Do for Self:
The Individual’s Divine Right to Self-Actualization
According to Ayn Rand’s Novel The Virtue of Selfishness
Lavada Walden
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
Prairie View A&M University/The Texas A&M University System
William Allan Kritsonis, Phd
Professor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
Prairie View A&M University/The Texas A&M University System
Prairie View, Texas
ABSTRACT
This article explores principles of Ayn Rand’s objectivist philosophy. Acting selfish is a bold and morally imperative act in defiance of the altruistic-collectivist traditions imposed on the individual by government and religion. The author maintains that the individual’s first responsibility is the achievement of her own happiness and the preservation of her life according to her own hierarchy of value and ethics.
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Recall your latest airplane travel. As the airplane ascended above terra firma, the flight attendants gave safety instructions and demonstrated to the passengers potentially life saving procedures to take in the event of an emergency. We are told that if we are traveling with small children or other passengers that require assistance, we are to put on our protective masks first, then to assist those who may require our help. So is the premise underlying Rand’s philosophy of The Virtue of Selfishness. The individual must practice reasonable and moral judgment in the pursuit of a livelihood before she can act selflessly, extending goodwill and charity to her neighbor. When human beings disregard their divine ability to think and create, society stagnates and is likely to crumble into a socialist system.
Purpose of Article
The purpose of this article is to discuss how selfishness used as an ethical compass to enrich and empower one’s own life is a moral imperative for every compassionate, reasoning person. Self-actualization can only be achieved through selfishness. Only after one has come into self-realization is she enfranchised into society.
A Majority of One
Rand’s objectivist philosophy called for the individual citizen to examine the constrictions the world’s morality had put on the individual citizen’s conscience. She challenged the individual to first examine her own motives, values and ethics, and to act in an according, reasonable manner in her interchange with fellow humanity. In Rand’s objectivism, the individual’s ethics should never be subjugated for the needs of society because the morals imposed by society are arbitrary and injurious to the divine right of liberty through self-actualization, since society is composed of a select number of powerful men and structured on their whims. By the human’s nature, man alone out of all known creatures, has the ability to think, to reason, and the act on his values. This unique ability, this metaphysical gift of human existence, requires the individual to do so. Rand “stress[ed] that the fact that living entities exist and function necessitates the existence of values and of an ultimate value which for any given living entity is its own life” (Rand, 1964, p. 18). Mere existence itself encompasses an innate awareness of affective interaction with other humans and obliges the individual to act on her consciousness.
There has never been a more vehement champion of rugged individualism, laissez-faire economics, the primacy of property rights, or the businessman as cultural hero. In her eyes, America as the founders conceived it was the one moral society in the history of the world, and her appointed task was to save it and the world from the bane of collectivist, altruist, and subjectivist immorality. (Valiunas, 2005, p. 59)
Consciousness and Choice
Awareness is inseparable from the individual’s ability to think. Objectivism holds the individual responsible for the results of her reasoning, or thoughts, and corresponding actions resulting from such reason. However, the individual can choose to live in an apathetic, unfocused state of consciousness, but to do so results in the voluntary surrender of reason, liberty, and ethics. Rand believed that “nothing is given to man on earth except a potential and the material on which to actualize it” (Rand, 1964, p. 23). That potential is only realized by the individual’s choice to learn, to discover, and to produce which are guided by her ethics – the determination of what is good or evil. The insurmountable vice of humankind is choosing not to think. The suspension of her reason and the shirking of her potential is the source of all that is evil in the world. Rand glorified in the power of the human mind. To her, the mind was the creator and destroyer of life.
Causal Explanations for an Objectivist Epistemology
What are the causal explanations for following such ethics? Objectivism encompasses economic, political, ethical, and metaphysical epistemology. It attempts to hold the individual accountable for her own productivity, values and beliefs . “Causal structures are critical for any society: they define what is easy, possible, difficult, or unattainable as societies define social roles, allocate resources, or transfer culture” (Losh, 2003, p. 18). Causal structures represent constructed facts as objective truths. Shades of differences across causal belief systems attempt to articulate what is subjective opinion, what is fantasy, what is disjointed rambling insanity, and what is legitimate, and what is genius. Causal structures also delineate what the acceptable methods to discover truth are. Cultural differences on what are true and how to find truth causes frustrations. Objectivism seeks to see life as it truly is. Unless the individual is free to interpret the world as she sees it, then she is hostage to a forced group-think. The causal structures of society are in contravention with her values and ethics, creating a moral dilemma.
Objectivist philosophy holds reason above diverse causal perspectives of the preceding and present centuries such as:
God (the divine) did it, a fatalistic perspective that places outcomes beyond human control, except for human placation or service as a divine instrument; there are rational laws to be discovered (and people can discover them); citing recognized authorities, whether scripture, famous scientists, Nostradamus, or philosophers; and, proof by anecdote or carefully selected examples, often used in astrology and other magical systems, but also in religious, and even scientific treatises. (Losh, 2003, p. 20)
If an individual refuses to use the ability to think and reason, then the causal explanations offered by the collectivist community will become her values and beliefs. Likewise, in education if the student is not allowed to discover and learn, to inquire, and is not permitted to act on her own values, then the causal explanations that serve the leaders of society supplant her ability to reason and impose a subjective moral code.
A collectivist society’s moral code that forbids and restricts morality is in itself a contradiction. The assignment of “good” or “bad” or “gray” (meaning it could be good or bad depending on the situation at hand and who the judgment will benefit) in the self-serving interest of leaders is unconscionable to the ethical individual. The individual has the divine right to discover what is good and right for herself. One must not evade the issue of moral judgment. Moral “grayness” results in sloppy epistemology, designed to disguise its true meaning. “Some people believe… a restatement as “Nobody is perfect in this world” -- i.e., everybody is a mixture of good and evil, and therefore, morally “gray.” …people accept it as some sort of natural fact, without further thought. They forget that morality deals only with issues open to man’s choice (i.e., to his free will)- and, therefore, no statistical generalizations are valid in this matter (Rand 88).”
The Moral Challenge
In Equality and Proportionality, Knapp troubleshoots Rand’s perspective on the responsibility of the moral individual.
…it can be agreed that in virtue of possessing moral standing that individuals have moral claims on us and deserve our moral concern or respect. The disagreements emerge when we try to specify what exactly the legitimate claims of those with moral standings are…. (Knapp, 2007, p.180)
Even with individuals whose moral standing is questionable (bad or “gray”), the society struggles with the justification for the moral concern and respect the individuals are shown by pointing out descriptive differences between the “good,” “bad,” and “gray”. An over-simplified solution dealing with “gray matter” individuals is to say that those who are not our moral equals lack the rationality we possess.
There is no minute difference that separates those who are rational, possess a conception of the good and a sense of justice, are capable of shaping their lives according to a plan, and so, from those who are not. So no matter where an account of moral standing draws a precise line…it will not be a line that puts everyone who satisfies the criterion on one side and everyone else on the other. (Knapp, 2007, p. 190)
All individuals deserve equitable and moral treatment by virtue of being free rational beings. Freedom is ascribed to others because we have a moral duty to do so as reasoning moral human beings.
The Ethical Individual
On ethics, Rand firmly supported the individual’s right to decide whether or when they wished to help others. Rand rejected the altruistic concept of an individual as her sister’s keeper. The altruistic-collectivist society does not have the right to impose its ethics on the individual. Doing so would usurp the individual’s right to reason in deciding when and if she will contribute to her neighbor’s well-being. The altruistic-collectivist government uses such causal explanations to uphold its international trade agreements, and even to provide vouchers from the public coffers for students to attend private school. Is this the responsibility of society as a whole, or is it the responsibility of concerned parents? Rand eloquently affirmed her disdain for governmental social programs,
nature does not guarantee automatic security, success and survival to any human being, it is only the dictatorial presumptuousness and the moral cannibalism of the altruist-collectivist code that permits man to suppose (or idly to daydream) that he can somehow guarantee such security at the expense of others. (Rand, 1964, p. 94)
A Call to Re-examine Government for the People
It is institutionalized gang-rule, rather than government, that thwarts creativity and productivity of its citizens by attempting to limit the individual’s ability to think independently and logically. The individual’s mind is her basic tool of survival. Liberty requires that she think and act accordingly. Government’s true role in support of the people is to enforce rules of conduct, not to impose mental slavery. Government should be foremost concerned with protecting the individual from mob rule, lynch law and private vendettas by protecting human rights under an objective code of rules. “The proper function of government falls into three categories… the police, to protect men from criminals – the armed services, to protect men from foreign invaders – the law courts, to settle disputes among men according to objective laws” (Rand, 1964, p. 131). It is an individual’s responsibility as a citizen of a democratic society to demand checks and controls on the governmental bureaucracy. Free, reasoning citizens should constantly monitor the government’s control, less we have a democratic implosion.
The Strongest Link
Rand asserts that the moral concept of “rights” transitions from principles guiding a singular person’s action to the principles guiding interaction with others. “Rights” protect and preserve the individual’s morality in a social situation. They are the connection connection between an individual’s moral code and the legal code of the greater society. “Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law” (Rand, 1964, p. 108). The thinking individual is the strongest link in a moral society. If the government is composed of men, and men are often fallible and mistaken, then society must work to uphold individual rights. If individual rights are stripped away, collectivism will reign supreme.
America was praised by Rand for being the only true democratic society because it has recognized and upheld the individual’s rights as a moral imperative. America has preserved the individual from tyranny by collectivist systems. From its inception, our nation has regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means of voluntary co-existence of logical, moral citizens, whereas altruist-collectivist societies have esteemed the collective whims of society over the individual’s autonomy.
It’s All about Me
“Since every purposeful action is motivated by some value or goal that the actor desires, one always acts selfishly, whether one knows it or not” (Rand, 1964, p. 66). Acting selfishly is an unselfish act if its aim is an ethical outcome. Selfishness is a conscious choice. The individual is guided by her ethics, which in-turn shape life’s values and purpose. Rand offers the individual herself as the determinant moral purpose of life. The preservation of her life, and her happiness are the primary moral purposes of life. The individual is the first recipient of her productivity and moral actions.
Being concerned for your own survival is a courageous act. To be selfish requires the recognition of one’s own hierarchy of values formed to serve one’s happiness, and foremost, the audacity to never sacrifice one’s self for the group. A morally courageous, selfish woman, will not act in contradiction to her own beliefs and values. To do otherwise would be self-sabotage and surrendering to the dictates of a self-serving community.
The selfishness of a man who is willing to die, if necessary, fighting for his freedom, lies in the fact that he is unwilling to go on living in a world where he is no longer able to act on his own judgment – that is, a world where human conditions of existence are no longer possible to him. (Rand, 1964, p. 68)
According to Rand, whether an action is selfish or unselfish is determined objectively and logically by the individual, without a flood of passion in the individual. Passion is not a criterion for cognition. She goes on to emphasize that if the individual is solely motivated by a feeling of compassion, charity, duty or altruism, the result of her action is that the individual has sacrificed her values and goals for short-lived pleasure, or worse, the wishes and needs of an inferior individual that she values less than the thing she gave up. Objectivism seeks to guard the individual from acting against her own satisfaction by surrendering to altruistic-collectivist ideals which favor the society over the individual.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion the objectivist philosophy advocates acting morally in one’s own interest first. The virtue of selfishness has been misinterpreted by the altruistic-socialist bureaucracies and organized religions to serve their own ends. Humanity itself requires the individual to think and reason and to produce. For the reasoning citizen to create and pursue happiness, she must be aware of her value system and the ethics of her interaction with a society which would sacrifice her life, for the subjective interests of the whole.
References
Knapp, C. (2007). Equality and proportionality. Canadian Journal of Philosophy,
37(2), 179-201.
Losh, S. C. (2003). On the application of social cognition and social location to creating
causal explanatory structures. Educational Research Quarterly, 26(3), 17-33.
Rand, A. (1964). The virtue of selfishness. New York: Signet.
Valiunas, A. (2005). Who needs Ayn Rand? Commentary, 120(2), 59-62.
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
Monday, April 28, 2008
Virtues - Alex Torrez & William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
The Lamar University Electronic Journal of Student Research
Summer 2008
The Virtue of Selfishness from a Humanitarian’s View
Alex Torrez
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
Assistant Superintendent
Clear Creek Independent School District
Houston, Texas
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford, Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
College of Education and Professional Studies
Central Washington University
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism as presented in Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selfishness (1964). Ayn Rand’s philosophy is centered on the objectivist ethics which advocate that man must be rationally selfish in order to insure survival. This philosophy contradicts the American spirit of giving to improve the well being of humankind by the gift of time, wealth or efforts. How do philosophies of humanitarians and philanthropist such as Mother Teresa, Bill Gates, Bill Buffet, and Theodore Roosevelt conflict with the objectivist philosophy? ________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Rand’s novel, The Virtue of Selfishness (1964), centers on the concept of objectivism and the virtue of selfishness. Individualism focused on survival by one’s mind and avoiding the people who are incapable of providing for themselves which she characterizes as looters. Based on the fundamental beliefs of objectivism how would people such as Mother Teresa, Bill Gates, and Bill Buffet, the most generous philanthropist, who has personally donated more the 30 billion dollars to improve health care, education and address extreme poverty be categorized.
Purpose of this Article
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism as presented in Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selfishness (1964). Ayn Rand’s philosophy is centered on the objectivist ethics which advocate that man must be rationally selfish in order to insure survival. This philosophy contradicts the American sprit of giving to improve the well being of humankind by the gift of one’s time, wealth or efforts. How do philosophies of humanitarians and philanthropist such as Mother Teresa, Bill Gates, Bill Buffet, and Theodore Roosevelt conflict with the objectivist philosophy?
Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, on February 2, 1905. At the age of nine she discovered her love of writing and decided to pursue a career as an author. As an eyewitness to both the Kerensky and Bolshevik Revolution and the establishment of Communism she suffered the results of an oppressive government. The final Communist victory brought the confiscation of her father's pharmacy and periods of near-starvation for her family. A product of Soviet Russia her writings are a reflection and interpretation of the events she witnessed during her youth. Rand’s distrust of government and society are obvious in her writings. The common theme in her writing is the focus of the hero or heroes who are tortured by a society that fails to understand their individualism and need to be selfish. In her book, The Fountainhead, she presented the character of the architect, Howard Roark ,for the first time as the kind of hero whose depiction was the chief goal of her writing: the ideal man, as "he could be and ought to be" (The Ayn Rand Institute, 1995).
Objectivism and Philanthropy
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have donated over 60 billion dollars combined to health, education, and helping address poverty. Both men have stated that they plan to donate all their wealth to decreasing the impact of poverty and improving education around the world. Bill Gates with his ability to be innovative in the field of technology and Buffet who is nick named the Oracle of Omaha for his ability to make sound investments. Gates and Buffet did not inherit their wealth but earned it through their own innovation and efforts. The breed of men Any Rand would have identified as men of the mind. To the benefit of the world these men do not adhere to philosophy of objectivism. Whether or not it is the main purpose of these two individuals to help others is beside the point. The fact that they do so with such generosity indicates that they believe that there is an end beyond their own being and accomplishments. The first sentences below are those of an objectivist point of view in regards to helping others. The second sentences are those of Bill Gates a humanitarian who values mankind more than his accomplishments and wealth.
