Voor het berekenen van de totale sterrenbeoordeling en de procentuele verdeling per ster gebruiken we geen gewoon gemiddelde. In plaats daarvan houdt ons systeem rekening met zaken als hoe recent een recensie is en of de recensent het item op Amazon heeft gekocht. Verder worden recensies ook geanalyseerd om de betrouwbaarheid te verifiëren.
The hyper-individualism and competition in mainstream colleges and universities—fueled by the rampant neo-liberalism that is embedded in the everyday behaviors of most faculty and administrators—has become widely acknowledged across the higher learning. Yet, as highlighted by Kathleen Fitzpatrick in Generous Thinking, not much is changing. As she candidly acknowledges in discussing her arrival as a professor at a land-grant university, she “got to watch closely as the shallowness of the contemporary commitment to [the public good] was exposed on the national and even international stage.” To address that challenge, she argues persuasively that our colleges and universities need to put building and sustaining relationships—not only within our institutions but through public engagement—at the forefront of our campus-wide cultures and our everyday practices. And to that end, she argues convincingly that the humanities are especially well-positioned to create and embody learning experiences that celebrate dispositions (such as “listening” rather than “talking” and embracing our connectedness rather than what divides us) and encouraging the cultivation of “organic communities” not only within our colleges and universities but also with the public. In so doing, she deftly challenges the reader to generate and share their ideas for cultivating “generous thinking” and the search for community. I highly recommend this book to faculty, administrators, students, staff, policymakers, and other stakeholders in higher education. We would all benefit from reflecting on Fitzpatrick’s ideas as a valuable starting point for ensuring that “generous thinking” takes a more prominent place across the higher learning.
Kathleen Fitzpatrick has long been a proponent of altering the fundamental values of higher education and university infrastructure. What she's proposing is a values-based structure as opposed to the competitive, political jockeying for everything (funding, students, prestige) in a university setting. It's risky to propose throwing out the status quo for faculty -- because faculty in all public universities have a say in the university through shared governance. If we can change that outlook from the faculty on up (instead of top down), we'll have a system that can articulate the needs for curricular shifts and move the needle on the anti-education thread that seems to be running through the U.S. Ed tech is not going to save the university system. Vocational training is not going to save the university system, nor the U.S. need for engaged citizens.
Her writing is accessible at all levels. Though it refers to the existing university infrastructure, it's plausible that an interested reader will understand that the current system isn't working. It's not meant as a roadmap. Kathleen never pretends to provide a universal salve. Instead, this is an invitation to think differently and take that to your committees to ask other faculty to join in that exploration of values in order to solve some of the university's issues. This can only be done by looking at colleagues as collaborators rather than competitors.
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 4 januari 2019
I ordered this because I was curious to hear about the “crisis” and what the “difficult place” we are in right now with the American university system and wanted to heat the proposed solution. Fitzpatrick proposes in her subtitle “a radical approach to saving the University”. From the start and in the 45 page introduction I realized that I am not the target audience for this book. This book is regarding issues and concerns that tenured professors have in liberal arts colleges regarding the study of humanities. The problem for me is that the base foundation information which Fitzpatrick is discussing is not directly shared in the book. This is like entering a conversation at a cocktail party when the two or more people are talking to each other and you have no context and struggle to understand what the conversation is about. This is like reading long blog posts of tenured professor speaking to other tenured professors. The writing comes off as arrogant. There are a lot of run-on sentences, it rambles and it is frustrating to read. There are only four chapters and the proposal for the solution is in the book’s conclusion which is only six pages long. I don’t really see a solution proposed here, which was the promise in the subtitle.
Rating 2 stars = Don’t Like It. To explain a little more about my interest in this book, in my career I hit a promotion ceiling because I did not have a college degree so I returned to college for my bachelors degree while still working full time. About 20 years later I returned to community college to study a topic I was interested in (fine arts) and have attended the last nine semesters so I have been seeing and spending time with today’s young people, most of whom are seeking a 2+2 bachelor’s degree. I am getting certified to teach high school and hope to be a positive influence for students to continue on to study at university. This book did not communicate the crisis to an interested person who is a book lover and a frequent reader of nonfiction books.
3,0 van 5 sterrenYou say you want a revolution, well you now, we all want to save the world.
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 14 september 2019
First, a little background.
I was educated in the post World War 2 British education system. Starting at age 5 in the infants, then at 7 into the juniors, I took an examination called the 11+, essentially an IQ test to determine the type of education I would be directed to following primary education. As a result of passing the test I went to a Grammar (academic) school with the expectation that I would be a strong university prospect. Those not so (un)lucky as to pass the test would go to the local secondary ,modern school where the range of subjects available ranged from academic to those more skill orientated. Another option for some would be to attend a Technical College which primarily offered vocational subjects, an area which expanded its offerings as computers became more generally available.
University was provided for fee paying students and those with lower incomes who met the academic criteria for entry and who were supported by local government. The subjects available were knowledge based, required substantial amounts of reading by students in non lecture or seminar time and examinations were based on 3 hour written papers without the accompaniment of books.
Education at all levels has changed dramatically across the world since the 1980s.
The emphasis has switched to subjects made up of modular subjects and adjustable routes to the award of a degree. Instead of knowledge based curricula, the overarching idea is problem solving by individuals working in groups or teams, assessment is based on the accumulation of points from multiple guess, short essays, course work, projects and sometimes other factors. Universities have become de facto high schools around a production function of providing skilled works who possess little in the way of a broad general education.
One of the issues of education in general was exploited on television by the stand up comedian Jay Leno on his late night television show where he would venture out onto the streets of Los Angeles and seek out individuals who he would question about general knowledge of politics and history. Funny yes, sad and deeply depressing even more so. Given the extent in time and classes the average American spends on American History, it is very difficult to comprehend the failure of some people to be able to remember any of it, although presumably, passed the courses.
I feel very strongly of the need to educate everyone as far as they are able to achieve. In the years before the Nationalization of Education in Britain by the Foster Act of 1870, ordinary men and women with very little disposable income would contribute in groups to pay someone to teach their children about reading,' riting and 'rithmetic. Not because of any religious beliefs per se (Roman Catholic rites were in Latin) but because, like all good parents, wanted their children to do well for themselves.
It is the reading that is the key.
I am very sympathetic to the author about the centrality of reading and her comprehension that we read in our own way, sometimes unable to express our understanding to each other, either in the same, or different fields. However, I believe that the reading of which she laments is a symptom of the problems not a cause of them. In this utilitarian, corporate world, where the academy has been transformed into training factories, the cost of which has been transferred, in many cases on to the recipients. Reading at undergraduate level is directed in order to be able to answer questions. Research, a badly abused word, refers to going out and finding answers as opposed to looking beyond them. The fact is that the whole edifice is rotten.
Universities are now grand places of glass and steel, students are plugged in to the internet superstructure, journals proliferate in every subject and data is the emperor. The students have little or know time for reflection and independent reading to supplement their coursework. Faculty are often distracted by their need to produce product which is the basic material from which data is obtained.
To an extent my experience conditions my outlook. I have worked under old and new. But I am troubled by the fact that on paper, we are better educated than ever. Yet for all that we do not question what goes on in the world. We are all too busy on our hampsters wheels to get by to look at the terminal issues facing us all because our communications may be 140 characters or less.
Yes the role of reading, talkng, discussing,arguing about the facts rather than personally are all contributing factores to making a difference. Rethinking the university requires us to go back to first principles, to ask ourselves what the purposes of education are and what are the best ways to get there. Universities should be responsive to the needs of the population, to achieve as much as they can, to teach,to carry out blue sky as well as vocational research, to equip students with the knowledge and skills they need to reach beyond. To boldly go as the saying goes.
The role of this book should be to provoke, to attract criticism, to find others with ideas and debate with them in order to progress. I think that we took a wrong turn in education. It is more than vocational, it needs to be independent of state and corporation and prepare the consumers to play a part in the world.
