|
A Conversation with Dr.
William Anton About the Evolution of Higher Education Institutions
and the Contribution of Counseling Centers to their Future
Success |
William Anton = W.A.
Carlos Zalaquett = C.Z.
C.Z.: In attempting to identify the skills and abilities needed by
college students to succeed in the 21st century, I realize that counseling
center themselves are in need of change to succeed in the future. Are
colleges and universities in need of change too, to meet the challenges of
the future?
W.A.: Yes. In a mid-1990s keynote address jointly published by
NACUBO and the Stanford Forum for Higher Education Figures, James
Duderstadt, President of the University of Michigan made a critical
observation regarding the perception of change that universities will
undergo in the next five years. Various groups were asked to rank on a 0
(status quo) to 10 (radical change) scale the degree of change they
believe universities will undergo in the next five years. The results were
as follows: faculty said three or four; academic administrators said seven
or eight; and, university presidents said 20!
C.Z.: They forecast change and lots of it. What kind of changes?
W.A.: One interesting response comes from James Duderstadt. In his
book chapter on Academic Renewal at Michigan, he described the University
of Michigan as a learning organization. In essence, a learning
organization is one that is continually expanding its capacity to create
its own future. The use of this business term is quite significant because
there is a wealth of information available to direct universities in
achieving this highly effective organizational status. Regarding the early
evolution towards achieving this at the University of Michigan, Duderstadt
observed, "We have demonstrated a remarkable inability to eliminate
outmoded and obsolete activities." Outdated policies, procedures, and
practices increasingly stifle our best and most creative people."
Frank H.T. Rhodes, the former president of Cornell following his
assessment of Ohio State University at the request of President William E.
Kirwan, made a similar observation. In his report he observed that "the
university's administrative structure is clumsy, well-intentioned, but
rarely effective".
C.Z.: What will be the mission of these new institutions?
W.A.: Duderstadt describes the primary missions of teaching,
research, and service as "the 20th century manifestations of the more
fundamental roles of creating, preserving, integrating, transmitting, and
applying knowledge." This has implications for faculty members of the 21st
century! Traditional styles of intellectual pursuit may become as obsolete
and irrelevant to the future as the American Corporation of the 1950s. In
his words, "The organizational head must play a critical role as both
leader and educator in designing, implementing, and selling the
transformation process." More precisely, "We must seek to remove the
constraints that prevent our institutions from responding promptly and
flexibly. We must eliminate unnecessary processes and administrative
structures, question existing premises and arrangements, and challenge,
excite and embolden the members of our university communities to embark on
this great adventure."
C.Z.: Changing to embrace changes.
W.A.: Yes. It is clear from Duderstadt's remarks that the most
critical challenge most institutions of higher learning will face will be
to develop the capacity for change embraced in the definition of a
learning organization. Our initial efforts must center on responsiveness
to rapidly changing societies and removing constraints such as unnecessary
processes and structures. In essence, a big part of the task is removing
institutional constraints and making it possible to challenge, excite and
embolden all members of the university to embark on a great adventure.
Developing a capacity for change requires an understanding of people and
how they function since they are the ones who determine efficiency and
productivity in organizations. Organizations cannot continue to ignore the
reality of human functioning in their attempts to create productive
outcomes.
C.Z.: In other words, human functioning will become an essential
component for the success of these organizations.
W.A.: You are right. Where the reality of human functioning is
acknowledged and accepted, the organization knows where it has strayed
from its purpose and more importantly knows how to initiate the process of
self-correction. The alternative is the unconscious organization, in which
the leadership and the workers maintain a precarious relationship often
characterized by "adversariliasm" or "pseudo-consensus" and never discover
the organizations potential or their own.
C.Z.: What other components will be needed?
W.A.: In addressing 21st century challenges for the Ohio State
University, President Kirwan was guided by five principles in formulating
a new plan. These are as follows: Primacy to academic needs, effective
communication within the university community and responsiveness to the
community, sustained focus on university's priorities, a well articulated
and timely decision-making process, and accountability for decisions and
overall progress towards goals. In particular, creating outreach and
engagement programs with communities that are served is crucial.
In a series of reports dealing with achievements, challenges and the
future role of a research university, Richard C. Atkinson, President of
the University of California has described how some major issues of the
next century will be addressed. Recognizing the importance of high
technology applications in private sector support, Dr. Atkinson stresses
the central importance of university based basic research and the
criticality of federal support (cf. Private sector) for this commitment to
the future. The emphasis on the partnership among government, universities
and industry has been a remarkably successful model. He describes the
essence of the development of "new growth theory" in economics. To quote
one of Dr. Atkinson's reports, "When federal investments in university
research increase, there is-with an appropriate lag time -a corresponding
increase in private- sector investments. There is now a well-researched
link between university-based research and industries' R&D efforts. I
have made it a priority to speak out about new growth theory and its most
striking implication -that the successful economies of the 21st century
will be knowledge-based." This means that universities must move to the
center stage of American life. In Dr. Atkinson's words, "Of all the
institutions in the United States, none will have a greater impact on our
future success or failure as a society than the research university".
