"Probably more worthless nonsense is written about education than about any other subject except religion."1 Therefore when talking about education (or religion) be brief. There is nothing in what you say, the reader can absorb nothing with economy of effort. If you are profound, the perceptive reader will recognize germinating truth and transplant it to his own experience. A sower went forth to sow....He who has ears to hear, let him hear!
Here are two checklists: (1) difficulties encountered by education innovations and (2) tactics that faculty (and in some cases administrators) may use to aid establishment, survival, and dissemination of education change in the face of difficulties. Neither list is sufficient alone: enumerating difficulties can lead to impotence and cynicism; tactics by themselves do not aid in recognizing the particular human, professional, and institutional arena in which the game is played out.
We assume in this article that the innovation you are pushing is worthy of adoption and survival, so that objections to it are largely defensive. Most changes, in fact, are not worthy; one success in five experiments is a good long-term survival rate for education changes. We are as perplexed as everybody else about how to evaluate innovations in order to select those that deserve to live. Most existing methods of evaluation enforce the presumptions of the status quo. ("How well do students do on the old examinations?"), or assume the result, or ignore the social context, or embody a transient fad, or serve as a vehicle for the world view of the critic. For the present we struggle along with whatever evaluation methods we can find while working hard (as many others are doing) on further and better ways to build effective evaluation into education experiments. At present we do now know enough to attempt a (third) checklist in this crucial area.
The assumption here that the proposed innovation is a good one misrepresents the actual process of invention and adoption, in which an initial bright idea is progressively developed and modified as it spreads from the originator through adjacent sympathetic groups into the world of indifference and opposition. At every stage both hostility and sympathetic attention cause continuous metamorphosis in the form of the innovation and in the justification for its adoption and expansion. Thus, in practice, each criticism of a proposed program must be looked at carefully to see in what way the substance may be used to improve the proposal or the method of presenting it. Do not wait for an innovation expert to tell you want to do--there aren't any--but make sure people you regard as reasonable agree that you have a good thing.
The items on these checklists summarize the experience of numerous people who have worked on education reform at MIT and at other institutions. Our collective experience with state-supported universities is limited, so that such difficulties as line-item budgeting (which can abort change through the rigidities of administration review and legislative approval) will not appear. We welcome additions to the lists that can redress the imbalance.
It will be obvious that the authors of this piece are committed to working within institutions to change them. None of the suggested tactics are designed to destroy or circumvent due process, although many do encourage a reinterpretation of which process owns our allegiance. The goal is to skew the system toward greater humanity, quality, efficiency, and style.
What use can one make of these lists? As in the case of summary statements in religion, uncritical adoption can be more dangerous than rejection. Inventing and installing an innovation is like carrying a double bed mattress up a narrow staircase. In the midst of our own struggles we have often been helped by an outsider who said, in effect, "Have you thought about this?". The new idea or insight has sometimes served to unblock the way by giving us a new handle on the mattress or a wider stairway. These items on these lists are presented to you for a similar purpose: you may recognize a universal obstacle in the particular local difficulty you face or find a range of tactics suitable to your situation.
So, assuming that a worthy innovation exists, what narrow turnings keep it blocked and how may they be navigated?
Go to [next section] or [title page]
David A. Smith <das@math.duke.edu>Last modified: July 3, 1997