HBCU’s

Study: Black professors must be "entertaining"

A new study published by Vanderbilt University underpins the theory of racial bias in higher education.

According to the study, black faculty members are not only wanted for intellectual purposes but to entertain as well. Apparently being an expert in a field is not enough; these professors must step it up to pass the general public’s test for being a “good” teacher.

“Black faculty members are expected to be “entertaining” when presenting academic research to mostly white peers, according to a new Vanderbilt study.”

The survey shows that black academics are expected to tell jokes and keep their presentations loaded with levity.

It gets worse for black women who are academics.

“Black females additionally noted being subject to their colleagues’ preoccupation with their clothing choices and hairstyle, and reported being admonished to play down their “passion” and “smile more.”

A common theme that many black men and women face in the workplace is compounded in higher education. Not to mention that the number of black faculty working in higher education is just nine percent, many academics have likely faced this issue many times before.

One of the authors of the study, Ebony McGee, is hopeful that the study will be used as a way to potentially train others in accepting workplace diversity.

“Our hope is that this study will offer novel and useful insights to those who organize presentations and those who give them, so they will be able to understand, appreciate and provide an improved experience for black and other minoritized scholars.”

Past, Present, and Future of Sustainable Leadership

Sustainable leadership builds on the past in an effort to create a better future for schools. This is against most educational change theories, which do not find a place for the past, since the “arrow of change” is thought to move only in a forward direction. Past problems are generally either ignored, or overcome in a rush to get to future improvement.

For those leaders attracted or addicted to change, the past is seen as a monument of backward thinking and irrational resistance for those whom they consider to favor the status quo, or those emotionally incapable of letting go of old habits and beliefs. These leaders consider the past to be a dark era of weak or poor leadership practices that leave negative legacies, models of schooling, or “uninformed” professional judgment in classroom instruction. All of these are negatives are seen as barriers to modernization.

Reform based only on the present or future becomes the opposite of sustainability. Sustainable development has the distinction of respecting, protecting, preserving, and renewing all the valuable elements of the past and learning from those elements to build a better future. One way of getting in touch with the past is to see teacher resistance and nostalgia among members of the profession not as obstacles to change, but as sources of wisdom. Teachers’ years of classroom experience should not be discounted.

Change theory must strive to create proposals that are built upon past legacies, instead of trying to ignore or destroy them. While contemplating changes, sustainable leadership calls on leaders to look to the past for precedents that might be reinvented or refined. Events of the past may also be used as evidence of policies that have succeeded or failed before.

However, the above proposal does not mean that leaders live in the past, but value and learn from it. We have to end “creative destruction,” where leaders see the need to wipe out the past in order to create a future. Creative destruction usually leads to endless back-and-forth movements, increased employee burnout, and the unnecessary waste of expertise and memory that has been accumulated over time. Instead, a creative recombination of the best parts of the past in a resourceful and renewing way should be used.

Through sustainable leadership, leaders should find new structures, technology, and people by finding, redistributing, reusing, and recombining mismatched parts that have been lying around in the school’s organizational “basement.” Sustainable leadership and improvement is concerned with both the future and the past. It refuses to treat people’s knowledge, careers, and experience as disposable waste, because, in reality, they are valuable and renewable resources. In conclusion, sustainable leadership does not blindly endorse the past, but respects and learns from it.

 

Diverse Conversations: The Business of Higher Education

There are many people that believe higher education could be changed for the better if colleges and universities were to think of themselves as businesses and the students as the customers. In theory, higher education institutions would operate more efficiently, which could potentially make students more satisfied with the education they are receiving and lead to lower tuition costs. For this week’s edition of “Diverse Conversations,” I sat down with Amy Hillman, Dean of the W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University, to discuss the “the business of higher education.”

Q: Many people believe that colleges and universities operate optimally when they adopt a business model; this is much to the chagrin of their faculty. Should institutions operate as businesses or are the objections of the faculty warranted?

A: If we consider “adopting a business model” to mean responding to market demands, then I think it’s absolutely critical for colleges to do so. Universities need to be adaptable, embrace technology and innovation, and employ unique strategies. They should examine the needs of their surrounding communities, including businesses, which can employ future graduates.

For example, here at the W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University, our new master’s degree in business analytics was developed as a result of industry demand for employees with strong training in analyzing big data, and more importantly, being able to make informed decisions from that data. We have also added more leadership, critical-thinking and negotiation components to our curriculum, as employers demanded more skills in those areas.