Because a genuinely selfish man chooses his goals by the guidance of reason and because the interests of rational men do not clash-other men may often benefit from his actions. But the benefit of other men is not his primary purpose or goal; his own benefit is his primary purpose and the conscious goal directing his action. (Rand, 1961, p. 67)
And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity. (The Harvard University Gazette, 2007, June 7)
Objectivist and Poverty
If a person were to ask an objectivist a question regarding poverty, handicapped, or the mentally ill, the response could be such as the one provided by Barbara Branden, “If you want to help them, you will not be stopped” (Rand, 1961, p. 93). The objectivist would tell you that,
Since nature does not guarantee automatic security, success and survival to any human being, it is only the dictatorial presumptuousness and the moral cannibalism of the altruist-collectivist code that permits a man to suppose (or idly daydream) that he can somehow guarantee such security to some men at the expense of others. (Rand, 1961, p.94)
Guaranteeing such security for the poor, ailing, and orphaned children of the world was the calling Mother Teresa lived to fulfill. Establishing missions of hope and growing the “The Missionaries of Charity, whose primary task was to love and care for those persons nobody was prepared to look after” (Nobel Prize.org) is one of Mother Teresa’s gifts to the world. The Missionaries of Charity has established missions of hope around the world including communist countries such as the former Soviet Union, Albania, and Cuba. Giving for Mother Teresa and those who follow in her convictions can be categorized as much more important than financial assistance. The gift of unconditional love, physical assistance, spiritual guidance, and the gift of hope for those who have no one else is the greatest gift that can be received or given. Barbara Branden “If you want to help them, you will not be stopped” (Rand, 1961, p. 93). One women, Mother Teresa challenged society to see the many issues that need to be addressed for the betterment of humanity. What kind of society would we live in if the majority lived by the philosophy that helping others except by chance is in one’s best interest?
Objectivism and Society
“If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor” (Rand, 1961, p 113). The preceding comment was Ayn Rand’s reaction to Franklin Roosevelt’s declaration and reaffirmation of the economic bill of rights. The rights are as follows:
1. The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries of shops or farms or mines of the nation.
2. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
3. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.
4. The right of every businessman, large and small to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home and abroad.
5. The right of every family to a decent home.
6. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good heath.
7. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of the old age, sickness, accidents and unemployment.
8. The right to a good education.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion the fundamental spirit of giving, servant hood, or being a humanitarian has had an impact on the lives of millions and is a corner stone for making the United States a nation that values the importance of helping people pursue the American dream. The Statue of Liberty reads:
Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
We live in a nation that has been built on the idea that everyone has the right to the pursuit of happiness. No where does it state that one man must be sacrificed for the benefit of another. The fact that people choose to be humanitarians, philanthropists, and servants gives people hope for a better society, nation, and ultimately world.
References
Rand, A. (1957). The virtue of selfishness. New York: Penguin Group.
Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) (1995). A brief biography of Ayn Rand. Retrieved March 18, 2008, from www.aynrand.org/site
Biography of the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 (1979). Retrieved March 18, 2008, from nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1979/teresa-bio.html
Franklin D. Roosevelt (n.d.). American Heritage Center, Incorporated. Retrieved March 23, 2008, from www.fdrheritage.org/bill of rights.htm
Remarks of Bill Gates: Harvard Commencement (2007, June 7). The Harvard University Gazette. Retrieved March 18, 2008, from www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/06.14/99-gates.html
_______________________________________________________________________
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
Summer 2008
The Virtue of Selfishness from a Humanitarian’s View
Alex Torrez
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
Assistant Superintendent
Clear Creek Independent School District
Houston, Texas
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford, Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
College of Education and Professional Studies
Central Washington University
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism as presented in Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selfishness (1964). Ayn Rand’s philosophy is centered on the objectivist ethics which advocate that man must be rationally selfish in order to insure survival. This philosophy contradicts the American spirit of giving to improve the well being of humankind by the gift of time, wealth or efforts. How do philosophies of humanitarians and philanthropist such as Mother Teresa, Bill Gates, Bill Buffet, and Theodore Roosevelt conflict with the objectivist philosophy? ________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Rand’s novel, The Virtue of Selfishness (1964), centers on the concept of objectivism and the virtue of selfishness. Individualism focused on survival by one’s mind and avoiding the people who are incapable of providing for themselves which she characterizes as looters. Based on the fundamental beliefs of objectivism how would people such as Mother Teresa, Bill Gates, and Bill Buffet, the most generous philanthropist, who has personally donated more the 30 billion dollars to improve health care, education and address extreme poverty be categorized.
Purpose of this Article
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism as presented in Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selfishness (1964). Ayn Rand’s philosophy is centered on the objectivist ethics which advocate that man must be rationally selfish in order to insure survival. This philosophy contradicts the American sprit of giving to improve the well being of humankind by the gift of one’s time, wealth or efforts. How do philosophies of humanitarians and philanthropist such as Mother Teresa, Bill Gates, Bill Buffet, and Theodore Roosevelt conflict with the objectivist philosophy?
Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, on February 2, 1905. At the age of nine she discovered her love of writing and decided to pursue a career as an author. As an eyewitness to both the Kerensky and Bolshevik Revolution and the establishment of Communism she suffered the results of an oppressive government. The final Communist victory brought the confiscation of her father's pharmacy and periods of near-starvation for her family. A product of Soviet Russia her writings are a reflection and interpretation of the events she witnessed during her youth. Rand’s distrust of government and society are obvious in her writings. The common theme in her writing is the focus of the hero or heroes who are tortured by a society that fails to understand their individualism and need to be selfish. In her book, The Fountainhead, she presented the character of the architect, Howard Roark ,for the first time as the kind of hero whose depiction was the chief goal of her writing: the ideal man, as "he could be and ought to be" (The Ayn Rand Institute, 1995).
Objectivism and Philanthropy
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have donated over 60 billion dollars combined to health, education, and helping address poverty. Both men have stated that they plan to donate all their wealth to decreasing the impact of poverty and improving education around the world. Bill Gates with his ability to be innovative in the field of technology and Buffet who is nick named the Oracle of Omaha for his ability to make sound investments. Gates and Buffet did not inherit their wealth but earned it through their own innovation and efforts. The breed of men Any Rand would have identified as men of the mind. To the benefit of the world these men do not adhere to philosophy of objectivism. Whether or not it is the main purpose of these two individuals to help others is beside the point. The fact that they do so with such generosity indicates that they believe that there is an end beyond their own being and accomplishments. The first sentences below are those of an objectivist point of view in regards to helping others. The second sentences are those of Bill Gates a humanitarian who values mankind more than his accomplishments and wealth.
Because a genuinely selfish man chooses his goals by the guidance of reason and because the interests of rational men do not clash-other men may often benefit from his actions. But the benefit of other men is not his primary purpose or goal; his own benefit is his primary purpose and the conscious goal directing his action. (Rand, 1961, p. 67)
And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity. (The Harvard University Gazette, 2007, June 7)
Objectivist and Poverty
If a person were to ask an objectivist a question regarding poverty, handicapped, or the mentally ill, the response could be such as the one provided by Barbara Branden, “If you want to help them, you will not be stopped” (Rand, 1961, p. 93). The objectivist would tell you that,
Since nature does not guarantee automatic security, success and survival to any human being, it is only the dictatorial presumptuousness and the moral cannibalism of the altruist-collectivist code that permits a man to suppose (or idly daydream) that he can somehow guarantee such security to some men at the expense of others. (Rand, 1961, p.94)
Guaranteeing such security for the poor, ailing, and orphaned children of the world was the calling Mother Teresa lived to fulfill. Establishing missions of hope and growing the “The Missionaries of Charity, whose primary task was to love and care for those persons nobody was prepared to look after” (Nobel Prize.org) is one of Mother Teresa’s gifts to the world. The Missionaries of Charity has established missions of hope around the world including communist countries such as the former Soviet Union, Albania, and Cuba. Giving for Mother Teresa and those who follow in her convictions can be categorized as much more important than financial assistance. The gift of unconditional love, physical assistance, spiritual guidance, and the gift of hope for those who have no one else is the greatest gift that can be received or given. Barbara Branden “If you want to help them, you will not be stopped” (Rand, 1961, p. 93). One women, Mother Teresa challenged society to see the many issues that need to be addressed for the betterment of humanity. What kind of society would we live in if the majority lived by the philosophy that helping others except by chance is in one’s best interest?
Objectivism and Society
“If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor” (Rand, 1961, p 113). The preceding comment was Ayn Rand’s reaction to Franklin Roosevelt’s declaration and reaffirmation of the economic bill of rights. The rights are as follows:
1. The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries of shops or farms or mines of the nation.
2. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
3. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.
4. The right of every businessman, large and small to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home and abroad.
5. The right of every family to a decent home.
6. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good heath.
7. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of the old age, sickness, accidents and unemployment.
8. The right to a good education.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion the fundamental spirit of giving, servant hood, or being a humanitarian has had an impact on the lives of millions and is a corner stone for making the United States a nation that values the importance of helping people pursue the American dream. The Statue of Liberty reads:
Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
We live in a nation that has been built on the idea that everyone has the right to the pursuit of happiness. No where does it state that one man must be sacrificed for the benefit of another. The fact that people choose to be humanitarians, philanthropists, and servants gives people hope for a better society, nation, and ultimately world.
References
Rand, A. (1957). The virtue of selfishness. New York: Penguin Group.
Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) (1995). A brief biography of Ayn Rand. Retrieved March 18, 2008, from www.aynrand.org/site
Biography of the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 (1979). Retrieved March 18, 2008, from nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1979/teresa-bio.html
Franklin D. Roosevelt (n.d.). American Heritage Center, Incorporated. Retrieved March 23, 2008, from www.fdrheritage.org/bill of rights.htm
Remarks of Bill Gates: Harvard Commencement (2007, June 7). The Harvard University Gazette. Retrieved March 18, 2008, from www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/06.14/99-gates.html
_______________________________________________________________________
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
Atlas Shrugged - Alex Torrez & William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Atlas Shrugged: Unnecessarily Selfish
Alex Torrez
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
Assistant Superintendent
Clear Creek Independent School District
Houston, Texas
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford, Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
College of Education and Professional Studies
Central Washington University
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism and altruism as presented in Atlas Shrugged. The center of Ayn Rand’s philosophy is that man must be selfish in order to achieve happiness and success rejecting one’s own heart, soul, and acceptance of the existence of a higher being. This philosophy contradicts many of the essential views of American society and the legacy of improving the next generation as well as those of religious faiths that center on servant hood. These fundamental values have made our nation a beckon for democracy and an economic power but most importantly a nation that provides the world assistance through missions, education, and finance. Rand’s philosophy of objectivism and selfishness seems to beg the question of what is success and happiness if not something to be shared with others.
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Rand’s novel, Atlas Shrugged (1957), is a strong reminder of the importance of the balance of government and the significant impact of the constitutional safe guards our society has implemented to protect the rights of property and more importantly the rights of an individual. Her views take more of a dark turn with her objectivist philosophy along with her support of selfishness and the need to put oneself first above all else in order to reach the highest levels of success and happiness. Although the novel makes some excellent observations regarding the importance of capitalism Rand’s anti religious views including not sacrificing for others makes one question the true meaning of happiness.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism and altruism as presented in Atlas Shrugged (1957) by Any Rand. The center of Ayn Rand’s philosophy is that man must be selfish in order to achieve happiness and success rejecting one’s own heart, soul, and acceptance of the existence of a higher being. This philosophy contradicts many of the essential views of American society and the legacy of improving the next generation as well as those of religious faiths that center on servant hood. These fundamental values have made our nation a beckon for democracy and an economic power but most importantly a nation that provides the world assistance through missions, education, and finance. Rand’s philosophy of objectivism and selfishness seems to beg the question of what is success and happiness if not something to be shared with others.
Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, on February 2, 1905. At the age of nine she discovered her love of writing and decided to pursue a career as an author. As an eyewitness to both the Kerensky and Bolshevik Revolution and the establishment of Communism she suffered the results of an oppressive government. The final Communist victory brought the confiscation of her father's pharmacy and periods of near-starvation. The Ayn Rand Institute (1995). Leaving Soviet Russia in 1925 she was determined never to return to her home country. She was granted an extension to her visa and later married an actor, Frank O’Conner in 1929. She began writing The Fountainhead in 1935. In the character of the architect Howard Roark, she presented for the first time the kind of hero whose depiction was the chief goal of her writing: the ideal man, man as "he could be and ought to be." The Ayn Rand Institute (1995). She published many novels and works following The Fountainhead but most consider Atlas Shrugged (1957), her last work of fiction, her greatest accomplishment.
Atlas Shrugged
In Atlas Shrugged (1957), the economy is collapsing; the government lead by the State Science Institute continues to issue restrictive and unrealistic regulations. Dagny Taggert the Vice President of Operations for Taggart Transcontinental Railroad is determined not to allow her railroad to be destroyed by the looters. As the population becomes overwhelmed with despair they ask “Who is John Galt?” as if having an understanding that the answer to the question will provide a solution to the present state of chaos. The most important character in the novel, John Galt, has organized a systematic withdraw of the most brilliant minds in society in an effort to prove that man cannot be successful by any means other than one’s mind and by doing so breaking the looters hold on the government and economy.
Men of the Mind
John Galt removed the most exceptional minds to prove to the world that society could not exist without them. “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine” (Rand, 1957, p.672) is the oath the men were asked to recite when they committed to leave their present lives. In that world there are only two types of people the ones who serve and satisfy themselves exclusively and those who work to serve others.
In this fictional story the heroes of the novel had no choice but to depart from the present state of affairs. This philosophy appears rational in a world where there are only looters and those who follow the objectivist philosophy. The question to consider is would their philosophy of objectivism be rational in a non-fictional world.
Altruism
Rand’s philosophy conflicts with altruism because of the practice of being unselfish when considering the welfare of others. Since she viewed sacrifice as a surrender of values and objectivism does not consider compromise an option, she viewed helping others as not in ones self interest.
