Howard Gardner Visits Bloomsburg

by Joan Miller

I first learned about the GoodWork Project five years ago. Since then I have collaborated with researchers in the nursing profession to learn about the meaning of good work among nurses in local, regional, and international settings. I have integrated the theory of good work in courses across disciplines at Bloomsburg University, Bloomsburg, PA.

Recently, Dr. Howard Gardner delivered the Provost Lecture at Bloomsburg University to an audience of over 1500 faculty and students. Dr. Gardner provided an overview of the theory of multiple intelligences. He transitioned seamlessly into the theory of good work. Following the lecture students approached Dr. Gardner to ask questions about both theories. Students grasped the theory of multiple intelligences and the need for both individualized and pluralized teaching. They understand that individuals have intelligences that cannot be measured solely by psychometric tests. However, they struggled with the notion of what it takes to become the kind of people we want to be and to build the society in which we want to live.

At breakfast the following morning, conversation with students turned to a discussion of what it means to falsify a resume. One student stated she would want to present herself just as she is, with enthusiasm for her profession and no falsification. She wants to be accepted for the person she is. Another student stated she would not be able to ‘put her head on the pillow’ at the end of the day if she falsified a resume. However, she is concerned about how hard it is to adhere to high ideals when others in the work place do not. She stated, “At the end of the day, a young person can return home and even there witness compromised work and values. What is a young person to do?” This student seemed desperate for a role model.

How are we preparing the next generation? Have we abandoned the role of the trusted role model? Have we failed as educators or is there hope for a better future among those committed to preparing the next generation of professionals to assume roles as responsible citizens? What does it take?

Howard Gardner’s Provost Lecture

Educating for Today and Tomorrow

by Lynn Barendsen

Last week, along with several colleagues from Project Zero, I participated in a conference in Washington DC. Our hosts were CASIE (Center for the Advancement and Study of International Education) and WIS (the Washington International School). Project Zero’s first “off site” conference! Very exciting for all of us, and a great opportunity to learn from passionate, creative teachers and researchers. I thought I’d share a sampling of thoughts that are still lingering with me:

Our first day was spent at the National Gallery of Art – a treat! Considering the idea of the museum, Shari Tishman asked us to consider the various “frames” we bring to our experiences. She referred to studies which demonstrate that most of us place a great deal of trust in our museums. Thinking through my goodwork “frame,” I wondered: what are the responsibilities that go along with this trust?

Our second day began with a plenary in which David Perkins talked about the Languages of War and Peace. Guiding us through how meaning is made, using phrases such as “regrettable necessity” or “zealous allegiance,” David enriched our understanding of what global competence means in the 21st century. As global citizens, whether or not we may agree with the actions of our nation’s leaders, we are all complicit in the societies to which we belong. A question Wendy and I have been thinking about for years, but one that seems to be getting increasingly complex: what does it mean to be a responsible global citizen?

Howard Gardner spoke about Five Minds for the Future on the final day of the conference. I always learn something when I listen to Howard, and this day was no exception. But what I found most moving was his response to a question posed by a participant. Attending the conference as a parent, not an educator, a woman asked how she might encourage new ideas in her school system. She is apparently up against a difficult school board, undoubtedly facing budget cuts, and feeling quite powerless. He offered encouragement, pointed to some examples of incredible “boutique” approaches (e.g. Reggio Emilia), and then pointed to what is really most important in our education system. We should not be focusing solely on test scores, or even on intelligence or knowledge. Education should be about teaching young people to be the kinds of human beings we want them to be.

Just a few of many ideas I’ll continue to mull over as Thanksgiving approaches.

Professional Ethics and Social Media-Medicine and Religion

by Margot Locker

Last week we posted the first in our two part series on Project Zero’s Carrie James’ experience at SMU’s “Conference of the Professions.”  After John Browning spoke about ethics and the law, Dr. Dan McCoy, a dermatologist, spoke about ethical dilemmas and challenges surfacing in medicine related to the internet.

He began by explaining how the internet allows patients to research their ailments and creates communities around shared experiences with medical conditions.  While these forums can be positive places for patients to relate, provide advice, and share stories, they can also be a source of misinformation for many. Dr. McCoy further detailed that there is concern across the field because it is difficult to police these spaces.

He also cited the tensions in online doctor-patient relationships, as they lack the trust and authenticity which are often products of face to face interactions. A solid relationship between doctor and patient is key to good medicine. While “telemedicine” should not necessarily cease to exist, the interactions online should be handled with care.

At the closing of his talk, Dr. McCoy cited a case in his life where a young nurse posted a photo of medical nature online that was deemed inappropriate and was consequently fired.  She was later reinstated as the picture was not identified or tagged. Cases like these raise the questions of doctor patient confidentiality and the caution medical professionals need to take in their online and social media activity.

After hearing Dr. McCoy speak, several conference participants offered their experiences with ethical uses of the internet in medicine. One participant wondered if it is ethical to find information out about a patient online in order to better treat them (such as a picture of a patient smoking). Another participant in the conference noted that psychiatric residents are more commonly “googling” patients in order to gather more information about their histories, which in turn changes the nature of their clinical encounter and how they may treat the patient. Should this practice be banned? Is it helpful or harmful in deciding on a course of treatment?

