This page is best viewed by expanding your viewer to the full size of your screen.
The fundamental difficulty of establishing an innovation is that all problems of survival must be solved simultaneously. "The operation was a great success, but the patient died." The right question to ask about what to do next depends both on the stage of development of an innovation and also on every constituency with which it comes in contact. We conclude with a grid of representative questions that may be asked at each stage of development of an innovation with respect to each constituency in the college or university. These questions are illustrative only: to attempt to be comprehensive would be both fraudulent and boring. We have omitted from the column of constituencies such interested outside parties as trustees, regents, legislators, and governors. The omission results mostly from simple ignorance on our part but also from the pathetic belief that a well-developed innovation with proven results and proper backing will be accepted, even paid for, by reasonable men.
| Stage:
People: |
Invention | Establishing | Financing | Evaluation | Dissemination | Survival | |||
| Inventor-driver | Can process of invention be encouraged by training, atmosphere, insight, or policy? | What personal and political qualities help release the "faculty brakes"? | Is national stature and "foundation charisma" required in an innovator? | Does the innovator plan for evaluation or resent it? | By this time is the innovator turning his attention to other projects? | ||||
| Participating faculty |
By what means can the initial idea be modified and expressed to fit the local situation and appeal to key administrators and faculty and the "thoughtful middle" of the community? | What professional risks are involved in participating in an unproved educational enterprise? | What fraction of faculty time is spent writing proposals? | Is evaluation built into the program from the beginning, including funds for evaluation? What is the process of internal revision based on trial? Must new programs be judged by new criteria? | How important is missionary work within the discipline? | Are participants lastingly changed by the experience? Is the innovation seen as serving a professional or life-style goal? What new structure or vested interest can continue to reward participation? Do faculty or students inside or outside the program see it as "a cheap way to get a degree"? | |||
| Participating staff |
Is new stafff required? Who pays? What is the long-term commitment of the institution to them? | Who does the staff work in schools where there is less supporting staff? | |||||||
| Participating students |
Are they vulnerable (requirements, grades, prerequisites)? Where do they get advice? | Is fellowship money available (if it is a graduate program)? | How important is informal conversation among students in encouraging new applicants and in spreading innovation to other schools? | ||||||
| Students as a whole |
What student demands or assumed needs shape the new program? | Are participating students seen as "sharp guys" or "odd-balls"? | Does the student body offer special opportunites to funding agency (poor, blacks, engineers, pre-med)? | How can faculty organize a coherent review of an innovation? How can students be involved? Does the administration stimulate review and execute judgment? Who should terminate an innovation that has failed? | |||||
| Faculty as a whole |
Are there academic rewards for academic inventiveness? | What is the "characteristic time" for faculty review and acceptance? | Does the new program compete with departmental funding? | How can innovations be spread to regular teaching? | |||||
| Administration | Is invention encouraged? | Is administrative interest of help in obtaining faculty approval of new program? | Can inside seed money be found? | Why are distinctive school styles not emulated (Antioch, Bennington, Sarah Lawrence, St. John's)? | |||||
| Administrative services |
How are innovative plans shaped by the mechanics of grades, schedules, credit, space needs, etc.? | Are there extra burdens due to the new program? Does this create resistance? | Can successful experiments be funded permanently? | How is the cost-effectiveness of an innovation to be judged and communicated? | |||||
| Other colleges and universities |
Can an "innovative consortium" straddle institutions? | Must experiment be organized first in one location? | How can one avoid the "not-invented-here" syndrome? Can a funding agency act as dissemination agent? What happens when the innovation money runs out? Do fads in financing threaten a successful innovation? | ||||||
| Funding agencies |
Can (and should) funding agencies initiate reform? | How important is outside seed money? | |||||||
Go to [next section] or [title page]
David A. Smith <das@math.duke.edu>Last modified: July 7, 1997