|
 
Conversation
About the Future
Analysis
of the College Student Forums
By
Chris Knaus
June 23, 2000
OVERVIEW
The Conversation about the Future on the University
of Washington campus was a year-long process of engaging the University
community in a broad-based dialogue about the future. The themes from
these dialogues will partially guide the direction of the University
of Washington. A core aspect of this year’s efforts were the College
Student Forums, an effort created to bring students into the conversation.
These Forums were held in each of the 17 schools and colleges, as
well as at UW Tacoma and UW Bothell. The Forums were hosted by President
McCormick and Regent Chris Knaus, and attendance ranged from a handful
of students to over 70.
This document is an attempt at providing a comprehensive analysis
of these Forums. While it will highlight recurrent themes that emerged
from these conversations, it will also bring to light several pressing
issues that were not frequently identified. The lessons learned flow
not only from student comments, but also from the processes through
which these forums were organized, and in follow-up conversations
with student and staff organizers.
INTRODUCTION
The student forums were held in every school and college
at the University of Washington (see Appendix A), with the exception
of the School of Library and Information Sciences, which will be held
in the fall. Forums were held at both the University of Washington
Tacoma and Bothell campuses. These forums were almost entirely coordinated
by students, whose voluntary efforts helped ensure student participation
and created a safe format for conversation. Valuable assistance and
guidance was provided by Marilyn Kliman, and several key staff within
individual departments and colleges assisted with minor details.
In coordinating these efforts, several key issues
came about. Primarily, it became apparent that students rarely come
together to talk about issues within their department, much less in
a college-wide forum. This lack of communication within and across
departments corresponds with the expressed concerns of few interdisciplinary
opportunities and the lack of community. In every forum, students
expressed how powerful opportunities for conversation can be. Simply
having forums where students can come together to process their educational
experiences, talk about career opportunities, discuss course content,
and delve into intellectual issues can help to create a campus environment
that supports and engages students.
Numerous students expressed their desire to have continued
conversation within their college, but felt that without central leadership
and active pressure, such conversations would not occur. In essence,
without President McCormick’s support and the Conversation about the
Future staff coordinating these forums, students indicated that such
opportunities to bring them together would not blossom. The benefits
of providing forums for students to come together seem obvious, but
without explicit emphasis on creating such forums, they likely will
not occur. Currently the burden of organizing such efforts lie squarely
on the shoulders of students’ voluntary efforts. From the student
perspective, that there appear to be few efforts to engage in serious
cross-department (within college) conversation, and even fewer resources
to be found sends a clear message about valuing interaction. Students
stressed the need for better communication among students and administration
before addressing specific issues, and this effort should be heavily
supported by the administration.
While the Conversation about the Future appears to
be over, in at least one college, the conversation is only just beginning.
After the Student Forum, students within the College of Education
coordinated four college-wide forums, which had students, staff and
faculty present. These local forums culminated in a year-end collaborative
effort that resulted in the establishment of college-wide committees
designed to address the themes that came forth during the initial
College Student Forum. It is important to note that this effort was
led entirely by students, and while staff have been supportive, without
the student energy and volunteer efforts, there would be no continued
dialogue around these issues. Students in other colleges have expressed
interest in continuing their conversations, but as of yet, nothing
significant appears to have surfaced. This reinforces the need to
either institutionally support student efforts, or to provide support
and guidance for college staff and faculty to create the opportunities
for increased sustained dialogue. Students will provide the energy
needed for such dialogues to be successful, but must feel institutionally
supported throughout the process.
LESSONS LEARNED
The clearest message throughout the process of the
Conversation is the value of engaging the campus community in continued
meaningful interaction. Students responded positively to engaging
in brief, one‑hour conversations by raising serious issues and
offering profound solutions to many problems. The implications for
having students spend a significant amount of time focusing on addressing
a specific issue are grand. Students were able to delve into issues
related to their department, their college, the University as a whole,
the local community, Washington state, and national and global issues,
and offered realistic and easy-to-implement ideas. As it is, if the
University of Washington wants to seriously consider the themes that
emerged from these forums, active support must accompany and drive
efforts working towards them. Student efforts are a valuable aspect
of this, but, from the student perspectives raised during these forums,
they cannot be the only, or even the main, source of energy working
towards change. The President was a clear influence on student involvement,
but a similar effect may be possible through college deans, department
chairs, and faculty support. Without this sort of support, student
efforts will largely fail, and the benefits of communication across
departments will not be realized.
