The role of institute director

I’ve been thinking carefully about the role of institute director as I commence my 12th academic year at the head of Krasnow.  It seems to me that just as important as the internal role–which I liken to serving as cheerleader-in-chief, is the external role, which involves a complex set of cultivation, diplomatic and social sensitivity skills that for me, are constantly evolving.

One aspect of this external role involves the complex interactions with other deans and directors at the University, each doing their best to serve their own unit’s interest, but at the same time, also aware of the overall strategic vision for George Mason as it moves forward. The key point is that from my standpoint as institute director, it’s incumbent upon me to consciously keep the larger University interest in mind and then to figure out how to align the Institute’s interests with the University. That doesn’t mean compromising the central scientific mission of the Institute. Rather, it means understanding that it doesn’t work to simply say no when that answer would make the most sense if we existed in a stand-alone context (as many of our sister institutes in fact do).

So how to get to yes? That’s the central external skill actually. To get to yes, it’s not enough to simply rejigger a proposition to be obviously win-win–that ignores political and emotional considerations. Sometimes, it takes simply the patience to wait things out, to patience to allow individuals to gain more knowledge, the patience to understand that even when a counterparty indicates no,  they actually are saying yes.

Annual Planning Conference–George Mason

Just got back from our annual planning conference–this year held on campus at the brand new Mason Inn and Conference Center (which we’ll be using for our executive short courses next summer). Take away message: the University is in good shape. I found my colleagues to be enthused and full of energy about the new academic year. There is a strong consensus for combining the strengths of a major research university with an institution dedicated to excellent teaching, and the notion of students as scholars, not just learners, as a way to differentiate ourselves going forward.

And the construction keeps on rolling

Krasnow is of course in the process of growing. Here’s the picture from late last week on the new wing. We’ll add a bunch of new labs and offices, which of course will allow us to expand our research and teaching. When we take delivery, the Institute’s footprint will reach an impressive 60,000 square feet. And we’ll still have satellite operations across the Mason campus which we’ll hope to bring under one roof with a Phase III project on the other end of the facility–sometime in 2014.

Andrew Sullivan on TED

I find myself disagreeing with Andrew on much of what he writes about these days, but I think he and others on to something about the future of higher education in his blog post here. In essence, TED represents the future of higher ed.  Along with MIT’s Open Course Ware. But this can’t be all of it. You can’t acquire a deep knowledge of quantum mechanics from a few “carefully curated” lectures–even if those are given by geniuses.

Stanley Fish on Plagiarism

I’m not usually an avid reader of Stanley Fish’s columns in the New York Times, but this one on academic plagiarism really hits the mark for me.

Money quote:

And if there should emerge  a powerful philosophical argument saying there’s no such thing as originality, its emergence needn’t alter  or even bother for a second a practice that can only get started if  originality is assumed as a baseline. It may be (to offer another example), as I have argued elsewhere, that there’s no such thing as free speech, but if you want to have a free speech regime because you believe that it is essential to the maintenance of democracy, just forget what Stanley Fish said — after all it’s just a theoretical argument — and get down to it as lawyers and judges in fact do all the time without the benefit or hindrance of any metaphysical rap.  Everyday disciplinary practices do not rest on a foundation of philosophy or theory; they rest on a foundation of themselves;  no theory or philosophy can either prop them up or topple them. As long as the practice is ongoing and flourishing its conventions will command respect and allegiance and flouting them will have negative consequences.