A sacrifice is the surrender of a value. Full sacrifice is full surrender of all values. If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous: the faintest trace of any gain dilutes your virtue. (Rand, 1957, p. 941)
Parts of Rand’s philosophy such as those stated in these sentences are acceptable and applicable in a fictional story such as Atlas Shrugged where the looters have seized property from the capitalists for their own greed and survival. Sentences such as these are unrealistic in the universe as it truly exists. Most religions including Christianity and people who chose to live by a moral code do not advocate sacrificing their values for the good of the lost, but rather helping because of these values and acknowledging the strength it takes to not sacrifice their own values when helping others. As an atheist Ayn Rand did not have a God in her universe nor did she write Atlas Shrugged (1957) with a concept of a higher being and the understanding of faith as a center of belief. Not understanding the nature of God and the promise of love and mercy Ayn Rand could not see the meaning of sacrifice and virtues of such acts. Christianity is set on the foundation of the greatest sacrifice that can be made “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John, 3:16). Ayn Rand’s interpretation of altruism is illustrated in the words of Lillian Reardon when she states that loving some one for their vices was the real tribute of love therefore sacrificing one’s values. Christian beliefs would reject this premise and adhere that because of Christian teachings a person can love a person in spite of the vices, sins, or other weakness because of God’s grace and mercy. Verses such as the following give direction as to the relationship with others "This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart" (Matthew, 18:35). So watch yourselves. "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him” (Luke, 17:3).
Objectivist
The objectivist philosopher would have people believe that most live by the idea that standards or ethics are based on a whim. John Galt expands this concept when he states that “the battle is only over the question or whose whim: society’s or the dictator’s or God’s “(Rand, 1961, p. 15). The objectivist fails to acknowledge the independence of our society and the independence of man. People in free and democratic societies have arrived at that state of freedom by making decisions based on truth and reality. Ayn Rand was a magnificent writer that had the ability to express her views as an authority on morality, ethics, and the concept of rational self interest; selfishness.
Genuinely Selfishness
At the heart of the objectivist ethics is the ideal of selfishness. The following sentences capture the essence of selfishness and how it benefits the practitioner. Difficult sentences for a person or a society that has been built with the core belief that serving and positive leadership improves everyone. “True success comes only when every generation continues to develop the next generation (Maxwell, 1995, p.188). How can people who live by the following ideas develop or leave anything for the generations that follow?
Because a genuinely selfish man chooses his goals by the guidance of reason the interests of rational men do not clash-other men may often benefit of from his actions. But the benefit of other is not his primary purpose or goal; his own benefit is his primary purpose and the conscious goal directing his action. (Rand, 1961, p. 67)
What is Happiness?
Through out the novel a common theme connecting many characters is the need to find happiness as a result of accomplishments and gaining material wealth. Although most would agree that accomplishments can make a person happy most would also agree that accomplishments without anyone to share them with would be a short lived fulfillment. To live a worthwhile, meaningful life, a person must be part of something greater than himself. The following passages examine the reflections of a man who has spent his life in the pursuit of happiness that places more value on accomplishment and wealth than on relationships and people. “I am sorry I disappointed you mother. You’re not sorry. You could have been here if you’d made the effort for anybody but your self? You’re not interested in any of us or in anything we do” (Rand, 1957, p. 40). “He had given Lillian none of his time for months-no, he thought, for years; for the eight years of their marriage. He had no interest to spare for her interest, not even enough to learn just what they were” (Rand, 1957, p123).
Hank Reardon was unhappy in is marriage and with the relationship he had with his mother and brother but never acknowledged the fact that his lack of commitment to his family and his selfishness for his own interest and endeavors had eroded his relationships. Progressive leadership and management philosophies adhere to the required balance necessary to be successful as a person and professional. A major part of present day beliefs is that the climb to the top does not need to be a lonely one for the climber and those he loves.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, Atlas Shrugged is an excellent novel with a wonderful story that mixes action, romance, and makes some excellent points regarding the value of capitalism. But readers are advised to remember that the novel is fiction and the characters who are super intelligent, attractive and powerful in their own area are fictional super heroes in a novel. The Constitution of the United States of America begins with the words “We the People of the United States” the key word being “We”. Our founding fathers understood the importance of people, all people and intended for our nation to be established with those ideals. The philosophy of objectivism centers around selfishness and not being part of the “We”. There is no doubt our nation was built on the strength of individuals but as Americans our true strength is as a people.
References
Rand, A. (1957). Atlas shrugged. New York: Penguin Group.
Rand, A. (1964). The virtue of selfishness. New York: Penguin Group.
Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) (1995). A brief biography of Ayn Rand. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from www.aynrand.org/site
Maxwell, M. (1995). Developing the leaders around you. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Incorporated.
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
Alex Torrez
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
Assistant Superintendent
Clear Creek Independent School District
Houston, Texas
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford, Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
College of Education and Professional Studies
Central Washington University
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism and altruism as presented in Atlas Shrugged. The center of Ayn Rand’s philosophy is that man must be selfish in order to achieve happiness and success rejecting one’s own heart, soul, and acceptance of the existence of a higher being. This philosophy contradicts many of the essential views of American society and the legacy of improving the next generation as well as those of religious faiths that center on servant hood. These fundamental values have made our nation a beckon for democracy and an economic power but most importantly a nation that provides the world assistance through missions, education, and finance. Rand’s philosophy of objectivism and selfishness seems to beg the question of what is success and happiness if not something to be shared with others.
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Rand’s novel, Atlas Shrugged (1957), is a strong reminder of the importance of the balance of government and the significant impact of the constitutional safe guards our society has implemented to protect the rights of property and more importantly the rights of an individual. Her views take more of a dark turn with her objectivist philosophy along with her support of selfishness and the need to put oneself first above all else in order to reach the highest levels of success and happiness. Although the novel makes some excellent observations regarding the importance of capitalism Rand’s anti religious views including not sacrificing for others makes one question the true meaning of happiness.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophy of objectivism and altruism as presented in Atlas Shrugged (1957) by Any Rand. The center of Ayn Rand’s philosophy is that man must be selfish in order to achieve happiness and success rejecting one’s own heart, soul, and acceptance of the existence of a higher being. This philosophy contradicts many of the essential views of American society and the legacy of improving the next generation as well as those of religious faiths that center on servant hood. These fundamental values have made our nation a beckon for democracy and an economic power but most importantly a nation that provides the world assistance through missions, education, and finance. Rand’s philosophy of objectivism and selfishness seems to beg the question of what is success and happiness if not something to be shared with others.
Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, on February 2, 1905. At the age of nine she discovered her love of writing and decided to pursue a career as an author. As an eyewitness to both the Kerensky and Bolshevik Revolution and the establishment of Communism she suffered the results of an oppressive government. The final Communist victory brought the confiscation of her father's pharmacy and periods of near-starvation. The Ayn Rand Institute (1995). Leaving Soviet Russia in 1925 she was determined never to return to her home country. She was granted an extension to her visa and later married an actor, Frank O’Conner in 1929. She began writing The Fountainhead in 1935. In the character of the architect Howard Roark, she presented for the first time the kind of hero whose depiction was the chief goal of her writing: the ideal man, man as "he could be and ought to be." The Ayn Rand Institute (1995). She published many novels and works following The Fountainhead but most consider Atlas Shrugged (1957), her last work of fiction, her greatest accomplishment.
Atlas Shrugged
In Atlas Shrugged (1957), the economy is collapsing; the government lead by the State Science Institute continues to issue restrictive and unrealistic regulations. Dagny Taggert the Vice President of Operations for Taggart Transcontinental Railroad is determined not to allow her railroad to be destroyed by the looters. As the population becomes overwhelmed with despair they ask “Who is John Galt?” as if having an understanding that the answer to the question will provide a solution to the present state of chaos. The most important character in the novel, John Galt, has organized a systematic withdraw of the most brilliant minds in society in an effort to prove that man cannot be successful by any means other than one’s mind and by doing so breaking the looters hold on the government and economy.
Men of the Mind
John Galt removed the most exceptional minds to prove to the world that society could not exist without them. “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine” (Rand, 1957, p.672) is the oath the men were asked to recite when they committed to leave their present lives. In that world there are only two types of people the ones who serve and satisfy themselves exclusively and those who work to serve others.
In this fictional story the heroes of the novel had no choice but to depart from the present state of affairs. This philosophy appears rational in a world where there are only looters and those who follow the objectivist philosophy. The question to consider is would their philosophy of objectivism be rational in a non-fictional world.
Altruism
Rand’s philosophy conflicts with altruism because of the practice of being unselfish when considering the welfare of others. Since she viewed sacrifice as a surrender of values and objectivism does not consider compromise an option, she viewed helping others as not in ones self interest.
A sacrifice is the surrender of a value. Full sacrifice is full surrender of all values. If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous: the faintest trace of any gain dilutes your virtue. (Rand, 1957, p. 941)
Parts of Rand’s philosophy such as those stated in these sentences are acceptable and applicable in a fictional story such as Atlas Shrugged where the looters have seized property from the capitalists for their own greed and survival. Sentences such as these are unrealistic in the universe as it truly exists. Most religions including Christianity and people who chose to live by a moral code do not advocate sacrificing their values for the good of the lost, but rather helping because of these values and acknowledging the strength it takes to not sacrifice their own values when helping others. As an atheist Ayn Rand did not have a God in her universe nor did she write Atlas Shrugged (1957) with a concept of a higher being and the understanding of faith as a center of belief. Not understanding the nature of God and the promise of love and mercy Ayn Rand could not see the meaning of sacrifice and virtues of such acts. Christianity is set on the foundation of the greatest sacrifice that can be made “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John, 3:16). Ayn Rand’s interpretation of altruism is illustrated in the words of Lillian Reardon when she states that loving some one for their vices was the real tribute of love therefore sacrificing one’s values. Christian beliefs would reject this premise and adhere that because of Christian teachings a person can love a person in spite of the vices, sins, or other weakness because of God’s grace and mercy. Verses such as the following give direction as to the relationship with others "This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart" (Matthew, 18:35). So watch yourselves. "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him” (Luke, 17:3).
Objectivist
The objectivist philosopher would have people believe that most live by the idea that standards or ethics are based on a whim. John Galt expands this concept when he states that “the battle is only over the question or whose whim: society’s or the dictator’s or God’s “(Rand, 1961, p. 15). The objectivist fails to acknowledge the independence of our society and the independence of man. People in free and democratic societies have arrived at that state of freedom by making decisions based on truth and reality. Ayn Rand was a magnificent writer that had the ability to express her views as an authority on morality, ethics, and the concept of rational self interest; selfishness.
Genuinely Selfishness
At the heart of the objectivist ethics is the ideal of selfishness. The following sentences capture the essence of selfishness and how it benefits the practitioner. Difficult sentences for a person or a society that has been built with the core belief that serving and positive leadership improves everyone. “True success comes only when every generation continues to develop the next generation (Maxwell, 1995, p.188). How can people who live by the following ideas develop or leave anything for the generations that follow?
Because a genuinely selfish man chooses his goals by the guidance of reason the interests of rational men do not clash-other men may often benefit of from his actions. But the benefit of other is not his primary purpose or goal; his own benefit is his primary purpose and the conscious goal directing his action. (Rand, 1961, p. 67)
What is Happiness?
Through out the novel a common theme connecting many characters is the need to find happiness as a result of accomplishments and gaining material wealth. Although most would agree that accomplishments can make a person happy most would also agree that accomplishments without anyone to share them with would be a short lived fulfillment. To live a worthwhile, meaningful life, a person must be part of something greater than himself. The following passages examine the reflections of a man who has spent his life in the pursuit of happiness that places more value on accomplishment and wealth than on relationships and people. “I am sorry I disappointed you mother. You’re not sorry. You could have been here if you’d made the effort for anybody but your self? You’re not interested in any of us or in anything we do” (Rand, 1957, p. 40). “He had given Lillian none of his time for months-no, he thought, for years; for the eight years of their marriage. He had no interest to spare for her interest, not even enough to learn just what they were” (Rand, 1957, p123).
Hank Reardon was unhappy in is marriage and with the relationship he had with his mother and brother but never acknowledged the fact that his lack of commitment to his family and his selfishness for his own interest and endeavors had eroded his relationships. Progressive leadership and management philosophies adhere to the required balance necessary to be successful as a person and professional. A major part of present day beliefs is that the climb to the top does not need to be a lonely one for the climber and those he loves.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, Atlas Shrugged is an excellent novel with a wonderful story that mixes action, romance, and makes some excellent points regarding the value of capitalism. But readers are advised to remember that the novel is fiction and the characters who are super intelligent, attractive and powerful in their own area are fictional super heroes in a novel. The Constitution of the United States of America begins with the words “We the People of the United States” the key word being “We”. Our founding fathers understood the importance of people, all people and intended for our nation to be established with those ideals. The philosophy of objectivism centers around selfishness and not being part of the “We”. There is no doubt our nation was built on the strength of individuals but as Americans our true strength is as a people.
References
Rand, A. (1957). Atlas shrugged. New York: Penguin Group.
Rand, A. (1964). The virtue of selfishness. New York: Penguin Group.
Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) (1995). A brief biography of Ayn Rand. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from www.aynrand.org/site
Maxwell, M. (1995). Developing the leaders around you. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Incorporated.
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
Thursday, April 17, 2008
William Allan Kritsonis' Contributions to Education
25th Year Anniversary of National FORUM Journals
Founded in 1983
William Allan Kritsonis’ Contribution to Education
Arthur L. Petterway, PhD
Principal
Houston Independent School District
Houston, Texas
ABSTRACT
This year marks the 25th Year Anniversary of the founding of National FORUM Journals by Dr. William Allan Kritsonis. The following snapshot of the career of Dr. Kritsonis is a small tribute to his contribution to education.
__________________________________________________________________________
Founder of National FORUM Journals
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these academic, scholarly, refereed, peer-reviewed journals.
Dr. Kritsonis Lectures at the University of Oxford, Oxford, England
In 2005, Dr. Kritsonis was an Invited Visiting Lecturer at the Oxford Round Table at Oriel College in the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. His lecture was entitled the Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning.
Dr. Kritsonis Recognized as Distinguished Alumnus
In 2004, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis was recognized as the Central Washington University Alumni Association Distinguished Alumnus for the College of Education and
Professional Studies. Dr. Kritsonis was nominated by alumni, former students, friends,
faculty, and staff. Final selection was made by the Alumni Association Board of Directors.
Recipients are CWU graduates of 20 years or more and are recognized for achievement in their professional field and have made a positive contribution to society. For
the second consecutive year, U.S. News and World Report placed Central Washington
University among the top elite public institutions in the west. CWU was 12th on the list in the 2006 On-Line Education of “America’s Best Colleges.”
Educational Background
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis earned his BA in 1969 from Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington. In 1971, he earned his M.Ed. from Seattle Pacific University. In 1976, he earned his PhD from the University of Iowa. In 1981, he was a Visiting Scholar at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, and in 1987 was a Visiting Scholar at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Professional Experience
Dr. Kritsonis began his career as a teacher. He has served education as a principal, superintendent of schools, director of student teaching and field experiences, invited guest professor, author, consultant, editor-in-chief, and publisher. Dr. Kritsonis has earned tenure as a professor at the highest academic rank at two major universities.
Books – Articles – Lectures - Workshops
Dr. Kritsonis lectures and conducts seminars and workshops on a variety of topics. He is author of more than 500 articles in professional journals and several books. His popular book SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: The Art of Survival is scheduled for its fourth edition. He is the author of the textbook William Kritsonis, PhD on Schooling that is used by many professors at colleges and universities throughout the nation and abroad.
