In a message dated 11/1/99 5:43:51 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dreskow@corp.webb.net writes:
> Fascinated to learn that you are from the community college world, and
> that you have been researching the community college as a learning
> organization: the community college was my world for one whole career.
Then you can relate to my comments! I am giving a presentation this month
entitled "The Learning College -- an Oxymoron?"
> I do not know which community college in which state you are part of,
No secret: West Valley College in Saratoga (in Silicon Valley), California
> but it is probably safe to look into a crystal ball and predict that
> your colllege has the following characteristics, and does the following
> things:
>
> 1. It says that it offers programs and services that take their shape
>from
> the needs of the local community;
Yes.
> 2. Despite this, its form and structures are identical to those found
> elsewhere: it uses the Carnegie credit system; a 3-credit course meets
>150
> minutes a week; a "full time" student take 4 or 5 "courses" each
> "semester" or "quarter"; students are graded "A" to "F"; 60 or so
>credits
> leads to a "degree"...
Yep.
> 3. The curriculum that your community apparently needs is quite similar
>to
> those elsewhere: a year of English, probably called English 101-102 is
> required...
Right again.
> The point of all this is to suggest that community college's learning of
> new ways as a Learning Organization is limited by its zones of freedom:
> and this boundaries are set not by the community, or the college
>faculty,
> but by the regulations and the various external regulators.
Mostly, I agree. California's ed code and the regulations governing its
community colleges are legion for their level of micromanagement. But
it's not all the fault of external forces. Community colleges are just as
accepting of some of the medieval concepts of higher education as their
four-year cousins. I am amazed (although less frequently as time goes on)
at how we can internally be so incredibly conservative.
> My own hunch is that "structure talks": the form of the community
>college
> sets limits on how much improving, how much learning it can do, just as
> the form of the Pony Express set limits as how much improving that
> organization could do: you could do a lot of training into a rider and
>his
> horse, but the structural limitations of thge Pony Express system set
> bounds to the amount of improvement possible.
> If this thesis is at all right, no matter how much TQM'ng and how LO'ing
>a
> community college does, very little improvement that the student can
>sense
> and feel and profit from will occur.
I'm testing your thesis right now as I convene faculty and staff to
discuss how we're going to support interdisciplinary programs and
innovative teaching approaches that do not fit into the existing boxes.
These endeavors are growing but have no "homes" within the traditional
structure and thus no viable representation. I am excited about this
project because it forces us to question everything from credentialing to
contracts/workload issues to adult learning theory.
> Is there evidence, other than anecdotal and self-congratulatory by
> experimenting faculty, to the contrary?
Well, that's what I'm compiling -- evidence. I can keep you periodically
posted. I'm sure you can appreciate the enormity of this task in an
institution that is largely traditional in terms of its organizational
structure. Harriett.
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>