Such support can come in a number of ways, and should
not be limited to thinking of just students in cross-departmental
communication. Faculty, staff, students, and community members all
benefit from increased dialogue, and there are several ways of facilitating
this. As noted in several of the forums, meeting times during meals
are often the most feasible for students and staff. The problem inherent
in this is that many of those who would attend choose instead to be
with their families and friends for meals. In order to address this,
the environment must be more conducive to participation from those
with families and significant others. Currently, the campus environment,
according to many of the students in these forums, is not inclusive
of those with families, and as such, efforts to create dialogue will
miss out on a key group of students and staff unless work is done
to ensure that children are welcome and included in campus events.
A related issue is the need to recognize that the
University’s current structures create barriers to students currently
working on efforts to engage in cross-departmental conversations.
The UW catering is considered unreasonably priced, as are rental fees
for many rooms throughout campus. Such barriers must be considered
in the process of creating a campus community that engages in dialogue;
the University must institutionally support such efforts.
EMERGENT THEMES
Community
While community was mentioned only a few times explicitly,
it weaves throughout most of the themes raised in the forums. In
fact, many of the themes offer a methodology for working towards
achieving a more inclusive, expansive, and enriched campus and surrounding
community. The need for belonging to a department and college was
expressed in several forums, but the larger notion of being part
of an institution that served as a community leader and resource
seemed to engage most students. The ways in which the University
of Washington can strive to create a campus community are presented
throughout the rest of the themes.
Students suggested an ideal way of combining a community
focus into academics by creating a program track to focus explicitly
on community organizing. This interdisciplinary track would serve
to educate students on the history of the local community through
community-based educational opportunities. It could provide academic
support and experiences that blend history, political science, sociology,
law, medicine, geography, art, education, social work, public health,
and a number of other disciplines. Such a program would root students
in the community and provide student assistance on local grassroots
organizing and relevant issues.
Other specific things can be done to help foster
a campus community. UW performances could be promoted to spark
dialogue around particular issues and could follow annual themes.
This could be enhanced by campus-wide book-of-the-month readings.
The selected book of the month, which could be sold at discounted
rate throughout the month, would serve as a discussion point throughout
campus. This could culminate with several forums for discussion
about the book. Different books would be chosen per month based
on the larger theme for the year.
Interdisciplinarity and Collaboration
The notion of interdisciplinary work was mentioned
thoroughly and almost dreamily by students throughout the University.
The very way the University conceives of interdisciplinarity should
be expanded to include collaboration with local and state communities
as well as other universities. The University of Washington should
think about creating opportunities for students to work with community
members, faculty from different disciplines, faculty from other
colleges and universities, K-12 teachers, practitioners, policy
makers, and other concerned and relevant parties. This expanded
view would position the University to create and support a multitude
of programs and opportunities that provide valuable learning experiences
for interested students. Programs and courses in conjunction with
other universities should be fostered and faculty could be rewarded
for such efforts. Opportunities like the College of Education’s
course cross listed with the University of British Columbia could
be encouraged by offering additional funding or a reward system
that acknowledges the extra work involved with coordinating such
a program.
An example of the importance of interdisciplinary
work can be seen in the health professions. Preparation for future
work in the health professions means gaining experience working
with people from different disciplines as doctors, pharmacists,
dentists, nurses, public health professionals, social workers, and
others, all work together to provide health care. In order to prepare
students, then, the University must provide opportunities for meaningful
interaction. This means working collaboratively on issues related
to health care delivery, policy discussions, and hands-on experiences.
Regular
college-wide forums.
These could focus on a variety of topics, including academic
presentations (of resident and visiting faculty, students, and staff),
college-wide issues, career preparation, and discussions about relevant
social issues. These forums could serve to create community while
providing college leadership in areas of concern. These are also
excellent opportunities to promote cross-departmental collaboration
and to demonstrate connectedness. Extra support should be provided
to collaborative forums that span several departments and bring
together students from outside the college.