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis’ version of the book of Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning (858 pages) was published in the United States of America in cooperation with partial financial support of Visiting Lecturers, Oxford strong>Round Table (2005). The book is the product of a collaborative twenty-four year effort started in 1978 with the late Dr. Philip H. Phenix. Dr. Kritsonis was in continuous communication with Dr. Phenix until his death in 2002.
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was the lead author of the textbook Practical Applications of Educational Research and Basic Statistics. The text provides practical content knowledge in research for graduate students at the doctoral and master’s levels.
In 2008, Dr. Kritsonis’ book Non-Renewal of Public School Personnel Contracts: Selected Supreme and District Court Decisions in Accordance with the Due Process of Law was published by The Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, New York.
Dr. Kritsonis’ seminar and workshop on Writing for Professional Publication has
been very popular with both professors and practitioners. Persons in attendance generate an
article to be published in a refereed journal at the national or international levels. Dr. Kritsonis has traveled and lectured throughout the United States and world-wide. Some recent international tours include Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, Turkey, Italy, Greece,
Monte Carlo, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Poland,
Germany, and many more.
Founder of National FORUM Journals – Over 4,000 Professors Published
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these refereed, peer-reviewed periodicals. In 1983, he founded the National FORUM of Educational Administration and Supervision – now acclaimed by many as the United States’ leading recognized scholarly academic refereed journal in educational administration, leadership, and supervision.
In 1987, Dr. Kritsonis founded the National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal whose aim is to conjoin the efforts of applied educational researchers world-wide with those of practitioners in education. He founded the National FORUM of Teacher Education Journal, National FORUM of Special Education Journal, National FORUM of Multicultural Issues Journal, International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, and the DOCTORAL FORUM – National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research. The DOCTORAL FORUM is the only refereed journal in America committed to publishing doctoral students while they are enrolled in course work in their doctoral programs. In 1997, he established the Online Journal Division of National FORUM Journals that publishes academic scholarly refereed articles daily on the website: www.nationalforum.com. Over 600 professors have published online. In January 2007, Dr. Kritsonis established the National Journal: Focus On Colleges, Universities, and Schools.
Professorial Roles
Dr. Kritsonis has served in professorial roles at Central Washington University, Washington; Salisbury State University, Maryland; Northwestern State University, Louisiana; McNeese State University, Louisiana; and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge in the Department of Administrative and Foundational Services.
In 2006, Dr. Kritsonis published two articles in the Two-Volume Set of the Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration published by SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California. He is a National Reviewer for the Journal of Research on Leadership, University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA).
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was invited to write a history and philosophy of education for the ABC-CLIO Encyclopedia of World History.
Currently, Dr. Kritsonis is Professor of Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University – Member of the Texas A&M University System. He teaches in the newly established PhD Program in Educational Leadership. Dr. Kritsonis taught the Inaugural class session in the doctoral program at the start of the fall 2004 academic year. In October 2006, Dr. Kritsonis chaired the first doctoral student to earn a PhD in Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University. He lives in Houston, Texas.
Founded in 1983
William Allan Kritsonis’ Contribution to Education
Arthur L. Petterway, PhD
Principal
Houston Independent School District
Houston, Texas
ABSTRACT
This year marks the 25th Year Anniversary of the founding of National FORUM Journals by Dr. William Allan Kritsonis. The following snapshot of the career of Dr. Kritsonis is a small tribute to his contribution to education.
__________________________________________________________________________
Founder of National FORUM Journals
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these academic, scholarly, refereed, peer-reviewed journals.
Dr. Kritsonis Lectures at the University of Oxford, Oxford, England
In 2005, Dr. Kritsonis was an Invited Visiting Lecturer at the Oxford Round Table at Oriel College in the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. His lecture was entitled the Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning.
Dr. Kritsonis Recognized as Distinguished Alumnus
In 2004, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis was recognized as the Central Washington University Alumni Association Distinguished Alumnus for the College of Education and
Professional Studies. Dr. Kritsonis was nominated by alumni, former students, friends,
faculty, and staff. Final selection was made by the Alumni Association Board of Directors.
Recipients are CWU graduates of 20 years or more and are recognized for achievement in their professional field and have made a positive contribution to society. For
the second consecutive year, U.S. News and World Report placed Central Washington
University among the top elite public institutions in the west. CWU was 12th on the list in the 2006 On-Line Education of “America’s Best Colleges.”
Educational Background
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis earned his BA in 1969 from Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington. In 1971, he earned his M.Ed. from Seattle Pacific University. In 1976, he earned his PhD from the University of Iowa. In 1981, he was a Visiting Scholar at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, and in 1987 was a Visiting Scholar at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Professional Experience
Dr. Kritsonis began his career as a teacher. He has served education as a principal, superintendent of schools, director of student teaching and field experiences, invited guest professor, author, consultant, editor-in-chief, and publisher. Dr. Kritsonis has earned tenure as a professor at the highest academic rank at two major universities.
Books – Articles – Lectures - Workshops
Dr. Kritsonis lectures and conducts seminars and workshops on a variety of topics. He is author of more than 500 articles in professional journals and several books. His popular book SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: The Art of Survival is scheduled for its fourth edition. He is the author of the textbook William Kritsonis, PhD on Schooling that is used by many professors at colleges and universities throughout the nation and abroad.
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis’ version of the book of Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning (858 pages) was published in the United States of America in cooperation with partial financial support of Visiting Lecturers, Oxford strong>Round Table (2005). The book is the product of a collaborative twenty-four year effort started in 1978 with the late Dr. Philip H. Phenix. Dr. Kritsonis was in continuous communication with Dr. Phenix until his death in 2002.
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was the lead author of the textbook Practical Applications of Educational Research and Basic Statistics. The text provides practical content knowledge in research for graduate students at the doctoral and master’s levels.
In 2008, Dr. Kritsonis’ book Non-Renewal of Public School Personnel Contracts: Selected Supreme and District Court Decisions in Accordance with the Due Process of Law was published by The Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, New York.
Dr. Kritsonis’ seminar and workshop on Writing for Professional Publication has
been very popular with both professors and practitioners. Persons in attendance generate an
article to be published in a refereed journal at the national or international levels. Dr. Kritsonis has traveled and lectured throughout the United States and world-wide. Some recent international tours include Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, Turkey, Italy, Greece,
Monte Carlo, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Poland,
Germany, and many more.
Founder of National FORUM Journals – Over 4,000 Professors Published
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these refereed, peer-reviewed periodicals. In 1983, he founded the National FORUM of Educational Administration and Supervision – now acclaimed by many as the United States’ leading recognized scholarly academic refereed journal in educational administration, leadership, and supervision.
In 1987, Dr. Kritsonis founded the National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal whose aim is to conjoin the efforts of applied educational researchers world-wide with those of practitioners in education. He founded the National FORUM of Teacher Education Journal, National FORUM of Special Education Journal, National FORUM of Multicultural Issues Journal, International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, and the DOCTORAL FORUM – National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research. The DOCTORAL FORUM is the only refereed journal in America committed to publishing doctoral students while they are enrolled in course work in their doctoral programs. In 1997, he established the Online Journal Division of National FORUM Journals that publishes academic scholarly refereed articles daily on the website: www.nationalforum.com. Over 600 professors have published online. In January 2007, Dr. Kritsonis established the National Journal: Focus On Colleges, Universities, and Schools.
Professorial Roles
Dr. Kritsonis has served in professorial roles at Central Washington University, Washington; Salisbury State University, Maryland; Northwestern State University, Louisiana; McNeese State University, Louisiana; and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge in the Department of Administrative and Foundational Services.
In 2006, Dr. Kritsonis published two articles in the Two-Volume Set of the Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration published by SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California. He is a National Reviewer for the Journal of Research on Leadership, University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA).
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was invited to write a history and philosophy of education for the ABC-CLIO Encyclopedia of World History.
Currently, Dr. Kritsonis is Professor of Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University – Member of the Texas A&M University System. He teaches in the newly established PhD Program in Educational Leadership. Dr. Kritsonis taught the Inaugural class session in the doctoral program at the start of the fall 2004 academic year. In October 2006, Dr. Kritsonis chaired the first doctoral student to earn a PhD in Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University. He lives in Houston, Texas.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Contributions to education...
25th Year Anniversary of National FORUM Journals
Founded in 1983
William Allan Kritsonis’ Contribution to Education
Arthur L. Petterway, PhD
Principal
Houston Independent School District
Houston, Texas
ABSTRACT
This year marks the 25th Year Anniversary of the founding of National FORUM Journals by Dr. William Allan Kritsonis. The following snapshot of the career of Dr. Kritsonis is a small tribute to his contribution to education.
__________________________________________________________________________
Founder of National FORUM Journals
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these academic, scholarly, refereed, peer-reviewed journals.
Dr. Kritsonis Lectures at the University of Oxford, Oxford, England
In 2005, Dr. Kritsonis was an Invited Visiting Lecturer at the Oxford Round Table at Oriel College in the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. His lecture was entitled the Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning.
Dr. Kritsonis Recognized as Distinguished Alumnus
In 2004, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis was recognized as the Central Washington University Alumni Association Distinguished Alumnus for the College of Education and Professional Studies. Dr. Kritsonis was nominated by alumni, former students, friends, faculty, and staff. Final selection was made by the Alumni Association Board of Directors. Recipients are CWU graduates of 20 years or more and are recognized for achievement in their professional field and have made a positive contribution to society. For the second consecutive year, U.S. News and World Report placed Central Washington University among the top elite public institutions in the west. CWU was 12th on the list in the 2006 On-Line Education of “America’s Best Colleges.”
Educational Background
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis earned his BA in 1969 from Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington. In 1971, he earned his M.Ed. from Seattle Pacific University. In 1976, he earned his PhD from the University of Iowa.In 1981, he was a Visiting Scholar at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, and in 1987 was a Visiting Scholar at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Professional Experience
Dr. Kritsonis began his career as a teacher. He has served education as a principal, superintendent of schools, director of student teaching and field experiences, invited guest professor, author, consultant, editor-in-chief, and publisher. Dr. Kritsonis has earned tenure as a professor at the highest academic rank at two major universities.
Books – Articles – Lectures - Workshops
Dr. Kritsonis lectures and conducts seminars and workshops on a variety of topics. He is author of more than 500 articles in professional journals and several books. His popular book SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: The Art of Survival is scheduled for its fourth edition. He is the author of the textbook William Kritsonis, PhD on Schooling that is used by many professors at colleges and universities throughout the nation and abroad. In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis’ version of the book of Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning (858 pages) was published in the United States of America in cooperation with partial financial support of Visiting Lecturers, Oxford Round Table (2005). The book is the product of a collaborative twenty-four year effort started in 1978 with the late Dr. Philip H. Phenix. Dr. Kritsonis was in continuous communication with Dr. Phenix until his death in 2002. In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was the lead author of the textbook Practical Applications of Educational Research and Basic Statistics. The text provides practical content knowledge in research for graduate students at the doctoral and master’s levels. In 2008, Dr. Kritsonis’ book Non-Renewal of Public School Personnel Contracts: Selected Supreme and District Court Decisions in Accordance with the Due Process of Law was published by The Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, New York. Dr. Kritsonis’ seminar and workshop on Writing for Professional Publication has been very popular with both professors and practitioners. Persons in attendance generate an article to be published in a refereed journal at the national or international levels. Dr. Kritsonis has traveled and lectured throughout the United States and world-wide. Some recent international tours include Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, Turkey, Italy, Greece, Monte Carlo, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Poland,
Germany, and many more.
Founder of National FORUM Journals – Over 4,000 Professors Published
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these refereed, peer-reviewed periodicals. In 1983, he founded the National FORUM of Educational Administration and Supervision – now acclaimed by many as the United States’ leading recognized scholarly academic refereed journal in educational administration, leadership, and supervision.
In 1987, Dr. Kritsonis founded the National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal whose aim is to conjoin the efforts of applied educational researchers world-wide with those of practitioners in education. He founded the National FORUM of Teacher Education Journal, National FORUM of Special Education Journal, National FORUM of Multicultural Issues Journal, International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, and the DOCTORAL FORUM – National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research. The DOCTORAL FORUM is the only refereed journal in America committed to publishing doctoral students while they are enrolled in course work in their doctoral programs. In 1997, he established the Online Journal Division of National FORUM Journals that publishes academic scholarly refereed articles daily on the website: www.nationalforum.com. Over 600 professors have published online. In January 2007, Dr. Kritsonis established the National Journal: Focus On Colleges, Universities, and Schools.
Professorial Roles
Dr. Kritsonis has served in professorial roles at Central Washington University, Washington; Salisbury State University, Maryland; Northwestern State University, Louisiana; McNeese State University, Louisiana; and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge in the Department of Administrative and Foundational Services.
In 2006, Dr. Kritsonis published two articles in the Two-Volume Set of the Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration published by SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California. He is a National Reviewer for the Journal of Research on Leadership, University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA).
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was invited to write a history and philosophy of education for the ABC-CLIO Encyclopedia of World History.
Currently, Dr. Kritsonis is Professor of Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University – Member of the Texas A&M University System. He teaches in the newly established PhD Program in Educational Leadership. Dr. Kritsonis taught the Inaugural class session in the doctoral program at the start of the fall 2004 academic year. In October 2006, Dr. Kritsonis chaired the first doctoral student to earn a PhD in Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University. He lives in Houston, Texas.
Founded in 1983
William Allan Kritsonis’ Contribution to Education
Arthur L. Petterway, PhD
Principal
Houston Independent School District
Houston, Texas
ABSTRACT
This year marks the 25th Year Anniversary of the founding of National FORUM Journals by Dr. William Allan Kritsonis. The following snapshot of the career of Dr. Kritsonis is a small tribute to his contribution to education.
__________________________________________________________________________
Founder of National FORUM Journals
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these academic, scholarly, refereed, peer-reviewed journals.
Dr. Kritsonis Lectures at the University of Oxford, Oxford, England
In 2005, Dr. Kritsonis was an Invited Visiting Lecturer at the Oxford Round Table at Oriel College in the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. His lecture was entitled the Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning.
Dr. Kritsonis Recognized as Distinguished Alumnus
In 2004, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis was recognized as the Central Washington University Alumni Association Distinguished Alumnus for the College of Education and Professional Studies. Dr. Kritsonis was nominated by alumni, former students, friends, faculty, and staff. Final selection was made by the Alumni Association Board of Directors. Recipients are CWU graduates of 20 years or more and are recognized for achievement in their professional field and have made a positive contribution to society. For the second consecutive year, U.S. News and World Report placed Central Washington University among the top elite public institutions in the west. CWU was 12th on the list in the 2006 On-Line Education of “America’s Best Colleges.”