3,0 van 5 sterrenA departure from excellence disguised as "generous thinking"
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 18 november 2018
First, the premise of this book is rock solid...there is an urgent need to reconsider the role of college education in society today. The anti-intellectual, anti-science bias held by a growing number of people is not only alarming but indicative or much more significant problems...problems that underscore the lack of clear communication and objectives demonstrated by higher education. While the title promises a "radical approach" I must admit to not expecting the proposals to be that radical...and in some ways, it's not. On the other hand, it is. Basically the book left me feeling frustrated over the lack of truly unique and cutting edge ideas and simultaneously disturbed by the lack of differentiation from what has been proposed by lesser academic institutions. In short, this isn't "generous thinking" but rather a departure from excellence. Last but not least, the writing is tedious - not quite academic in nature yet certainly far from conversational.
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 20 november 2018
Kathleen Fitzpatrick calls for transforming the culture of higher education from one of competition to one of community. And that sense of community is to extend beyond the campus. Fitzpatrick decries how education has come to be considered a private responsibility rather than a public good. Higher education institutions have contributed to this change in perspective by isolating themselves from the larger community. Fitzpatrick calls for universities to join in solidarity with the wider public. This will require, says Fitzpatrick, generous thinking—listening to one another, being open to learning as much as teaching, and applying knowledge for the public good. Fitzpatrick admits that what she proposes will not be easily achieved. Nonetheless, it is critical, she argues, to the future of higher education and society that universities reach beyond their borders to lead the necessary transformation of how we perceive and deliver education. Fitzpatrick writes for university faculty and administrators. But this volume will also be of interest to anyone concerned about the role of higher education in American society.
2,0 van 5 sterrenI found the author to be fairly pedantic and her audience was very much intended to be university professors which is great as that is where change is going to come ...
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 17 december 2018
Generous Thinking makes an appeal towards open scholarship and rethinking the role of higher education in todays world. As someone in this industry I am a firm believer that we are in a crossroads of the role of the university in the United States, but this book does nothing to propose any solutions and is a combination of various blog ideas put into a book calling for more discussion. I found the author to be fairly pedantic and her audience was very much intended to be university professors which is great as that is where change is going to come from but not much for mass appeal to the average reader or even those outside of academia in higher education. Hopefully this will be a starting point for a discussion, but this is not where you are going to find any answers. If you want to look at some of the transformative areas of higher ed today look at the various books on guided pathways and the way in which curriculum is being looked at to serve working adults and convey the needed components of education today.
5,0 van 5 sterrenGood for professors & university leaders
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 4 maart 2019
Higher education is facing Some really big challenges right now, including the need to justify costs, ensure quality and value, and keep in step with society needs. It's a complex issue that is worthy of a deep analysis and thoughtful solutions. In this book, the author does a great job describing the issues and provides reasonable and well-researched ideas that would be helpful for universities to consider in their strategic planning and sustainability measures.
I agree with the other reviewers that this is not meant for people who do not have experience working in higher education in some capacity. In other words, it is not written for an audience who is not familiar with the current higher ed landscape. It's just how it was written, but for me it was an excellent read (I am a professor, an administrator, and work on a couple of state-wide accreditation committees). I think this book is great for schools working on planning and looking for ways to expand their reach to be more responsive to students.
4,0 van 5 sterrenA Radical, but perhaps Flawed Premise
Beoordeeld in de Verenigde Staten op 24 juni 2019
As someone who has witnessed personally the traumatizing effects of an academy that places prestige above all else, I was eager to learn of alternative solutions. The premise here is that if we can develop a culture around our faculty culture that focuses on building each other up, that somehow this will ripple through the organization and out into the community to reap positive results. I think this kind of idea is not entirely practical as long as the entire premise of doctoral study and beyond is based on critique and finding flaws within a certain body of work. Nearly every doctoral student I have ever met has been trained to rip apart the scholarly work of others to assert their own superiority. I don't know how a reversal of this magnitude would work in practical terms with sufficient culture change to turn and entire organization around. At any rate, it was an intriguing read and I appreciated the optimism.