It’s important to recognize that the job market changes. For professional schools (like business schools), failure to keep up with market conditions leads to obsolescence, and students will suffer from a lack of employability. Schools need to be nimble like an entrepreneur, able to quickly respond to changes in the business environment or actions by competing institutions. Complacency within schools results in the same problems as complacency within businesses. After all, if our profession is centered on enabling student success throughout their careers, then we need to practice what we teach.

Q: When colleges discuss operating efficiently and optimally, many employees see this as code for layoffs and budget cuts. Are they right to be apprehensive?

A: Efficiency is critical for any organization, nonprofits (e.g. universities) included. Being able to do the most possible with the resources given (efficiency) means better service — and more of it — for all involved. Apprehension like you describe, however, seems to be more a matter of trust. If employers use code words to hide what is really happening, employees will lose trust, and that’s never good. It’s not good for employees or employers.

Q: Nowadays, a lot of higher education institutions are recruiting their presidents from the business world. What do you think of this trend? Does it make sense? Especially since we know that many of these recruits end up garnering mixed reviews?

A: I was unaware of this trend with the exception of the for-profit universities, in which case, it makes sense because their ultimate goal is shareholder value creation. In the context of not-for-profit universities, this is like hiring a president from the business world to run any not-for-profit. It would take a special candidate to take what is best from the business world and apply it to universities, while still keeping the mission of education at the forefront.

Q: There are people within higher education who believe that it is overly commercial, and almost becoming a caricature of itself. Is there some truth to this? What are your thoughts?

A: I would guess that this line of thought is aimed at the new and highly visible for-profit companies selling education. They have very large marketing budgets and opportunities to sometimes portray themselves in ways that don’t necessarily reflect the ideals of nonprofit universities.

As the world of higher education evolves, we need to keep the lines of communication open with both our employees and our other constituents, to create a shared vision. Big changes always seem daunting to some, but if we have a shared vision and shared goals, then we can also share a sense of accomplishment as we achieve those goals.

For example, a decade ago, the W. P. Carey School of Business became one of the first business schools to enter the relatively uncharted waters of online education from quality, traditional universities. By utilizing the same stellar faculty members in our other highly ranked MBA programs, as well as a phenomenal technical team, we have risen to the top of the offerings out there. In fact, this year, our online MBA program was ranked No. 2 in the nation in U.S. News & World Report’s first-ever numerical online-MBA ranking. Faculty and staff across the board took pride in this achievement.

Q: What current trends do you see in higher education, as it pertains to how it does business? How about business innovation?

A: Beyond the increased demand for specialized master’s programs like the business-analytics degree I mentioned above, another growing trend is that of offering interdisciplinary degrees. The business world has long recognized that true innovation comes from working across functional silos. Employers are telling us they need employees with the skills to bridge the gaps between engineering and marketing, between sustainability and finance, and between legal and strategy, as examples.
This is one reason the W. P. Carey School introduced new interdisciplinary undergraduate degrees five years ago wherein a student can get a B.A. in business with a concentration in areas including communications, global leadership, legal studies, public policy or sustainability. These interdisciplinary degrees marry the knowledge from the business toolbox with broad-based thinking in other areas.

The need for interdisciplinary thinking is also the reason we have so many dual degrees. All of our master’s degrees (MBA, M.S. in Information Management, M.S. in Business Analytics, Master of Accountancy, Master of Taxation, M.S. in Management, Master of Real Estate Development) can be paired with graduate degrees in architecture, engineering or law. This is also the reason we have strong partners like the Mayo Clinic, which sends M.D. students to the W. P. Carey School to get advanced degrees, including our MBA, while they are still in medical school.

Q: As far as the “the business of higher education,” what will it look like in the future?

A: Like other businesses, the business of higher education will continue to evolve. For example, I think the talk about MOOCs (massively open online courses) is overblown.

A similar situation happened in the media industry in the early days of the Internet. Despite all the fuss about free content, The Wall Street Journal was one of the first media websites to step up and charge for access. As they say, “Content is king,” and that worked out for the newspaper.

While MOOCs may be good marketing for colleges and universities, they have no clear business model. That doesn’t mean business schools can ignore them, but rather, as with any technological improvement, we can embrace them in a way that furthers our value propositions.

Well, that concludes my interview with Amy Hillman. I would like to thank her for consenting to this interview.

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.