Educational Background
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis earned his BA in 1969 from Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington. In 1971, he earned his M.Ed. from Seattle Pacific University. In 1976, he earned his PhD from the University of Iowa.In 1981, he was a Visiting Scholar at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, and in 1987 was a Visiting Scholar at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Professional Experience
Dr. Kritsonis began his career as a teacher. He has served education as a principal, superintendent of schools, director of student teaching and field experiences, invited guest professor, author, consultant, editor-in-chief, and publisher. Dr. Kritsonis has earned tenure as a professor at the highest academic rank at two major universities.
Books – Articles – Lectures - Workshops
Dr. Kritsonis lectures and conducts seminars and workshops on a variety of topics. He is author of more than 500 articles in professional journals and several books. His popular book SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: The Art of Survival is scheduled for its fourth edition. He is the author of the textbook William Kritsonis, PhD on Schooling that is used by many professors at colleges and universities throughout the nation and abroad. In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis’ version of the book of Ways of Knowing Through the Realms of Meaning (858 pages) was published in the United States of America in cooperation with partial financial support of Visiting Lecturers, Oxford Round Table (2005). The book is the product of a collaborative twenty-four year effort started in 1978 with the late Dr. Philip H. Phenix. Dr. Kritsonis was in continuous communication with Dr. Phenix until his death in 2002. In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was the lead author of the textbook Practical Applications of Educational Research and Basic Statistics. The text provides practical content knowledge in research for graduate students at the doctoral and master’s levels. In 2008, Dr. Kritsonis’ book Non-Renewal of Public School Personnel Contracts: Selected Supreme and District Court Decisions in Accordance with the Due Process of Law was published by The Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, New York. Dr. Kritsonis’ seminar and workshop on Writing for Professional Publication has been very popular with both professors and practitioners. Persons in attendance generate an article to be published in a refereed journal at the national or international levels. Dr. Kritsonis has traveled and lectured throughout the United States and world-wide. Some recent international tours include Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, Turkey, Italy, Greece, Monte Carlo, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Poland,
Germany, and many more.
Founder of National FORUM Journals – Over 4,000 Professors Published
Dr. Kritsonis is founder of NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (since 1983). These publications represent a group of highly respected scholarly academic periodicals. Over 4,000 writers have been published in these refereed, peer-reviewed periodicals. In 1983, he founded the National FORUM of Educational Administration and Supervision – now acclaimed by many as the United States’ leading recognized scholarly academic refereed journal in educational administration, leadership, and supervision.
In 1987, Dr. Kritsonis founded the National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal whose aim is to conjoin the efforts of applied educational researchers world-wide with those of practitioners in education. He founded the National FORUM of Teacher Education Journal, National FORUM of Special Education Journal, National FORUM of Multicultural Issues Journal, International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, and the DOCTORAL FORUM – National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research. The DOCTORAL FORUM is the only refereed journal in America committed to publishing doctoral students while they are enrolled in course work in their doctoral programs. In 1997, he established the Online Journal Division of National FORUM Journals that publishes academic scholarly refereed articles daily on the website: www.nationalforum.com. Over 600 professors have published online. In January 2007, Dr. Kritsonis established the National Journal: Focus On Colleges, Universities, and Schools.
Professorial Roles
Dr. Kritsonis has served in professorial roles at Central Washington University, Washington; Salisbury State University, Maryland; Northwestern State University, Louisiana; McNeese State University, Louisiana; and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge in the Department of Administrative and Foundational Services.
In 2006, Dr. Kritsonis published two articles in the Two-Volume Set of the Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration published by SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California. He is a National Reviewer for the Journal of Research on Leadership, University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA).
In 2007, Dr. Kritsonis was invited to write a history and philosophy of education for the ABC-CLIO Encyclopedia of World History.
Currently, Dr. Kritsonis is Professor of Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University – Member of the Texas A&M University System. He teaches in the newly established PhD Program in Educational Leadership. Dr. Kritsonis taught the Inaugural class session in the doctoral program at the start of the fall 2004 academic year. In October 2006, Dr. Kritsonis chaired the first doctoral student to earn a PhD in Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University. He lives in Houston, Texas.
Functions of the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor
FOCUS on Colleges, Universities, and Schools
VOLUME 2 NUMBER 1, 2008
Functions of the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
The Texas A&M University System
Prairie View, Texas
Invited Visiting Lecturer
Oxford Round Table
Oriel College in the University of Oxford
Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus
Central Washington University
College of Education and Professional Studies
Ellensburg, Washington
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this article is to provide suggestions for doctoral dissertation advisors. The content was developed from discussions with colleagues, doctoral candidates, recipients of advanced degrees, and reviewing literature pertaining to doctoral studies. This article provides some general guidelines and practical functions for doctoral dissertation advisors.
Introduction
Those who succeed in academic scholastic writing at the advanced levels typically write an excellent doctoral dissertation. In writing a dissertation, there appears to be an enjoyment of the constant flowing of ideas. At the doctoral level, mentors are critically important in helping their students complete the dissertation, and later in getting graduates published at the national level in refereed, juried, peer-reviewed scholarly journals.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to establish some basic functions of the doctoral dissertation advisor. Hopefully, the suggestions will help others in the doctoral advisement process.
Basic Functions of the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor
The following suggestions are functions of a doctoral dissertation advisor:
1. Keep a folder for each doctoral student. This will give you the opportunity to review previous and current work completed by the student. It will give you the opportunity to review your own comments. Reviewing the folder periodically enables you to firmly grasp the student’s concerns with conducting research.
2. Keep track of emails that you send and other correspondence. Make certain that you communicate to students frequently. Not communicating with doctoral students is condescending and shows disrespect.
3. Establish a personal, but professional relationship with your doctoral student advisees. Being a mentor is a very serious responsibility. See each of your students first as people. They have goals and aspirations just as you do.
4. Develop your own style in dissertation advising. The best way to develop your own style is simply by doing it.
5. Be positive in working with doctoral students on their dissertation. Make certain to provide feedback that is constructive and useful. Always strive to be positive and enthusiastic in working with doctoral students on their dissertations. Be cheerful, optimistic, and helpful. Direct advisees to relevant sources of information.
6. Know your strengths, attributes, weaknesses, and limitations.
7. Do you homework in working with each advisee. Make certain to study the dissertation topic your advisee is interested in developing.
8. Think about your own dissertation experience. Avoid any mistakes that were made. Incorporate effective strategies that work.
9. Encourage advisees to document what they want to do as a dissertation topic.
10. Strive to make a difference as an advisor to your advisee. Model appropriate behavior.
11. Make your presence matter in the life of the doctoral student.
12. Accept the responsibility of doing a good job.
13. Accept the fact you know more about writing a dissertation than your advisee.
14. As an advisor, recognize the time when the dissertation topic must be revised or changed. Do not be afraid to tell an advisee when they are wasting time on something that will not work or is not relevant.
15. Be ready to suggest to your advisee the need to shift the research time to other areas of the dissertation if you see the advisee bog down.
16. Do not hesitate to tell the advisee to put more effort into the dissertation.
17. Make certain to realize as an advisor there are many different strategies for writing a doctoral dissertation.
18. Encourage doctoral students to talk with others who are writing their dissertation. They often can provide practical feedback and encouragement.
19. Encourage doctoral students to communicate with others in different colleges or departments who are writing their dissertation.
20. Encourage advisees to explore ideas beyond your suggestions.
21. Tell your advisees how you like to work with them. If you need to work from an outline – tell the advisee. Let advisees know your own work habits.
22. Remember, it is the advisee’s dissertation – not yours. They must do the work.
23. If you are an inexperienced dissertation advisor, try to work with a colleague who has successful experience. As an advisor, you are there to help. Help as much as you possibly can.
24. Be supportive of the advisee’s work. Use specific examples in telling advisees their work is good or not acceptable. Point out where the work needs improvement.
25. Make certain you develop the habit of getting things back to students in a timely manner; hopefully, within five - ten business days. Through being diligent in your efforts, the advisee will keep focused. Read dissertation chapters at your earliest convenience. Do not let too much time elapse. Remember, you are a busy person and so is your advisee. Establish timelines with the advisee and meet them.
26. Give your doctoral students the responsibility of meeting deadlines.
27. Encourage students to contact you if you have taken too long to respond to them.
28. As an advisor, give lots of suggestions. Be specific, exact, concise, detailed, and comprehensive in all aspects of your advising.
29. Encourage your doctoral students to talk with their committee members throughout the entire process. Other committee members might suggest different approaches or a new study altogether. When this happens, meet with the advisee. Perhaps you will agree or disagree. Keep the dialogue open and positive.
30. It is your duty to encourage your advisees to do the work that must be done to have a quality and professionally satisfying dissertation.
31. Be available. If this means meeting with a doctoral student at a location other than the university, do it. Some advisees need a lot of attention, guidance, and direction. Others are self-directive. Be flexible and adaptable.
32. The advisee should not hear major changes for the first time at the proposal defense.
33. In giving guidance to your advisees, constantly prepare them for their proposal defense and ultimately defending their dissertation. This will keep them focused.
34. Do not take on the job of advisor if you do not intend to make it a priority. Dissertation advisement takes an enormous amount of time and commitment. During the entire process, it will be necessary for you to meet with the other members of the dissertation committee to discuss the progress of the doctoral student.
35. You want your students to tell you “I like the way you are always available, keep up the good work.”
36. The doctoral student and advisor should consult someone other than the student’s committee members for special advising or expertise.
37. Help your advisee when there is a need to clarify the dissertation topic.
38. Try to obtain adequate funding for your advisee’s research.
39. Link students with similar dissertation topics together.
40. During the advisement process, dissertation advisors should mentor students by helping them to prepare manuscripts for publication in national, refereed, peer reviewed journals.
41. Consider or recommend doctoral students for university responsibilities, such as facilitating classes when professors are unavailable, and giving examinations at distance learning facilities. This gives them experiences in higher education.
42. Involve doctoral students with coordinating orientation sessions for new students.
43. As a dissertation advisor, develop an approval form for both the proposal and dissertation defense that must be signed by all committee members prior to scheduling a formal meeting. By doing so, the committee members agree the student is ready to present and defend.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, the purpose of this article was to establish some general functions of a dissertation advisor. There are numerous functions of a dissertation advisor and these are only a few. In addition, my intention was to provide some general guidelines for thoughtful consideration. Perhaps, you can add to the list.
References
Dave, R. (2007 December). Quality time with your dissertation. Retrieved December 4,
2007, from the Association for Support of Graduate Students Website: http://www.asgs.org/
Eastwood, J.S. (2000). Comprehensive editing. Retrieved December 2, 2007, from
www.jeastwood.com
Jensen, S. (2000). Dissertation news. Retrieved December 3, 2007, from
http://www.dissertationdoctor.com
________________________________________________________________________
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
VOLUME 2 NUMBER 1, 2008
Functions of the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
The Texas A&M University System
Prairie View, Texas
Invited Visiting Lecturer
Oxford Round Table
Oriel College in the University of Oxford
Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus
Central Washington University
College of Education and Professional Studies
Ellensburg, Washington
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this article is to provide suggestions for doctoral dissertation advisors. The content was developed from discussions with colleagues, doctoral candidates, recipients of advanced degrees, and reviewing literature pertaining to doctoral studies. This article provides some general guidelines and practical functions for doctoral dissertation advisors.
Introduction
Those who succeed in academic scholastic writing at the advanced levels typically write an excellent doctoral dissertation. In writing a dissertation, there appears to be an enjoyment of the constant flowing of ideas. At the doctoral level, mentors are critically important in helping their students complete the dissertation, and later in getting graduates published at the national level in refereed, juried, peer-reviewed scholarly journals.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to establish some basic functions of the doctoral dissertation advisor. Hopefully, the suggestions will help others in the doctoral advisement process.
Basic Functions of the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor
The following suggestions are functions of a doctoral dissertation advisor:
1. Keep a folder for each doctoral student. This will give you the opportunity to review previous and current work completed by the student. It will give you the opportunity to review your own comments. Reviewing the folder periodically enables you to firmly grasp the student’s concerns with conducting research.
2. Keep track of emails that you send and other correspondence. Make certain that you communicate to students frequently. Not communicating with doctoral students is condescending and shows disrespect.
3. Establish a personal, but professional relationship with your doctoral student advisees. Being a mentor is a very serious responsibility. See each of your students first as people. They have goals and aspirations just as you do.
4. Develop your own style in dissertation advising. The best way to develop your own style is simply by doing it.
5. Be positive in working with doctoral students on their dissertation. Make certain to provide feedback that is constructive and useful. Always strive to be positive and enthusiastic in working with doctoral students on their dissertations. Be cheerful, optimistic, and helpful. Direct advisees to relevant sources of information.
6. Know your strengths, attributes, weaknesses, and limitations.
7. Do you homework in working with each advisee. Make certain to study the dissertation topic your advisee is interested in developing.
8. Think about your own dissertation experience. Avoid any mistakes that were made. Incorporate effective strategies that work.
9. Encourage advisees to document what they want to do as a dissertation topic.
10. Strive to make a difference as an advisor to your advisee. Model appropriate behavior.
11. Make your presence matter in the life of the doctoral student.
12. Accept the responsibility of doing a good job.
13. Accept the fact you know more about writing a dissertation than your advisee.
14. As an advisor, recognize the time when the dissertation topic must be revised or changed. Do not be afraid to tell an advisee when they are wasting time on something that will not work or is not relevant.
15. Be ready to suggest to your advisee the need to shift the research time to other areas of the dissertation if you see the advisee bog down.
16. Do not hesitate to tell the advisee to put more effort into the dissertation.
17. Make certain to realize as an advisor there are many different strategies for writing a doctoral dissertation.
18. Encourage doctoral students to talk with others who are writing their dissertation. They often can provide practical feedback and encouragement.
19. Encourage doctoral students to communicate with others in different colleges or departments who are writing their dissertation.
20. Encourage advisees to explore ideas beyond your suggestions.
21. Tell your advisees how you like to work with them. If you need to work from an outline – tell the advisee. Let advisees know your own work habits.
22. Remember, it is the advisee’s dissertation – not yours. They must do the work.
23. If you are an inexperienced dissertation advisor, try to work with a colleague who has successful experience. As an advisor, you are there to help. Help as much as you possibly can.
24. Be supportive of the advisee’s work. Use specific examples in telling advisees their work is good or not acceptable. Point out where the work needs improvement.
25. Make certain you develop the habit of getting things back to students in a timely manner; hopefully, within five - ten business days. Through being diligent in your efforts, the advisee will keep focused. Read dissertation chapters at your earliest convenience. Do not let too much time elapse. Remember, you are a busy person and so is your advisee. Establish timelines with the advisee and meet them.
26. Give your doctoral students the responsibility of meeting deadlines.
27. Encourage students to contact you if you have taken too long to respond to them.
28. As an advisor, give lots of suggestions. Be specific, exact, concise, detailed, and comprehensive in all aspects of your advising.
