Mel, The feeling you have expressed relates to several broader questions. Academia is a form of organization that works on traditions and values. There is no explicit bottom line that can indicate progress and outcome at the end of the day that is meaningful for all stakeholder. The traditions and values are determined in the background of a history and philosophy. It is a myth that change is not of interest in education. Things change but in their own ways, at their own pace and the outcome is not always same as the original goal of the change agent. In this scenario the challenges you listed for individual faculty members are inter-related with a system of factors and issues. You gave the example of the discipline of CS. Some matters of change, I guess, are easier for academia to make sense of and find value in than others within the framework and context that it is functioning at a given point in time.
I don't know if I have a concrete suggestion to make but one thing that can help is to understand things in a broader perspective. Here choosing a perspective, i.e., a conceptual framework, for the purpose of understanding is a matter in itself. There are no simple answers to these questions. Junaid On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Mel Chua <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > I had a great chat with Junaid about this last week... one of the things > that I've heard as a common theme in every conversation I've ever had with a > TOS prof is "so, y'know, Mel, changing academia is *hard*." > >
_______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos
