Our Polytechnic Identity: 20th vs. 21st Century
The title of our WASC self-study, "Our Polytechnic Identity in the 21st Century," begs the question: Is there a difference between what Cal Poly might have been in the 20th century and what it might become in the future?
The self-study has as its basic hypothesis a decisive yes, given the profound transformation that has been taking place in higher education and that continues to take place in the world around us. I don't think it is too much to say that we have been experiencing a paradigm shift in the way universities are expected to operate, one expressed by the deceptively simple binary opposition between "teaching" and "learning."
As an exercise in imagining all the ways in which this contention might be meaningful, I have been gathering other oppositions to help explain the ways the 21st-century polytechnic might differ from its antecedent. The result is the 20/21 document, which is organized under a few key headings:
- Teaching vs. learning
- Compliance vs. self-study
- Monoculture vs. diversity
- Earning a degree vs. becoming a life-long learner
- Isolation vs. integration
It has been suggested that these distinctions are not particular to polytechnic institutions and that the desirable attributes of this century have their origins in the last. I would respond that the uppermost heading, the über opposition, is the very distinction between the 20th- and the 21st-century polytechnic; under that heading we should find issues that go to the heart of our own institutional transformation.
I would also respond that life does not present itself in neat, 100-year chunks, but we often find it useful to think in those terms. The 20/21 document helps us think about something as complex as a whole institution. In one form or another, the self-study needs to make the argument that Cal Poly is a university in transit; it is no longer the institution on the left side of the document, but it is not yet the institution on the right.
That said, the 20/21 document is not in any sense a definitive statement. It is a work in progress that has been aided and abetted by various members of the campus community. Any individual opposition is debatable and subject to a better formulation. I invite you to help join the debate.
-Bruno Giberti, Professor, Architecture; Chair, WASC Self-Study Process
Help imagine the future of Cal Poly by making your own contribution to the document. Either email your comments or additions or download a Microsoft Word version of the 20/21 document, make changes, and send them to wasc@calpoly.edu.
| 20th Century Polytechnic (What We Were) |
21st Century Polytechnic (What We Aspire to Be) |
|---|---|
| Senior project | Culminating experience |
| Learn-by-doing (stuff) | Learn-by-doing (projects) |
| Teacher | Teacher-scholar |
| Research | Scholarship |
| Pragmatic | Pragmatic and intellectual |
| Practice | Theory and practice |
| Undergraduate education | Undergraduate and graduate education |
| Polytechnic | Polytechnic and comprehensive |
| Exclusive identity | Inclusive identity |
| Three polytechnic colleges | All colleges contribute to our polytechnic identity |
| Students are responsible for student success | Everyone is responsible for student success |
| Analog | Digital |
| State-supported | State-assisted |
| Bureaucratic | Entrepreneurial |
| Teaching (What We Were) | Learning (What We Aspire to Be) |
|---|---|
| Input | Output |
| Passive | Active |
| Filling the vessel | Kindling the fire (Plutarch) |
| Faculty as experts | Faculty as expert learners |
| Course content | Learning objectives |
| Information transfer | Learning to learn |
| Good intentions | Demonstrable results |
| Static model of knowledge | Dynamic model of knowledge |
| Don't need to know | Need to know |
| Information | Knowledge |
| Library as repository | Library as learning center |
| Authorities | Facilitators |
| Compliance (What We Were) | Self-Study (What We Aspire to Be) |
|---|---|
| Input | Output |
| Conviction | Evidence |
| Meeting minimum standards | Achieving excellence |
| Periodic assessment | Continuous improvement |
| Unaccountable | Accountable to students, colleagues, public |
| Externally driven | Internally driven |
| No ownership | Ownership |
| CSU peers | Polytechnic peers |
| We have to | We want to |
| Complacency | Curiosity |
| We don't know our students very well | We know our students |
| Unsustainable | Sustainable |
| Monoculture (What We Were) | Diversity (What We Aspire to Be) |
|---|---|
| Exclusive | Inclusive |
| One kind of intelligence | Multiple intelligences |
| Male ways of knowing/working/learning | Male and female ways of knowing/working/learning |
| Disciplinary knowledge | Interdisciplinary knowledge |
| Earning a Degree (What We Were) | Becoming a Lifelong Learner (What We Aspire to Be) |
|---|---|
| Traditional students | Traditional and non-traditional students |
| Continuing Ed as an auxiliary | Continuing Ed as a college |
| Isolation (What We Were) | Integration (What We Aspire to Be) |
|---|---|
| Local focus | Global competence |
| Inward-looking | Outward-looking |
| Passive relationship to world | Active relationship to world |
| Compartmentalized education | Integrated education |
| Flow chart | Matrix |
| GE vs. major | GE and major |
| Curricular | Curricular and co-curricular |
| Academic affairs | Academic and student affairs |
| Silo-bound | Silo-busting |
| Stationary skills | Transferable skills |
| Individual | Collective |
| Competitive | Collaborative |
| Disciplinary knowledge | Interdisciplinary knowledge |
| A community unto itself | Part of the larger community |
| Ivory tower | Engaged institution |
| Education as an individual initiative | Education as a common project |