Encourage
Course-taking in Different Departments.
The University’s strength lies in its many strong programs,
and this presents opportunities for departmental crossovers. Many
students learn to be disciplinarians through watching their department
and faculty work solely within their discipline. Faculty who model
interdisciplinary work send messages to students that collaboration
is effective and essential. Course requirements could be restructured
to ensure students take courses and work on projects with students
in similar majors. Interdisciplinary programs should serve a more
central role in students’ academic work.
Collaborative
Teaching.
Professors should be encouraged to work with faculty
from other departments in collaborative teaching ventures. This
would benefit teachers who are not as well trained by hooking them
up with better teaching faculty and could greatly expand opportunities
for mentor teachers. This also means providing a reward system that
acknowledges and encourages faculty who focus more explicitly on
team-teaching and working to assist other faculty with their own
teaching. It also means considering the tenure review process as
an interdisciplinary process that includes faculty outside the department
and college.
Collaborative
Campus-centered Projects.
Create collaborative groups (with faculty, staff and
students from different departments) to focus on addressing small
issues on campus. An example could be the creation of collaborative
groups to create art projects on campus that alter the physical
face of the University. The University could commission murals,
and have graduate students and faculty create teams to coordinate
an interdisciplinary effort. The artistic team could come up with
a theme or topic based on conversations in the community immediately
surrounding the location of the to-be-painted mural. They could
then delve into the history of that theme and create the mural based
on the outcomes of their learning process. This collaborative project
would promote the understanding of artwork and local history while
beautifying the campus.
Diversity
Some aspect of diversity was brought up at every
student forum. Many of the aspects brought up blend with other themes,
but also warrant individual assessment. Overall, students felt that
the University could focus more on diversity and begin to provide
leadership that encourages all students to think critically about
their role in the perpetuation of inequality. Throughout these forums,
it became apparent that students do not have adequate opportunities
to explore issues such as racism. There exists, then, an opportunity
to provide institutional support for engaging in campus-wide discussions
related to diversity. The dean of each college could provide a college-wide
forum on diversity within their respective college and hold monthly
follow-up sessions which delve into specific issues within the college.
Child
Care. An ideal way of dealing with childcare would be
to create a childcare center on campus that does research into child
development and early childhood education. The University could
also support college-based child care, where faculty, staff and
students come together to create a space for drop-in hours. This
would require few University resources, but could provide internships
for students.
Outreach.
Many students stressed the need for the University to have a continued
positive presence in minority communities. This would provide expanded
opportunities for students to get into communities and do supportive
work. Ideally, students could work in communities for academic
credit, and these opportunities would augment their educational
experiences by providing increased awareness of issues in minority
communities.
Campus
Climate.
The University could centrally coordinate efforts to promote an
inclusive campus climate. The climate would benefit from increased
presence of people of color, and from bringing in more culturally
relevant and celebrated experiences. Students would like diversity
training for faculty, staff and students so that all become more
aware of the climate on campus. A cross-disciplinary effort to
engage in training, like Professor Nagda’s Intergroup Dialogue,
could be expanded and implemented University-wide.
Tutoring
and Support Services.
Students expressed the need to augment the Office of Minority Affairs’
tutorial services with more localized departmental efforts. One
idea was to have some graduate student Teaching Assistants assigned
to tutoring exclusively. Another idea would create a mentoring system
that connects first-year students with third-year students. This
relationship would last two years. At the end of the two years,
the mentee would become a mentor for an incoming first year student
and begin their own process of mentoring.
Hiring
Diverse Staff and Faculty.
Numerous students highlighted the lack of diverse faculty and also
noted the corresponding lack of support for the few faculty of color.
One of the ways of addressing this was by creating ongoing faculty
discussion groups that focus on these sorts of issues, but also
includes collaboration on research, outreach into the community,
and other pressing needs. Participation in these discussion groups
would assist faculty in gaining support while raising the awareness
of other faculty not connected to issues about diversity.
Admissions.
While many students challenged the use of standardized
tests in admissions procedures, they also wanted to see more conversation
about how the admissions process works.
Curriculum.