C.Z.: These will call for dramatic changes within these
organizations.
W.A.: It will involve a revolution. In a recent paper entitled "The
Future of the University of California", Dr. Atkinson describes the
implications of the knowledge-based revolution on research universities,
where "every responsibility is shaped and bounded by the central and
pervasive mission of discovering and advancing knowledge." Research
universities are being transformed by a revolution they themselves helped
create. In Dr. Atkinson's words, "What these two phenomena
-society's growing dependence on knowledge and the technological
revolution in education- will ultimately mean for the organization and the
role of universities is a topic we have barely begun to understand.
But it is clear that we need to look at the University anew in light of
both the demands and the possibilities of a knowledge-based society."
C.Z.: What kind of organizational transformations would most
effectively support such knowledge creating systems?
W.A.: This is a question that we have begun to address. For example,
among the implications for the University of California, Dr. Atkinson has
observed that there will be greater decentralization, greater
accountability, greater marketplace influences, and greater flexibility in
the use of campus resources to maintain both quality and access.
"The purpose of these changes is to organize the University to carry out
its missions of teaching, research and public service. A research
university -full of bright individuals with their own passionate
commitments to learning- is a wonderful place in which to pursue such an
education."
C.Z.: It is difficult to imagine traditional organizations becoming
learning organizations.
W.A.: Let me give you an example. One of the world's outstanding
universities, Michigan State, has boldly faced this challenge. This
university has developed six principles to guide the development of
institutional assumptions and create organizational conditions that will
keep Michigan State at the forefront of the 21st century. These principles
are as follows:
- Improve the Quality of Education and Expert Knowledge,
- Achieve More Active Learning,
- Generate New Knowledge and Scholarship Across the
Mission,
- Promote Problem Solving to Address Society's Needs,
- Advance Diversity within Community, and
- Make People Matter.
Specific steps for
implementing each of the guiding principles and major initiatives taken
were also offered. In essence, Michigan State has made the commitment to
become a learning organization. A quote from their web site sums up their
renewed commitment as follows: "We advance the dynamic legacy of an
institution where knowledge is created and shared to serve the common
good, where excellence is the watchword, and where every person
matters." Not surprisingly, “Make People Matter” is one of their six
guiding principles.
C.Z.: How important are human resources for these organizations?
W.A.: The recognition that human resources are critical to knowledge
creating systems in the Information Age cannot be overstated. Most are now
quite aware that what we have come to know as the industrial age is ending
and is being replaced by the information age. In the industrial age Henry
Ford's classic statement, "All I needed was a pair of hands and I have to
put up with the whole individual", was harmful to the dignity of
individual workers, but whatever unseen effect it had on the bottom line
was not readily evident.
Information is now the raw material of organizations. Our focus on
data has given way to information which in turn has given way to
knowledge. Knowledge is the product and the physical value of the
product is less important. The value of a company is now primarily its
intangible assets. Since knowledge now equals value, how do organizations
insure that they are capable of sustaining the creation of new knowledge.
In the industrial age (where 90% of the time what passes for commitment is
compliance) you could get away with treating people as "a pair of hands"
and still remain relatively unaware of the implicit costs of this on the
product. But when knowledge is your product, there is no place to hide.
You can't dictate or intimidate people into creativity. In this new
context, emphasis must be placed on making accurate assumptions about
human functioning and delineating the factors that optimize the delivery
of quality informational products.
C.Z.: Which underlines again the importance of human functioning for
these organizations.
W.A.: Yes. Our early steps into the information age have already
begun to generate some of the right questions. What do we know about human
beings? What factors influence their functioning levels? What do we know
about learning? What are the organizational conditions that create great
informational products, optimal levels of performance in people and great
levels of satisfaction in one's job and one's work?
C.Z.: Have we also generated some of the right responses?
