On the peril of applying standards from one country to the next (or balancing expectations and resources).
(Part 2 of 2)
About a week ago, I commented on the peril posed to the global academic community posed by adopting US productivity requirements: https://lnkd.in/eFsYgsVr
I've been surprised by the response, with many #PhDStudents, #Faculty, & #Administrators reaching out to express support & concern.
Some have noted that they need clear alternative paths for measuring performance.
They argue we live in a global #academicmarketplace, where schools compete for the same students, space in the same journals, & spots on the same ranking lists.
Others noted that along with globalization, #fundingagencies demand they show impact by publishing in ranked #journals.
All agree that we need a reasoned approach to evaluating faculty performance, beyond counting papers.
So what to do? How do we develop productivity standards? That let your Uni compete in the global context? And are reasonable?
First, recognize that one size does not fit all.
I often wonder if people recognize the heterogeneity of Unis in the States.
The variance in student populations, resources, and mission - and corresponding variance in teaching, research, funding, and service requirements - is breathtaking.
Just as there are many "American models" for success, we should support many global models.
Second, calibrate expectations to the mission of the Uni.
The "US standard" for research productivity promoted abroad is often the toughest.
If appropriating a "US standard", pick Uni's that offer similar resource sets and share your mission.
Optimizing research is just one way to be ranked. IMHO, teaching is as important.
Third, expectations need to map to resources.
I've worked at US-based Unis with lean & sumptuous budgets as well as with more and less teaching expectations. Consider 2:
Uni 1 - lean budget - inclusive journal listing, more courses, demanded teaching excellence
Uni 2 - sumptuous budget - demanded top papers, fewer courses, and but more teaching excellence
These Uni's eval systems balanced resources with demands.
Fourth, know that change will cause conflict & takes time.
I joined a school as it moved from "old teaching centric" to "new research centric" value systems.
This pivot caused constant tension & mismatches in resources.
When I left, they recalibrated performance standards (again).
Finally, consider the whole faculty member.
The peril to faculty comes from mismatches - in resources, values, and expectations.
Most #faculty want to develop and share knowledge.
If eval systems focus too much on develop, we will lose the "share" teachers that make Uni's great.
Worse, we will never develop the great #teachers that we need to sustain higher education.
We need to find balance in evaluation systems #highereducation - in every country - bc we need heterogeneity to sustain the global academic community!
Let's build a better academy!
留言