After Dr. McCoy finished speaking, the last member of the panel, Pastor Dusty Craig, shared his thoughts on the place of the internet in religion. He feels that social media allows people to get to know their spiritual leader in a different environment.  These media also provide forums for members of religious communities to share their perspectives on their faith and, in so doing, helps push against the notion that the leader is the only person who can speak about the meaning of the faith He pointed out that the mission of the church is to spread the word and get the message to the “un-churched, de-churched, and anti-church population,” and social media is an ideal means to do this.  Pastor Craig ended by acknowledging that with all the benefits of the internet, policies are still necessary to regulate use within the church. His church, for instance, has rules on what staff can post online, especially as they “friend” and reach out virtually to many people in order to get them interested in the church.

Offering these diverse perspectives about the internet in their places of work, this panel revealed many common challenges facing the professions when it comes to internet usage and social media. Many questions come to mind in thinking about these issues: What privacy issues do we face in light of the internet? How is the relationship between doctor/patient, lawyer/client, and pastor/ practioner altered due to online activity? How can social media be ethically managed? How are professions adapting professional codes, or creating new ones, to address new issues raised in new media environments?

Professional Ethics and Social Media-The Law

by Margot Locker

Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr and other forms of social media are rapidly becoming a vital form of communication worldwide. This trend impacts not only how people share information informally, but also has implications for the professions. In the world of law, social media and online activity are bringing up new issues of ethics and integrity. This topic was discussed at SMU’s “Professional Ethics and Social Media: Like?” conference, held last week in Dallas. Project Zero Research Director Carrie James was invited to give the keynote address at the conference, discussing topics including the moral and ethical dimensions of digital life and what can we do in education and training of young professionals to prepare them to handle social media ethically.

Following her address, there was a panel discussion including a physician, a lawyer, and a pastor. Each member of the panel had experienced or observed ethical dilemmas and challenges in their work related to online life, and shared their insights on their choices and thoughts when confronting these issues. In this blog series, we will share some insights from these professionals..

John Browning, a lawyer and author of The Lawyers Guide to Social Networking, opened the panel with his view that the law is currently unable to keep pace with innovations in technology.  He also suggested that new media create both opportunities and challenges. For example, the internet allows clients to research their rights and legal methods, but also serves to complicate the position of jurors.  Many cases nationwide have emerged in which jurors have violated the integrity of the law with online conduct: jurors looking up information online pertaining to the case, and sometimes referencing the wrong state for laws, thus leading to mistrials; jurors using Facebook to ask friends to respond to a poll as to how they should vote on the case. As a result, Browning explained, new guidelines have been put in place for jurors about their online conduct.

Browning also raised issues of misuse of social media tools and the legal questions that have followed.  As usage of Twitter, Facebook, and blogs have become more prevalent means of communicating legal questions have been raised about whether one can expect privacy for one’s online content. For instance, the question of whether status updates on social media accounts could be used as admissible evidence in cases where employees are claiming sickness, depression, or other ailments while their updates suggest otherwise has been raised in recent court cases.

Case by case, our legal notions of privacy and free speech are being confronted by the new realities presented as people share more of their lives online. Browning believes that there is a need for social media policies in companies, firms, and organizations to guide employees’ online conduct. On the other hand, many are wary of enforcing policies governing online activity as they could easily become a form of censorship and viewed as prohibition of free speech for employees.

The key questions that emerge:  Do we need a new set of rules to guide our behavior online? Do we need to have a new set of rules for how online evidence is treated? Should the law treat content posted by minors differently – just as criminal transgressions by youth are?

What are your reactions and thoughts on the issues?

Stay tuned for a video from the conference in the next few weeks!

The Rise and Fall of the University Emperor

by Howard Gardner

This piece is an excerpt from an On Leadership roundtable on higher education and the 21st-century leadership challenge for university presidents.

As the story goes, when James Conant of Harvard went to visit Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the White House, the wags in Cambridge said “the president is in Washington, visiting Mr. Roosevelt.”

Yet long gone are the days when university presidents—the likes of Abbott Lawrence Lowell of Harvard or Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia—reigned supreme. Perhaps it is not as dire as you’d think listening to the current wags’ quip: “The president of the college is someone who lives in a big house and begs.” But college and university presidents are indeed running huge multi-million-dollar or multi-billion-dollar operations and are responsible to numerous constituencies, whose interests are often diametrically opposed to one another.

On top of that, we live in a decidedly non-heroic time (witness the current political mess in Washington and most state capitals). Against this background, the call for university presidents, individually or corporately, to get their act together to solve the financial problems, make students accountable and speak out bravely on the issues of the day seems unrealistic.

And yet it is equally apparent that the current situation, with roughly 4,000 institutions of higher learning in the United States, is untenable. The apparent lure and efficacy of online education will inevitably lead to a thinning of the ranks. And this survival of the fittest will play out based in part on financial resources (Princeton is unlikely to go out of business), in part on distinctive programs (there may always be a place for quirky offerings, à la St. John’s great books curriculum), and in part on outstanding athletic or artistic programs.

Having sketched a depressing picture, let me offer a few positive suggestions.

Yes, university presidents who remain at the helm for several years, and who manage to build up a reservoir of good will, can make and consolidate sensible changes in curricula, pricing, scheduling and faculty recruitment. And universities that strive to align the interests of the various constituencies can forge ahead in a promising direction.

This piece was originally published in full in The Washington Post.