29. Encourage your doctoral students to talk with their committee members throughout the entire process. Other committee members might suggest different approaches or a new study altogether. When this happens, meet with the advisee. Perhaps you will agree or disagree. Keep the dialogue open and positive.
30. It is your duty to encourage your advisees to do the work that must be done to have a quality and professionally satisfying dissertation.
31. Be available. If this means meeting with a doctoral student at a location other than the university, do it. Some advisees need a lot of attention, guidance, and direction. Others are self-directive. Be flexible and adaptable.
32. The advisee should not hear major changes for the first time at the proposal defense.
33. In giving guidance to your advisees, constantly prepare them for their proposal defense and ultimately defending their dissertation. This will keep them focused.
34. Do not take on the job of advisor if you do not intend to make it a priority. Dissertation advisement takes an enormous amount of time and commitment. During the entire process, it will be necessary for you to meet with the other members of the dissertation committee to discuss the progress of the doctoral student.
35. You want your students to tell you “I like the way you are always available, keep up the good work.”
36. The doctoral student and advisor should consult someone other than the student’s committee members for special advising or expertise.
37. Help your advisee when there is a need to clarify the dissertation topic.
38. Try to obtain adequate funding for your advisee’s research.
39. Link students with similar dissertation topics together.
40. During the advisement process, dissertation advisors should mentor students by helping them to prepare manuscripts for publication in national, refereed, peer reviewed journals.
41. Consider or recommend doctoral students for university responsibilities, such as facilitating classes when professors are unavailable, and giving examinations at distance learning facilities. This gives them experiences in higher education.
42. Involve doctoral students with coordinating orientation sessions for new students.
43. As a dissertation advisor, develop an approval form for both the proposal and dissertation defense that must be signed by all committee members prior to scheduling a formal meeting. By doing so, the committee members agree the student is ready to present and defend.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, the purpose of this article was to establish some general functions of a dissertation advisor. There are numerous functions of a dissertation advisor and these are only a few. In addition, my intention was to provide some general guidelines for thoughtful consideration. Perhaps, you can add to the list.
References
Dave, R. (2007 December). Quality time with your dissertation. Retrieved December 4,
2007, from the Association for Support of Graduate Students Website: http://www.asgs.org/
Eastwood, J.S. (2000). Comprehensive editing. Retrieved December 2, 2007, from
www.jeastwood.com
Jensen, S. (2000). Dissertation news. Retrieved December 3, 2007, from
http://www.dissertationdoctor.com
________________________________________________________________________
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas www.nationalforum.com
Maintaining Ethical Leadership and High "Diversity" Standards
National FORUM of Applied Education Research Journal (AERJ)
22 (3) 2009
Maintaining Ethical Leadership and High “Diversity” Standards in Higher Education: A National Issue in Educational Leadership
Clarence Johnson
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
Director of Safe and Secure Schools
Aldine Independent School District
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford, Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
Central Washington University
College of Education and Professional Studies
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
African American students, Asian students, Hispanics students, and White students are treated equally when decisions are made related to college entrance policies. The number of degrees conferred to minorities continues to grow and the gap in attainment between White students and students of color continues to diminish. Educational leadership must deal with the most divisive educational issue since Brown v Board of Education. Research will show the many facets of the higher education dilemma and suggest that we, as educators, have the answer that is ethically correct. We must make the correct decision based on race, sex, social class, ethnicity, and disability. The solution is an educational leadership decision based on high diversity standards and what is right.
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
During the 1965 commencement address at Howard University, President Lyndon Johnson said, “You don’t take a person hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘You are free to compete with all others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair” (Atkinson, 2006, p. 318). Forty-two years later, America colleges and universities are faced with equity issues in higher education for all minorities. Educational leadership must play the lead role in addressing the equality of higher education for students and meeting the needs of faculty members. Faculty face the same equity issues as incoming freshmen college students.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to examine the issues of maintaining high standards in higher education and solve the diversity dilemma. In our democracy of equal opportunity for education to all students, we enter a complex arena after students graduate from high school. Our leaders have fulfilled the basic right of achieving a high school free education but the higher education institutions must maintain the same position with different guidelines. Research will look at faculty members, universities presidents, and all ethnic groups in the higher education domain.
Affirmative Action
Race conscious affirmative action in higher education survived a close call challenge in 2003 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that race was a valid academic admission criterion in the Grutter v. Bollinger case. Two years later, a number of “pipeline” programs to help underrepresented minorities gain admission to and complete graduate school have modified their eligibility requirements, opening their participation to all students in an effort to avoid legal challenges (Roach, 2005).
“If there’s a need for affirmative action in higher education, it’s clearly at the graduate level” (Roach, 2005, p. 24), says Dr. Ansley Abraham, the director of the Southern Regional Education Board’s State Doctoral Scholars Program (SREB). “We need concerted efforts to steer and assist minority students in those directions. We have to have very intense and focused efforts” (Roach, 2005, p.24). This is a major role for educational leadership.
Minority Doctoral Recipients
Ansley and others pointed out that at the graduate level, pipeline programs have been critical to the growth of minority doctoral recipients. Ph.D. programs in particular are known for their high attrition rates. Programs such as Ford’s and SREB’s have been widely credited for improving the chances that underrepresented minorities complete their doctorates. A number of participants in the long running Ford Foundation Fellowship programs say they were dismayed to learn last year that the foundation had altered the eligibility and name of the nation’s largest Ph.D. support program for underrepresented minorities. Since 1979 the program has provided fellowship funding for nearly 2,300 African American, American Indian, and Hispanic doctoral recipients (Roach, 2005).
Renamed the Ford Foundation Diversity Fellows program in 2004, the modified program has recently accepted the first cohort of students which includes non-underrepresented minorities. The new mix of program participants will be funded in 2005-2006 academic year, according to Foundation officials (Roach, 2005). This active role of the Foundation serves as a mainstay in maintaining the high standards for minorities in higher education.
Asian Americans
Research has pointed a supporting-finger at the Asian Americans because they are considered part of the minorities. In higher education, educational leadership must face every dilemma. As Congress ponders the future of federal programs for minority serving institutions, House lawmakers are proposing a new funding stream for another set of colleges and universities; those serving significant numbers of Asian American students. Much of Congress already funds support for historically Black colleges and universities, tribal colleges, and Hispanic-serving institutions. Twenty-five House lawmakers are calling for a new program to help institutions serving Asian American and Pacific Islander students. The new bill, H.R. 2616, notes that Pacific Islander students are a diverse population that includes 21 ethnic groups (Dervarics, 2005 July).
While Asian Americans overall have the highest going rate of any group nationwide, certain subgroups have little representation in higher education. This group includes students of Laotian heritage, where only 6 percent have college degrees. Rates are 6 percent for Cambodian Americans and 5 percent for Hmong Americans, the bill states. By comparison, about 64 percent of Chinese Americans have some college experience (Dervarics, 2005 July).
Graduation Rate among Minorities
After examining the Asian American position in higher education, research will analyze and interpret the current data. In academic year 1994-1995, just over 200,000 students representing ethnic and racial minority groups graduated from U.S. colleges and universities with a four-year degree. In 2004-2005, that number reached nearly 350,000, representing an annual growth rate of 5.1 percent and a 64 percent increase the entire 10-year period. The growth rate was fastest for Hispanics, where 6.4 percent clip led to a near doubling of degrees from, 54,000 in 1994-1995 to just over 100,000 in 2004-2005. These growth rates are especially impressive when compared with the rate of growth in bachelor’s degrees conferred to White students, which increased an average of 1.3 percent annually during the same time frame (Borden, 2006).
The trends are impressive. The number of degrees conferred to minorities continues to grow and the gap in attainment between White students and students of color continues to diminish. But the gap has not disappeared. In this year’s Top 100 analyses, the first to come under the Diverse Issues in Higher Education banner, we continue our focus on the institutions that award the most degrees to students of color (Borden, 2006). The educational leadership behind the scene plays a major role in maintaining the growth trends.
Hispanics
Research will now weigh in on the largest and fastest growing minority group, Hispanics. New federal support for graduate education at Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) would improve educational opportunities for Latino students and may increase the pool of minority faculty, witnesses told a U.S. House of Representatives panel last month in Texas. Hispanics received about 4 percent of all master’s degrees in 2002, while Whites received 62 percent and African Americans 8 percent, says, Dr. Raymond Pardes, commissioner of higher education in Texas. That 4 percent reflects a small gain during the past decade, but one that significantly trails Hispanic population growth (Dervarics, June 2005).
“Progress in educational attainment for Hispanics has been steady but slow, while the population growth has been dramatic” (Dervarics, 2005 June, p. 6), he says. Overall, fewer than half of the HSIs in Texas offer graduate studies, he adds. Only 20 percent of Hispanic-serving institutions offer a master’s degree, and less than 15 percent have doctoral programs, says Dr. Tomas Arciniega, special assistant to the chancellor at California State University-San Marcos, an HSI. Yet he says that by supportive HSIs, particularly those in urban locations, Congress is helping students of all races.
HSIs “educate a significant percentage of African American students” (Dervarics, 2005 June, p. 6), he says. In Bakersfield, where Arciniega was president for 21 years, 30 percent are Latino, while African Americans, American Indians, and Pacific Islanders are 15 percent of enrollment. Hispanic-serving colleges and universities are asking Congress to create a new $125 million program to enhance graduate education under Title V of the Higher Education Act. That title supports an undergraduate education program for two and four-year HSIs, currently funded at $95 million.
The House and Senate bills propose other changes to Title V. The legislation also would increase the undergraduate program to $175 million, nearly double the current funding. Rivera notes that HSIs receive less than half the per-student funding given to all degree-granting institutions. The university president also called for another new section of Title V with funding to help HSIs improve technology infrastructure. Rivera also asked Congress to eliminate a requirement that HSIs have at least 50 percent low-income students in order to qualify for Title V funds. “This regulatory burden is not required of other minority-serving institutions and should be eliminated” (Dervarics, 2005 June, p. 6), he says. Historically Black colleges have no such requirement. The income test is one of two major parameters to gauge eligibility for the program; colleges also must have at least 25 percent Hispanic enrollment to qualify for the program (Dervarics, 2005 June).
Through the House and Senate bills, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities and other leaders also want Congress to allow Title V funds to go toward articulation agreement between two and four-year institutions. Many HSIs are two-year colleges. With the Higher Education Act up for renewal this year, Congress also has a rare opportunity to address the growth of the Hispanic population and its effect on higher education. This growth ultimately may lead to a significant increase in the number of Hispanic-serving colleges and universities nationwide (Dervarics, June 2005). The Hispanic educational leadership is pressing hard toward meeting the needs of the Hispanic student population in higher education.
Lottery to Pay for Tuition
It is significant to note that research indicated educational leadership explored the lottery for addressing the needs of minorities being included in higher education. New Mexico’s lottery scholarship have helped more New Mexicans of all backgrounds and income levels go to college, but the program has especially helped increase the number of minority students in higher education (Anonymous, 2004).
The program which began in the fall of 1997, pays tuition for the New Mexico high school graduate who immediately go on to college and maintain at least a 2.5 grade point average. It paid $36 million in the fiscal year that ended in June, and ended the year with $51 million surplus. From 1991 to 1996, before the program began, the University of New Mexico enrolled an average of 666 minority freshmen who had graduated from New Mexico high schools each year. From 1998 to 2003, the figure soared to an average of 1,143. Of those, 80 percent had a lottery scholarship (Anonymous, 2004).
However, the study concluded the program is not a cost effective way to get minority and low-income students to attend University of New Mexico, since half the beneficiaries were not minority students and 70 percent were high income. The study defined high income as families earning more than $40,000 a year (Anonymous, 2004).
Minority College Faculty
Educational leadership research takes a close and personal look at minority faculty members. Despite gains in recent years, the percentage of minority faculty still lags behind the overall population and the percentage of minority students. According to the American Council on Education, minorities account for less than 20 percent of fulltime faculty at U.S. colleges. “This is an issue that all higher education institutions face, regardless if you’re a two-year community college, a state university, a private college or a big research university like Minnesota” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8), says Dr. Robert Jones, the senior vice president for system academic administration at the University of Minnesota. “All of our institutions in one way or another is very challenged by this issue” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8).
The Keeping Our Faculties conference represents a unique effort to address faculty diversity. Breakout sessions focused on areas such as faculty-driven diversity efforts, mentoring for academic writing, the experience of Black women on engineering faculties and coping with the stress of being the sole faculty member of an underrepresented group (Pattison, 2007). “All too often, when we start these initiatives, we act like we’re starting from ground zero, when in fact there’s been a lot of changes of diversity work” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8), says Dr. Nancy “Rusty” Barcelo, the vice president and vice provost at University of Minnesota and a co-founder of the conference. “I’m going to be able to take a lot of what we’ve heard here and figure out how to apply it to our work” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8). But diversifying the faculty, adds Barcelo, requires efforts well beyond the traditional job search. “If you look at the pipeline, it’s really kind of dismal” (Pattison, 2007, p.8), she says. “Part of what we need to address here is the notion of how we’re promoting graduate education so we can have this diverse pool of faculty in the future” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8). Many attendees voiced concerns about a political countermovement that has stymied diversity efforts, including Proposition 209 in California and the recent approval Proposal 2 in Michigan (Pattison, 2007).
Such initiatives have had a chilling effect on efforts to diversify campuses. Slaughter notes that the University of California, Los Angeles and UC-Berkeley enrolled 209 Black students out of a total class of 7,350 in 2004; less than half as many as a decade earlier, before Proposition 209. Of those 209 students, only 83 were Black men, and half of them were athletes. Similarly, Slaughter says, faculty appointments of Blacks at the University of California are under 3 percent (Pattison, 2007).
Minority College Presidents
Research examines the state-of-affairs regarding the college presidents. Minority presidents often are brought in to promote diversity, leading to, in some cases, an abbreviated tenure. It was only three years ago that Dr. Wayne Branch was tapped to take over the reins at Clark College, a 70-year-old private college in Vancouver, Washington. As president of the Community College of Baltimore County-Essex, Branch oversaw the reorganization of the college after it was folded into a three-college system. Those organizational skills and his background in counseling led Clark to make Branch the first African American president in the college’s history. Clarke trustees also thought Branch could help mend a bitter rift between the faculty and his presidential predecessor, Dr. Tana L. Hasart (Pluviose, 2006).
Now barely three years after taking the job, Branch is out at Clark. His dismissal reflects a disturbing trend for minority community college presidents, says Dr. John E. Roueche, director of the University of Texas at Austin’s Community College Leadership Program. “Today, there are only about 39 or 40 African American presidents of community colleges, and that is less than it was 10 years ago” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 23), he says. “And probably 35 percent to 40 percent of that group is graduates of our program” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 23). A college with diversity troubles sometimes reaches out to a minority candidate for help without giving the candidate a frank assessment of a sometimes hostile environment, adds Dr. Howard L. Simmons, chairman of Morgan State University’s department of advanced studies, leadership, and policy (Pluviose, 2006).
