We understand that asking the right questions is at least as important (arguably more so) than finding the right answers. What problems are we trying to solve, and how should we go about framing a question that is solvable? The way the questions are asked will guide the answers that we accept and will tell us much about the assumptions that we make about higher education. Many people agree that higher education needs to be fixed, but we can’t agree on what it is that is broken.
In preparing for the retreat, invited participants were asked to think about the following questions. One of our stellar graduate students (Art Zavala and Kathy Hayes) phoned each participant and tape-recorded their answers.
- What are the findings or theories from your area of expertise that we could apply to higher education? (Feel free to define your area of expertise any way you want. Some examples of what we are thinking about include research on the transfer of training, understanding how people work in groups, encouraging creative or analytic thinking, cultural or motivational factors, learning with multimedia, and maintenance of attention.)
- What are the (most important) unsolved problems? What should be included in an agenda for research?
- What prototypes can you point us toward where principles from the science of learning are already being applied (e.g., activities, courses, fields of study, degree programs, or entire systems)?
- What are the major problems with or barriers to redesigning higher education? Do you have any ideas for overcoming them?
- What additional questions should we be asking?
- What do we need to do so that one outcome of the retreat is to effect change (in ways that we want)?
In the right-hand column are links to the summaries of responses that they provided and the questions they thought we should be asking. Additional responses will be posted to this site as they become available.
|