The need for a diversity and ethnic studies requirement was expressed
by most students. Some students dug in deeper and suggested that
the University require courses that focus explicitly on an aspect
of oppression, such as racism or sexism. The curriculum should reflect
the student body and the local and state community, and this means
ensuring that faculty have the background knowledge and awareness
to do such a thing. This could be achieved through more faculty
training, but also through the faculty discussion groups.
Need
to Serve Local Populations.
Students expressed an interest in serving as mentors to K-12 students
interested in their field of study. Students could get academic
credit for mentoring and a mentoring program could be expanded through
the Pipeline project and other programs designed for outreach.
Preparation of Citizens
Students expressed the need to be educated about
how to participate in the world once they graduate. This participation
varied from being prepared in their professions to thinking critically
about their own role as citizens in a democracy. It extended from
wanting to learn about how to interact with other people, learning
the histories of diverse populations, and understanding the nature
of oppression to being prepared to work in their field and future
employment. The connection between diversity, interdisciplinary
work, and preparation for life as citizens and workers blended in
these forums.
Students expressed concern that they did not know
enough beyond theory to be of greatest benefit to their eventual
clients. Students want to know that what they are studying will
matter in their careers, and want to ensure that they can interact
and work with all people. Students expressed the desire to learn
about social justice so they would be in a place to address social
inequality through their careers.
Critical
Thinking.
Many professional jobs require thinking on your feet,
and students wanted greater preparation and practice with basic
critical thinking skills. Such opportunities could also be used
to increase awareness of alternative perspectives and people from
different cultures. One related way of focusing on critical thinking
skills appears possible through a well-developed ethnic studies
requirement, which centers on teaching students to consider multiple
perspectives and also focuses on the critical thinking needed to
assess social equality. Students suggested that general education
requirements could focus on critical thinking as the core component
in preparing them for their majors.
Technology.
Students expressed an interest in learning the most advanced technology,
but also wanted to ensure that they were not leaving some populations
behind or without access. The key here lies in learning how to bridge
the digital divide while focusing on new technologies. The K-12
connection would work well here; students could work in community
schools teaching K-12 students how to use new technologies, especially
in schools with few resources. Another possibility would be to
provide student mentoring for incoming students who have had less
access to newer technologies.
Experiential
Learning and Hands-on Experiences.
Students mentioned the importance of connecting with experts in
the field and getting practical experiences with some of the work
they will be doing in the field. Ideas included connecting students
with industrial and field experts who could serve as mentors (especially
to minority students to help foster students through the pipeline).
In specially designed programs, the University could also create
apprenticeship programs and provide academic credit for experiences
and internships in the field. This also works to increase diversity
by focusing on training students to interact with diverse clienteles,
so that students can provide equitable services to all populations.
Campus
Decision-making Processes. Students expressed keen interest
in having more involvement with on-campus leadership and decision-making
processes. Students serving in decision-making capacities for the
University gain valuable experiences by seeing first hand how the
University operates. This is key preparation for future faculty,
administrators and policy makers. Student participation in decision
making processes serves to ensure that students take an active role
in the shaping of their education, and students expressed the empowering
aspect of being involved. Students mentioned the expansion of the
CHID class (Rethinking the University) to focus on one pressing
University-wide issue per quarter. This course would ideally have
an open enrollment, serving both undergraduate and graduate students.
It could serve as a temporary task force on pressing issues, spending
a quarter on a select topic, issuing status reports and ultimately,
a decision on how the University should decide. The course could
have guest speakers from the administration, faculty, students,
and community members and could largely be student-run, with the
exception of the coordinating faculty. Courses could also focus
on social problems that students within the campus raise. For example,
a course, or series of courses could be designed around global warming,
or around sweatshop issues. These courses would necessarily be interdisciplinary,
and could produce a working report, which offers suggestions for
UW action.
Study
Abroad.
Students talked about the need to have experiences working with
populations that they will interact with once they graduate. For
many students that population is largely located within the state,
although for some students this means creating national and international
opportunities. Intercampus exchanges could work to expand opportunities
within the state, as students could study at other universities
with relative ease, and use the local resources that the University
of Washington simply cannot provide. The UW could also strengthen
community support and presence by creating research communities
where there are community centers. Ideally, the University would
become more spread throughout the state to ensure that students
who wanted a state-wide experience could obtain it.
K-12
Connection.
The need to actively work to ensure the K-12 system prepares all
students equitably and adequately was expressed by students in almost
every forum. Students wanted to participate in programs that place
them in local K-12 schools to mentor and foster relationships with
students (particularly minority students). While a number of such
programs are currently being proposed and in the beginning stages,
students expressed the desire to have the process be made as easy
as possible. Essentially, students want to know which office to
go to in order to be connected with a program that places them in
schools. Academic credit and internships could provide support for
students serving as mentors or in classroom support roles.
SUMMARY
This document is not intended to be comprehensive
of all ideas, strategies, or criticisms brought up during the student
forums. For such in-depth analysis, readers should refer to the Conversation
website (http://www.washington.edu/change/future/summaries.htm) and
look at each school and college’s summary notes. Rather, the attempt
was to provide an overview and clarification of the major recurrent
themes. Specific suggestions that did not appear to relate to the
above themes were taken out, but should not be overlooked. Indeed,
many of the suggestions are relatively easy to implement and yet could
reinforce the focus on community. For example, students mentioned
the need for more bike racks, for having students involved with the
tenure review process, and for more opportunities for curricular reform.
These ideas can all support the endeavor to create a more inclusive
community. If such an attempt is to flourish, the ideas within the
summary notes should be carefully analyzed.
Where we should go from here
The University should continue to converse about how to create
a campus community. The very process of this conversation is an important
community-building event. Focusing on answers to how to create a campus
community without engaging the community in such a conversation, however,
will limit the effectiveness of any proposed actions. The campus must
come together in a community-centered way to address how best to foster
community.
With that, however, the University should pursue the
creation of social-problem and issue based research teams. A number
of other methods would help to get at some of the themes raised by
the students, but these social-problem-focused groups could comprehensively
address most, if not all, of the issues raised. These collaborative
teams could address particular social issues and create reports that
addressed them. Courses could focus on aspects of these and students
could get certificates in these areas of study. Students could also
work on senior theses and have graduate student advisors on these
projects. This creates numerous undergraduate research opportunities
and extends the work currently done sporadically throughout departments.
Within any given social issue, the research teams
could serve to research and work extensively on the historical context
of the problems and provide subsequent education to the campus and
community. Issues could have groups within the teams that focus on
the local, national and global levels, while some could focus on how
the University of Washington interacts with, contributes to, or addresses
the problems. These teams could ultimately prepare reports and working
papers to present to local, state, and national policy makers and
help ensure that the University of Washington has a presence in public
decision-making processes.
CONCLUSION
The Conversation About the Future was successful in
identifying core themes that students feel must be addressed in order
to attain their vision of the future. In order to proceed, the University
must begin to critically analyze student ideas and move forward with
significant student guidance paving the way towards the future.
APPENDIX A
College Student Forums Participation Lists
|
College/School
|
Date
|
Number
of Participants
|
|
College
of Architecture and Urban Planning
|
May 16
|
20
|
|
College
of Arts & Sciences, Arts & Humanities
|
March 3
|
4
|
|
College
of Arts & Sciences, Natural Sciences
|
May 3
|
6
|
|
College
of Arts & Sciences, Social Sciences (2 parts)
|
April 5
& May 4
|
14
|
|
School of
Business
|
May 10
|
70
|
|
School of
Dentistry
|
May 2
|
7
|
|
College
of Engineering
|
March 6
|
15
|
|
College
of Education
|
January
12
|
56
|
|
College
of Forestry
|
March 10
|
14
|
|
College
of Library and Information Sciences
|
Fall 2000
|
N/A
|
|
School of
Law
|
March 27
|
28
|
|
School of
Nursing
|
February
9
|
19
|
|
School of
Medicine
|
May 8
|
28
|
|
College
of Ocean & Fishery Science
|
June 1
|
22
|
|
School of
Pharmacy
|
April 21
|
19
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
School of
Public Health
|
April 7
|
|
|
School of
Social Work
|
March 1
|
68
|
|
University
of Washington Bothell
|
January
25
|
21
|
|
University
of Washington Tacoma
|
February
1
|
18
|
|
Total
|
|
453
|
|