“Minority presidents are often asked to take over in case where they’ve had lots of difficulties. A lot of times these institutions already have problems when people go in” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24), says Simmons, a former executive director of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. “Sometimes, I don’t think they would even hire [minorities] if there were not these looming problems. And, then the faculty takes the position that the president is really in charge and they were not consulted. A lot of times the faculty members take the position, ‘If you don’t do what we want you to do, then you’re going to be out the door” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24).
Dr. Elva LeBlanc, president of two-year Galveston College, says the common faculty complaint of presidential abrasiveness is often simply the result of faculty not getting their way. “I’ve yet to serve at an institution where faculty complaints didn’t include a lack of communication. You send memoranda, you have meetings, you send e-mail, but still, that comes up” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24), LeBlanc says.
Roueche suggests that some faculty members are perhaps unwilling to embrace diversity initiatives when they come from a minority president. He says, by the way of analogy, that if the chairs of a science department and an English department both argue that writing should be included in every course, the science department will carry more weight. “In my view, a White person carrying the banner of diversity is not going to have the same kind of negative reaction that sometimes minority folks have when they’re carrying the same banner” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24), Roueche says.
However, Roueche says numerous minority community college presidents have had enormous success implementing diversity initiatives while at the same time promoting harmony with faculty despite existing racial tensions. Roueche points out that Dr. Walter G. Bumphus, outgoing president of the Louisiana Community and Technical College System, has been a champion of diversity and “is one of the most respected, honored, admired presidents in the country” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24).
Educational Leadership
Moving into the workforce arena, research indicates that workforce leadership calls on educational leadership to produce the quality personnel in the 21st century. With an urgency not seen in decades, policy leaders concerned about America’s global competitiveness and widening income gaps within U.S. society are propelling issues of academic and workforce preparation to the forefront of the nation’s education policy debates (Olson, 2006).
Worried that current expectations and structures are ill suited to the 21st century, politicians, scholars, and business executives are pushing to ground educational standards far more closely in the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in the new economy. They are arguing for a closer connection between K-12 and postsecondary education, on the assumption that decent-paying jobs with opportunities for advancement will require at least some education beyond high school, as well as lifelong learning to adjust to a fluid labor market (Olson, 2006).
The changes such leaders are advocating could have tremendous repercussions from preschool through graduate school. On one side of the debate are those who believe that fundamental shifts in the economy, brought about largely by technology, are creating a premium for knowledge and skills. Students must be prepared to take advantage of those new opportunities they warn, or risk joining the ranks of the working poor. On the other side are economists who see a more gradual rise in skill requirements and no shortage of college-educated workers over the next decade. They question the extent to which education offers a solution to the United States’ broader economic problems. Meanwhile large disagreements remain about how best to redesign secondary and postsecondary institutions to meet the shifting demands (Olson, 2006). Educational leadership will focus on meeting the demands of America’s global academic strengths.
Educational leadership research focuses on equity and equality. Admission decisions should match the goals of individual and societal equity, and equality should drive both policy and specific decisions. However, the ideal seldom applies. Rather, admission professionals find a tension between equity and equality; the individual and larger social benefits; and in artificially-created market shortage (Caldwell, 2007).
Equality is an expectation of even-handed treatment, as discussed by Strike, Haller and Soltis, who write, “In any given circumstances, people who are the same in those respects relevant to how they are treated in those circumstances should receive the same treatment” (Caldwell, 2007, p. 16). Equality concentrates on the individual and the circumstances surrounding him or her. It does not focus on group differences, based on factors such as race, sex, social class, ethnicity, and disability. It assumes that the individual has been assimilated into the society and should not be “hampered by traditional expectations and stereotypes” (Young, 1990, p. 157). On the other hand, equity “deals with difference and takes into consideration the fact that this society has many groups in it who have not always been equal treatment and/or have not had a level field on which to play. These groups have been frequently made to feel inferior to those in the mainstream and some have even been oppressed” (Shapiro, 2001, p. 76).
Many policy decisions have negatively impacted participation of the disadvantaged in higher education of the past two decades; the shift from need-based to merit-based financial aid; a shrinking pool of financial aid; and the reduction of state support for public higher education occurring at the legislative level. Additionally institutions’ desires are often driven by financial need, raising student qualifications. The consequences, albeit unintended, of programs, such as the Hope Scholarship Program and the shift to merit-based institutional scholarships, have worked against both equality and equity. They neither provide all students the same opportunities nor an advantage to a specific group. Instead these policies have tended to reinforce the status quo and narrow the range of benefiting students able to benefit (Caldwell, 2007).
The recent decision by the Supreme Court on June 28, 2007, adds more responsibilities to educational leadership in higher education regarding enrollment procedures. With competing blocs of Justices claiming the mantle of Brown v. Board of Education, a bitterly divided Supreme Court declared Thursday that public school systems cannot seek to achieve or maintain integration through measures that take explicit account of a student’s race (Greenhouse, 2007).
Voting 5-4, the court, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, invalidated programs in Seattle and metropolitan Louisville, Kentucky, which sought to maintain school-by-school diversity by limiting transfers on the basis of race or using race as a “tie-breaker” for admission to particular schools (Greenhouse, 2007).
Both programs had been upheld by lower federal courts and were similar to plans in place in hundreds of school districts across the country. Chief Justice Roberts said such programs are “directed only to racial balance, pure and simple” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), a goal he said is forbidden by the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection (Greenhouse, 2007). “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discrimination on the basis of race” (Greenhouse, 2007, P. A13), Roberts said. His side of the debate, the chief justice said, was “more faithful to the heritage of Brown” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), the landmark 1954 decision that declared school segregation unconstitutional. “When it comes to using race to assign children to schools, history will be heard” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), he said.
The decision came on the final day of the court’s 2006-07-term, which showed an energized conservative majority in control across many areas. Though Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined his opinion on the schools case in full, the fifth member of the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy, did not. Kennedy agreed that the two plans are unconstitutional. But he was highly critical of what he called the chief justice’s “all-too-unyielding insistence that race cannot be a factor in instances when, in my view, it may be taken into account” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13).
In a separate opinion that could shape the practical implications of the decision and provide school districts with guidelines for how to create systems that can pass muster with the court, Kennedy said achieving racial diversity, “avoiding racial isolation” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), and addressing “the problem of de facto desegregation in schooling” are “compelling interests” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), that a school district could constitutionally pursue as long as it did so through programs that were sufficiently “narrowly tailored.” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13) As a matter of constitutional doctrine and practical impact, Kennedy’s opinion significantly limited the full reach of the other four justices’ embrace of a “colorblind Constitution” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), under which all racially conscious government action, no matter how benign or invidious its goal, is equally suspect (Greenhouse, 2007).
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, the purpose of this article was to examine the issues of maintaining high standards in higher education and solve the diversity dilemma. Research indicated that in our democracy of equal opportunity for education to all students, we are meeting the needs of minority students that graduate from high school. Research looked at faculty members, universities presidents, and all ethnic groups in the higher education domain. Despite gains in recent years, the percentage of minority faculty still lags behind the overall population and the percentage of minority students. According to the American Council on Education, minorities account for less than 20 percent of fulltime faculty at U.S. colleges. “This is an issue that all higher education institutions face, regardless if you’re a two-year community college, a state university, a private college or a big research university like Minnesota” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8), says Dr. Robert Jones, the senior vice president for system academic administration at the University of Minnesota. “All of our institutions in one way or another is very challenged by this issue” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8). I support Dr. Jones assessment that all institutions of higher education must face the real issues and provide the educational leadership necessary to attain our goals. We must retool our efforts to meet the needs of all students. Ethical educational leadership in higher education is the answer.
References
22 (3) 2009
Maintaining Ethical Leadership and High “Diversity” Standards in Higher Education: A National Issue in Educational Leadership
Clarence Johnson
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
Director of Safe and Secure Schools
Aldine Independent School District
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
The Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford, Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
Central Washington University
College of Education and Professional Studies
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
African American students, Asian students, Hispanics students, and White students are treated equally when decisions are made related to college entrance policies. The number of degrees conferred to minorities continues to grow and the gap in attainment between White students and students of color continues to diminish. Educational leadership must deal with the most divisive educational issue since Brown v Board of Education. Research will show the many facets of the higher education dilemma and suggest that we, as educators, have the answer that is ethically correct. We must make the correct decision based on race, sex, social class, ethnicity, and disability. The solution is an educational leadership decision based on high diversity standards and what is right.
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
During the 1965 commencement address at Howard University, President Lyndon Johnson said, “You don’t take a person hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘You are free to compete with all others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair” (Atkinson, 2006, p. 318). Forty-two years later, America colleges and universities are faced with equity issues in higher education for all minorities. Educational leadership must play the lead role in addressing the equality of higher education for students and meeting the needs of faculty members. Faculty face the same equity issues as incoming freshmen college students.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to examine the issues of maintaining high standards in higher education and solve the diversity dilemma. In our democracy of equal opportunity for education to all students, we enter a complex arena after students graduate from high school. Our leaders have fulfilled the basic right of achieving a high school free education but the higher education institutions must maintain the same position with different guidelines. Research will look at faculty members, universities presidents, and all ethnic groups in the higher education domain.
Affirmative Action
Race conscious affirmative action in higher education survived a close call challenge in 2003 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that race was a valid academic admission criterion in the Grutter v. Bollinger case. Two years later, a number of “pipeline” programs to help underrepresented minorities gain admission to and complete graduate school have modified their eligibility requirements, opening their participation to all students in an effort to avoid legal challenges (Roach, 2005).
“If there’s a need for affirmative action in higher education, it’s clearly at the graduate level” (Roach, 2005, p. 24), says Dr. Ansley Abraham, the director of the Southern Regional Education Board’s State Doctoral Scholars Program (SREB). “We need concerted efforts to steer and assist minority students in those directions. We have to have very intense and focused efforts” (Roach, 2005, p.24). This is a major role for educational leadership.
Minority Doctoral Recipients
Ansley and others pointed out that at the graduate level, pipeline programs have been critical to the growth of minority doctoral recipients. Ph.D. programs in particular are known for their high attrition rates. Programs such as Ford’s and SREB’s have been widely credited for improving the chances that underrepresented minorities complete their doctorates. A number of participants in the long running Ford Foundation Fellowship programs say they were dismayed to learn last year that the foundation had altered the eligibility and name of the nation’s largest Ph.D. support program for underrepresented minorities. Since 1979 the program has provided fellowship funding for nearly 2,300 African American, American Indian, and Hispanic doctoral recipients (Roach, 2005).
Renamed the Ford Foundation Diversity Fellows program in 2004, the modified program has recently accepted the first cohort of students which includes non-underrepresented minorities. The new mix of program participants will be funded in 2005-2006 academic year, according to Foundation officials (Roach, 2005). This active role of the Foundation serves as a mainstay in maintaining the high standards for minorities in higher education.
Asian Americans
Research has pointed a supporting-finger at the Asian Americans because they are considered part of the minorities. In higher education, educational leadership must face every dilemma. As Congress ponders the future of federal programs for minority serving institutions, House lawmakers are proposing a new funding stream for another set of colleges and universities; those serving significant numbers of Asian American students. Much of Congress already funds support for historically Black colleges and universities, tribal colleges, and Hispanic-serving institutions. Twenty-five House lawmakers are calling for a new program to help institutions serving Asian American and Pacific Islander students. The new bill, H.R. 2616, notes that Pacific Islander students are a diverse population that includes 21 ethnic groups (Dervarics, 2005 July).
While Asian Americans overall have the highest going rate of any group nationwide, certain subgroups have little representation in higher education. This group includes students of Laotian heritage, where only 6 percent have college degrees. Rates are 6 percent for Cambodian Americans and 5 percent for Hmong Americans, the bill states. By comparison, about 64 percent of Chinese Americans have some college experience (Dervarics, 2005 July).
Graduation Rate among Minorities
After examining the Asian American position in higher education, research will analyze and interpret the current data. In academic year 1994-1995, just over 200,000 students representing ethnic and racial minority groups graduated from U.S. colleges and universities with a four-year degree. In 2004-2005, that number reached nearly 350,000, representing an annual growth rate of 5.1 percent and a 64 percent increase the entire 10-year period. The growth rate was fastest for Hispanics, where 6.4 percent clip led to a near doubling of degrees from, 54,000 in 1994-1995 to just over 100,000 in 2004-2005. These growth rates are especially impressive when compared with the rate of growth in bachelor’s degrees conferred to White students, which increased an average of 1.3 percent annually during the same time frame (Borden, 2006).
The trends are impressive. The number of degrees conferred to minorities continues to grow and the gap in attainment between White students and students of color continues to diminish. But the gap has not disappeared. In this year’s Top 100 analyses, the first to come under the Diverse Issues in Higher Education banner, we continue our focus on the institutions that award the most degrees to students of color (Borden, 2006). The educational leadership behind the scene plays a major role in maintaining the growth trends.
Hispanics
Research will now weigh in on the largest and fastest growing minority group, Hispanics. New federal support for graduate education at Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) would improve educational opportunities for Latino students and may increase the pool of minority faculty, witnesses told a U.S. House of Representatives panel last month in Texas. Hispanics received about 4 percent of all master’s degrees in 2002, while Whites received 62 percent and African Americans 8 percent, says, Dr. Raymond Pardes, commissioner of higher education in Texas. That 4 percent reflects a small gain during the past decade, but one that significantly trails Hispanic population growth (Dervarics, June 2005).
“Progress in educational attainment for Hispanics has been steady but slow, while the population growth has been dramatic” (Dervarics, 2005 June, p. 6), he says. Overall, fewer than half of the HSIs in Texas offer graduate studies, he adds. Only 20 percent of Hispanic-serving institutions offer a master’s degree, and less than 15 percent have doctoral programs, says Dr. Tomas Arciniega, special assistant to the chancellor at California State University-San Marcos, an HSI. Yet he says that by supportive HSIs, particularly those in urban locations, Congress is helping students of all races.
HSIs “educate a significant percentage of African American students” (Dervarics, 2005 June, p. 6), he says. In Bakersfield, where Arciniega was president for 21 years, 30 percent are Latino, while African Americans, American Indians, and Pacific Islanders are 15 percent of enrollment. Hispanic-serving colleges and universities are asking Congress to create a new $125 million program to enhance graduate education under Title V of the Higher Education Act. That title supports an undergraduate education program for two and four-year HSIs, currently funded at $95 million.
The House and Senate bills propose other changes to Title V. The legislation also would increase the undergraduate program to $175 million, nearly double the current funding. Rivera notes that HSIs receive less than half the per-student funding given to all degree-granting institutions. The university president also called for another new section of Title V with funding to help HSIs improve technology infrastructure. Rivera also asked Congress to eliminate a requirement that HSIs have at least 50 percent low-income students in order to qualify for Title V funds. “This regulatory burden is not required of other minority-serving institutions and should be eliminated” (Dervarics, 2005 June, p. 6), he says. Historically Black colleges have no such requirement. The income test is one of two major parameters to gauge eligibility for the program; colleges also must have at least 25 percent Hispanic enrollment to qualify for the program (Dervarics, 2005 June).
Through the House and Senate bills, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities and other leaders also want Congress to allow Title V funds to go toward articulation agreement between two and four-year institutions. Many HSIs are two-year colleges. With the Higher Education Act up for renewal this year, Congress also has a rare opportunity to address the growth of the Hispanic population and its effect on higher education. This growth ultimately may lead to a significant increase in the number of Hispanic-serving colleges and universities nationwide (Dervarics, June 2005). The Hispanic educational leadership is pressing hard toward meeting the needs of the Hispanic student population in higher education.
Lottery to Pay for Tuition
It is significant to note that research indicated educational leadership explored the lottery for addressing the needs of minorities being included in higher education. New Mexico’s lottery scholarship have helped more New Mexicans of all backgrounds and income levels go to college, but the program has especially helped increase the number of minority students in higher education (Anonymous, 2004).
The program which began in the fall of 1997, pays tuition for the New Mexico high school graduate who immediately go on to college and maintain at least a 2.5 grade point average. It paid $36 million in the fiscal year that ended in June, and ended the year with $51 million surplus. From 1991 to 1996, before the program began, the University of New Mexico enrolled an average of 666 minority freshmen who had graduated from New Mexico high schools each year. From 1998 to 2003, the figure soared to an average of 1,143. Of those, 80 percent had a lottery scholarship (Anonymous, 2004).
However, the study concluded the program is not a cost effective way to get minority and low-income students to attend University of New Mexico, since half the beneficiaries were not minority students and 70 percent were high income. The study defined high income as families earning more than $40,000 a year (Anonymous, 2004).
Minority College Faculty
Educational leadership research takes a close and personal look at minority faculty members. Despite gains in recent years, the percentage of minority faculty still lags behind the overall population and the percentage of minority students. According to the American Council on Education, minorities account for less than 20 percent of fulltime faculty at U.S. colleges. “This is an issue that all higher education institutions face, regardless if you’re a two-year community college, a state university, a private college or a big research university like Minnesota” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8), says Dr. Robert Jones, the senior vice president for system academic administration at the University of Minnesota. “All of our institutions in one way or another is very challenged by this issue” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8).
The Keeping Our Faculties conference represents a unique effort to address faculty diversity. Breakout sessions focused on areas such as faculty-driven diversity efforts, mentoring for academic writing, the experience of Black women on engineering faculties and coping with the stress of being the sole faculty member of an underrepresented group (Pattison, 2007). “All too often, when we start these initiatives, we act like we’re starting from ground zero, when in fact there’s been a lot of changes of diversity work” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8), says Dr. Nancy “Rusty” Barcelo, the vice president and vice provost at University of Minnesota and a co-founder of the conference. “I’m going to be able to take a lot of what we’ve heard here and figure out how to apply it to our work” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8). But diversifying the faculty, adds Barcelo, requires efforts well beyond the traditional job search. “If you look at the pipeline, it’s really kind of dismal” (Pattison, 2007, p.8), she says. “Part of what we need to address here is the notion of how we’re promoting graduate education so we can have this diverse pool of faculty in the future” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8). Many attendees voiced concerns about a political countermovement that has stymied diversity efforts, including Proposition 209 in California and the recent approval Proposal 2 in Michigan (Pattison, 2007).
Such initiatives have had a chilling effect on efforts to diversify campuses. Slaughter notes that the University of California, Los Angeles and UC-Berkeley enrolled 209 Black students out of a total class of 7,350 in 2004; less than half as many as a decade earlier, before Proposition 209. Of those 209 students, only 83 were Black men, and half of them were athletes. Similarly, Slaughter says, faculty appointments of Blacks at the University of California are under 3 percent (Pattison, 2007).
Minority College Presidents
Research examines the state-of-affairs regarding the college presidents. Minority presidents often are brought in to promote diversity, leading to, in some cases, an abbreviated tenure. It was only three years ago that Dr. Wayne Branch was tapped to take over the reins at Clark College, a 70-year-old private college in Vancouver, Washington. As president of the Community College of Baltimore County-Essex, Branch oversaw the reorganization of the college after it was folded into a three-college system. Those organizational skills and his background in counseling led Clark to make Branch the first African American president in the college’s history. Clarke trustees also thought Branch could help mend a bitter rift between the faculty and his presidential predecessor, Dr. Tana L. Hasart (Pluviose, 2006).
Now barely three years after taking the job, Branch is out at Clark. His dismissal reflects a disturbing trend for minority community college presidents, says Dr. John E. Roueche, director of the University of Texas at Austin’s Community College Leadership Program. “Today, there are only about 39 or 40 African American presidents of community colleges, and that is less than it was 10 years ago” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 23), he says. “And probably 35 percent to 40 percent of that group is graduates of our program” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 23). A college with diversity troubles sometimes reaches out to a minority candidate for help without giving the candidate a frank assessment of a sometimes hostile environment, adds Dr. Howard L. Simmons, chairman of Morgan State University’s department of advanced studies, leadership, and policy (Pluviose, 2006).
“Minority presidents are often asked to take over in case where they’ve had lots of difficulties. A lot of times these institutions already have problems when people go in” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24), says Simmons, a former executive director of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. “Sometimes, I don’t think they would even hire [minorities] if there were not these looming problems. And, then the faculty takes the position that the president is really in charge and they were not consulted. A lot of times the faculty members take the position, ‘If you don’t do what we want you to do, then you’re going to be out the door” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24).
Dr. Elva LeBlanc, president of two-year Galveston College, says the common faculty complaint of presidential abrasiveness is often simply the result of faculty not getting their way. “I’ve yet to serve at an institution where faculty complaints didn’t include a lack of communication. You send memoranda, you have meetings, you send e-mail, but still, that comes up” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24), LeBlanc says.
Roueche suggests that some faculty members are perhaps unwilling to embrace diversity initiatives when they come from a minority president. He says, by the way of analogy, that if the chairs of a science department and an English department both argue that writing should be included in every course, the science department will carry more weight. “In my view, a White person carrying the banner of diversity is not going to have the same kind of negative reaction that sometimes minority folks have when they’re carrying the same banner” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24), Roueche says.
However, Roueche says numerous minority community college presidents have had enormous success implementing diversity initiatives while at the same time promoting harmony with faculty despite existing racial tensions. Roueche points out that Dr. Walter G. Bumphus, outgoing president of the Louisiana Community and Technical College System, has been a champion of diversity and “is one of the most respected, honored, admired presidents in the country” (Pluviose, 2006, p. 24).
Educational Leadership
Moving into the workforce arena, research indicates that workforce leadership calls on educational leadership to produce the quality personnel in the 21st century. With an urgency not seen in decades, policy leaders concerned about America’s global competitiveness and widening income gaps within U.S. society are propelling issues of academic and workforce preparation to the forefront of the nation’s education policy debates (Olson, 2006).
Worried that current expectations and structures are ill suited to the 21st century, politicians, scholars, and business executives are pushing to ground educational standards far more closely in the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in the new economy. They are arguing for a closer connection between K-12 and postsecondary education, on the assumption that decent-paying jobs with opportunities for advancement will require at least some education beyond high school, as well as lifelong learning to adjust to a fluid labor market (Olson, 2006).
The changes such leaders are advocating could have tremendous repercussions from preschool through graduate school. On one side of the debate are those who believe that fundamental shifts in the economy, brought about largely by technology, are creating a premium for knowledge and skills. Students must be prepared to take advantage of those new opportunities they warn, or risk joining the ranks of the working poor. On the other side are economists who see a more gradual rise in skill requirements and no shortage of college-educated workers over the next decade. They question the extent to which education offers a solution to the United States’ broader economic problems. Meanwhile large disagreements remain about how best to redesign secondary and postsecondary institutions to meet the shifting demands (Olson, 2006). Educational leadership will focus on meeting the demands of America’s global academic strengths.
Educational leadership research focuses on equity and equality. Admission decisions should match the goals of individual and societal equity, and equality should drive both policy and specific decisions. However, the ideal seldom applies. Rather, admission professionals find a tension between equity and equality; the individual and larger social benefits; and in artificially-created market shortage (Caldwell, 2007).
Equality is an expectation of even-handed treatment, as discussed by Strike, Haller and Soltis, who write, “In any given circumstances, people who are the same in those respects relevant to how they are treated in those circumstances should receive the same treatment” (Caldwell, 2007, p. 16). Equality concentrates on the individual and the circumstances surrounding him or her. It does not focus on group differences, based on factors such as race, sex, social class, ethnicity, and disability. It assumes that the individual has been assimilated into the society and should not be “hampered by traditional expectations and stereotypes” (Young, 1990, p. 157). On the other hand, equity “deals with difference and takes into consideration the fact that this society has many groups in it who have not always been equal treatment and/or have not had a level field on which to play. These groups have been frequently made to feel inferior to those in the mainstream and some have even been oppressed” (Shapiro, 2001, p. 76).
Many policy decisions have negatively impacted participation of the disadvantaged in higher education of the past two decades; the shift from need-based to merit-based financial aid; a shrinking pool of financial aid; and the reduction of state support for public higher education occurring at the legislative level. Additionally institutions’ desires are often driven by financial need, raising student qualifications. The consequences, albeit unintended, of programs, such as the Hope Scholarship Program and the shift to merit-based institutional scholarships, have worked against both equality and equity. They neither provide all students the same opportunities nor an advantage to a specific group. Instead these policies have tended to reinforce the status quo and narrow the range of benefiting students able to benefit (Caldwell, 2007).
The recent decision by the Supreme Court on June 28, 2007, adds more responsibilities to educational leadership in higher education regarding enrollment procedures. With competing blocs of Justices claiming the mantle of Brown v. Board of Education, a bitterly divided Supreme Court declared Thursday that public school systems cannot seek to achieve or maintain integration through measures that take explicit account of a student’s race (Greenhouse, 2007).
Voting 5-4, the court, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, invalidated programs in Seattle and metropolitan Louisville, Kentucky, which sought to maintain school-by-school diversity by limiting transfers on the basis of race or using race as a “tie-breaker” for admission to particular schools (Greenhouse, 2007).
Both programs had been upheld by lower federal courts and were similar to plans in place in hundreds of school districts across the country. Chief Justice Roberts said such programs are “directed only to racial balance, pure and simple” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), a goal he said is forbidden by the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection (Greenhouse, 2007). “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discrimination on the basis of race” (Greenhouse, 2007, P. A13), Roberts said. His side of the debate, the chief justice said, was “more faithful to the heritage of Brown” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), the landmark 1954 decision that declared school segregation unconstitutional. “When it comes to using race to assign children to schools, history will be heard” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), he said.
The decision came on the final day of the court’s 2006-07-term, which showed an energized conservative majority in control across many areas. Though Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined his opinion on the schools case in full, the fifth member of the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy, did not. Kennedy agreed that the two plans are unconstitutional. But he was highly critical of what he called the chief justice’s “all-too-unyielding insistence that race cannot be a factor in instances when, in my view, it may be taken into account” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13).
In a separate opinion that could shape the practical implications of the decision and provide school districts with guidelines for how to create systems that can pass muster with the court, Kennedy said achieving racial diversity, “avoiding racial isolation” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), and addressing “the problem of de facto desegregation in schooling” are “compelling interests” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), that a school district could constitutionally pursue as long as it did so through programs that were sufficiently “narrowly tailored.” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13) As a matter of constitutional doctrine and practical impact, Kennedy’s opinion significantly limited the full reach of the other four justices’ embrace of a “colorblind Constitution” (Greenhouse, 2007, p. A13), under which all racially conscious government action, no matter how benign or invidious its goal, is equally suspect (Greenhouse, 2007).
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, the purpose of this article was to examine the issues of maintaining high standards in higher education and solve the diversity dilemma. Research indicated that in our democracy of equal opportunity for education to all students, we are meeting the needs of minority students that graduate from high school. Research looked at faculty members, universities presidents, and all ethnic groups in the higher education domain. Despite gains in recent years, the percentage of minority faculty still lags behind the overall population and the percentage of minority students. According to the American Council on Education, minorities account for less than 20 percent of fulltime faculty at U.S. colleges. “This is an issue that all higher education institutions face, regardless if you’re a two-year community college, a state university, a private college or a big research university like Minnesota” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8), says Dr. Robert Jones, the senior vice president for system academic administration at the University of Minnesota. “All of our institutions in one way or another is very challenged by this issue” (Pattison, 2007, p. 8). I support Dr. Jones assessment that all institutions of higher education must face the real issues and provide the educational leadership necessary to attain our goals. We must retool our efforts to meet the needs of all students. Ethical educational leadership in higher education is the answer.
References
Anonymous, (2004). Lottery scholarships in New Mexico getting more minorities to
college. Black Issues in Higher Education, 21(23), 18.
Atkinson, R.C., & Pelfrey, P.A. (2006, June). Opportunity in a democratic society: Race
and economic status in higher education. Proceedings of the American
Philosophical Society, Research Library, p.318.
Borden, V., & Brown, P. (2006, June). The top 100: Interpreting the data.
Diverse Issues in Higher Education June, 23(8), 36.
Caldwell, C., Shapiro, J.P., & Gross, S.J. (2007, Spring). Ethical leadership in higher
education admission: Equality vs. equity. Journal of College Admission, 15-19.
Retrieved on June 27, 2007, from
http://calbears.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3955/is_200704/ai_n19198047
Dervarics, C. (2005, June). Congress hears call for expanded aid to Hispanic-serving
Institutions. Black Issues in Higher Education, 22(10), 6.
Dervarics, C. (2005, July). Lawmakers propose aid for college serving Asian Americans.
Black Issues in Higher Education, 22(11), 6.
Greenhouse, L. (2007, June 29). Ruling curbs use of race by schools. Houston Chronicle,
pp. A1, A13.
Olson, L. (2006, March). Economic trends fuel push to retool schooling. Education Week,
25(28), 1.
Pattison, K. (2007, May). Minority scholars share strategies at ‘Keeping Our Faculties’
conference. Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 24(6), 8.
Pluviose, D. (2006, August). Hung out to dry, Diverse Issues in Higher Education.
23(14), 23.
Roach, R. (2005, July). Affirmative action fallout: Graduate level programs once aimed
at minorities. Black Issues in Higher Education, 22(11), 24.
Shapiro, J.P. & Stefkovich, J.A. (2001). Ethical leadership and decision making in
education: Applying theoretical perspective to complex dilemmas (2nd ed.).
Mahwah: Lawerence Eribaum Associates.
Strike, K.A., Haller, E.J., & Soltis, J.F. (1988). The ethics of school administration (2nd
ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Young, I.M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Press.
Formatted by Dr. Mary Alice Kritsonis, National Research and Manuscript Preparation Editor, National FORUM Journals, Houston, Texas. www.nationalforum.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)