures in place are not severe enough to act as a deterrent in preventing recurrence of such cases.

An investment in research aimed at uncovering the motivation behind such misconduct by researchers would go a long way in managing the problem. It would also be equally helpful to invest in the development of a systematic mechanism for the detection of research misconduct.

Source

A summary of the case can be found on this link  https://ori.hhs.gov/content/case-summary-skau-colleen-t .

 

First Things First…

Hello Everyone!

My name is Amos Kalua, a Doctoral Student in the School of Architecture and Design under the College of Architecture and Urban Studies at Virginia Polytechnic and State University in the USA.

I will be using this blog as a way of externalizing my thought experiments on matters of relevance within the realm of global higher education systems. This undertaking is in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a graduate course, GRAD 5104 – Preparing the Future Professoriate,  that I am taking this Spring 2018 semester. This course is a preparatory platform for Doctoral students as they journey towards Faculty positions in higher education.

During the course of this blog’s life, I look forward to having thought provoking and enlightening exchanges with you all on the multiplicity of matters that find as their being within the purview  of higher education.

Thank you.

1 2