W.A.: Of course. Perhaps the most meaningful and comprehensive
answers to these questions are contained in a book written by Peter Senge
who is a professor at the Sloan School of Business at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. The book entitled The Fifth Discipline describes
the essential ingredients of a learning organization--whether it be a
Fortune 100 company, a university, school system, or a volunteer
organization. What Peter Senge has done is the organizational counterpart
of the industrial revolution. He has identified the domain, labeled the
major elements and proposed a model for understanding the
interrelationships. In his book, Peter Senge identifies the core
disciplines that must be mastered to create a learning organization. What
distinguishes learning organizations from traditional hierarchical
authoritarian structures is the mastery of certain basic disciplines,
designed to work in concert to create optimal interpersonal functioning
supporting outstanding levels of business success. The disciplines
are:
- Personal Mastery, the discipline of developing our personal
vision by focusing our energies and developing a clearer vision of
reality
- Mental Models, the deeply ingrained beliefs and generalizations
that influence how we interpret the world and how we take action
- Building Shared Vision, the need for a vision to be shared by all
members of the organization
- Team Learning, the capacity of members of a team to suspend
assumptions and enter into genuine "thinking together" (e.g.
dialogue)
- Systems Thinking, which is the fifth discipline, the recognition
that organizations are bound by an invisible fabric of interrelated
actions.
C.Z.: Thus, valuing people and change will be of critical
importance.
All the hierarchies of the world (especially in the
information age) recognize the need for creativity, commitment and
innovation from their people. Yet the price of vitality is the sum of all
our fears and the price of our passion and commitment involves the
shattering of deep personal illusions of immunity and safety. In
Duderstadt's words, "Those institutions that can step up to this process
of change will thrive. Those that bury their heads in the sand, that
rigidly defend the status quo --or even worst, some idyllic vision of a
past that never existed- are at very great risk. The real question as
stated by Duderstadt "is not whether higher education will be transformed,
but rather how and by whom."
C.Z.: What will be the contribution of counseling centers in the
success of these organizations?
W.A.: Knowledge-based universities would need the contribution of
all their members and departments. The obvious question is: Can counseling
centers contribute to the mission and goals of these modern institutions?
My opinion is that counseling centers can and should actively contribute
to their institutions.
C.Z.: Well, we do know about the psychological characteristics of
our learners, and we can share that knowledge...
W.A.: Certainly. As you remember from our previous conversation,
personal/emotional factors are central to the primary mission of our
institutions, which is to educate our students. Personality is important
for high-order intellectual functioning and provides the supporting
structure for developing the skills you mention in your research.
Intelligence is far from unidimensional and it does not exist separate
from personality functioning. The implications of this for education
concerns the most fundamental assumptions on which universities have been
organized. It is difficult these days to find a commission report dealing
with education and learning that does not recognize the central importance
of personal/emotional factors in learning.
C.Z.: Do you think that university administrators are interested in
this kind of contribution?
W.A.: The somewhat lower priority given historically to so-called
non-academic support services in university settings is increasingly
incongruent with what we now know about how people learn. There is no
separation between the intellect and personality, and if we were forced to
choose which of the two constructs is the most important in furthering our
understanding of learning - which is ultimately simply adaptation - it
would probably be "personality." Most of us have more than enough
intellect to master content if we only had fuller access to our abilities.
In this respect, the distinction between intellectual ability and
intellectual functioning is critical. What is most important is
intellectual functioning. This represents the extent to which a person has
functional access to his/her intellectual abilities.
C.Z.: Therefore, our organizations would be interested in this
information because it would help them better prepare our students.
W.A.: If we are genuinely interested in developing each student's
academic potential, we can only do it by considering what we already know
about human functioning and learning. The more important processes of
reasoning and thinking, as opposed to memorization, are even more
dependent on "personality" functioning. In general, the more critical the
thinking process, the more dependent it is on adaptive personality
functioning. This in turn draws the inescapable conclusion that student
services that enhance in students a sense of personal/emotional well-being
are much more central to the academic mission than any of us have
previously considered."
C.Z.: As you have noticed, I believe that counseling centers are
capable of conducting research and providing our institutions with
different kinds of information. Information that can be useful for
planning and decision-making. In fact, we are helping to determine the
skills and abilities our students should learn to succeed in this new
century.
W.A.: Yes. Counseling centers must assume an active role in
producing knowledge that can serve as the basis for further progress
within the universities. By embracing the challenge of studying the skills
and abilities to succeed in this century, you provided a good example of
how much we can help. Your research is timely, it has heuristic value, and
also fits within the kind of transformations discussed above. The question
of how universities can contribute to the development of these skills and
abilities has been anticipated by some distinguished university presidents
in the past decade. We are beginning to identify the skills needed to
address the future.
C.Z.: We certainly are.
W.A.: Yes, and your research also suggests additional challenges,
such as to determine what factors enhance the development of these skills
and their effective application to a rapidly changing future. As you can
see, the role of counseling centers becomes evident within the
institutions of higher education of the 21st Century, especially as
experts in the personal/emotional factors in the effective application of
learning and skills.
Back to
Top
| 
