There's nothing particularly wrong with this article but I have to admit rolling my eyes a bit about the idea of (Our Brave) leaders advancing a set of 'Grand Challenges' that we (the peons) will meet though a 'digital transformation'. The challenges are almost always business objectives - that's why learning is described as 'student success' and why research and discovery is described as 'reputation and relevance'. And of course the institution's financial health and responses to competition (including the heathen 'alternative credentials') round out the rest. I think the framing represents a misunderstanding of the idea of grad challenges or leadership in general - it's not the health and advancement of the institution that motivates people, it's the advancement of whatever it is the institution was created to address in the first place. That's why my grand challenge ("each person is able to rise to his or her fullest potential without social or financial encumbrance, where they may express themselves fully and without reservation") makes so much sense for me, and cannot even be imagined by institutional administrators (who these days are debating killing students).
Today: 0 Total: 1103 [Direct link] [Share]
