Harvard School of Public Health | Panel 4: Public Health Education Unbound - Transforming the Field
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Harvard School of Public Health | Panel 4: Public Health Education Unbound - Transforming the Field PRESENTER 1: For purposes of time, I know some are still in the hallway, but we're going to head into our capstone fourth panel, moderated by Donna Peterson. Donna, take it away. DONNA J Thank you. Friends, thank you. Thank you for hanging in there with us. It's been a long day but I think a fruitful PETERSON: day and a rich day, with some fabulous, fabulous discussions and fabulous points raised. We have the task as your closing panel of perhaps addressing some things that haven't been raised yet, perhaps pulling together some of the threats that have been identified, but ideally, and most importantly, thinking about the future and what all of this might mean for us as we go forward. I will say, in all the discussion of C's, we've had lots of wonderful C words, I haven't heard some that are very important to me, one being chocolate, one being Cabernet, and one being Coltrane. So I am looking forward to the reception and I hope there's all of those things. So get your clarinet, your saxophone, because we're looking to have some fun and have that party that we heard about earlier that we never did hear about the parties. But we have a very distinguished panel with us as our closing panel, delighted to present to you two distinguished leaders, two provosts. We have the provost from Harvard, Dr. Alan Garber down there on my far right. We have the provost from MIT Dr. Chris Kaiser, is with us. And I think that's only fitting, as we began the morning hearing about the historic partnership of 1913 between Harvard and MIT. So we thank you both for being with us. We also have with us from Harvard's Institute for Global Studies, Sue Goldie is here with us from Harvard. They didn't put the slide up. So I'm trying to remember who these people are. Everybody else had a slide. Chocolate-- lots of chocolate. Anita Berlin joins us from London. I don't have my glasses on. This is a shorter session. That's good. Anita Berlin, Alan Garber, Sue Goldie, Chris Kaiser, and the famous Donna Peterson, moderating. So we have a slightly shorter session. We're going to try to have more of a conversation up here. To stimulate you to join us in conversation, we're going to try to open it for questions a little earlier. So this is your last shot to ask those questions. Commentary is reserved for the reception. Ask your questions of our wonderful panel. So we've heard, as you know, those of you who have been with us all day, very, very stimulating ideas about where higher education is going and what it means for education in this particular health profession, that being public health. And we've heard about how much of what we've been doing perhaps isn't serving us well, how the idea of being bound to semesters and credits and classrooms might not be the model, particularly given the technology affords us all kinds of opportunities to do things in different ways. We've heard about our faculty perhaps not being skilled in the ways that they need to be 21st century facilitators of learning and what might that mean for us. We've learned that we're perhaps not engaging in sufficient research on pedagogical techniques, nor evaluation of those pedagogical techniques to figure out if we are in fact impacting the field of public health. So all of these things really beg the question, where is the university of the future? What will it look like? How will it enable the kind of lifelong learning that we've talked about? How will it enable us to rethink education, particularly in the profession of public health, where we know-- we've identified this several times today-- we can't possibly learn everything we need to know over an entire career in a one and 1/2 half or two year program. That's not realistic. So how will universities function in the future? How will they help us as public health professionals continue to create the public health professionals for the future? So I'll start with our provosts to tell us what they see the university of the future looking like, being like. What will it feel like? Start with you, Professor Garber. ALAN M. Well, I think one of the most interesting questions that we're going to face is whether the university is a, place or GARBER: is it a URL? And actually, Harvard School of Public Health is leading the way. And I just want to take a moment to congratulate Julio and his colleagues on this 100th anniversary. And I also want to say that the School of Public Health is really leading the way and trying to address this very question of what will the university of the future look like. Those of you who know about edX know that edX is an organization that was created by Harvard and MIT to basically promote online education. And you may think that I would believe that the future of higher education is online, I think that's a little bit like saying the future of higher education involves books. It's going to be a set of tools that we will probably adopt. The interesting question to me is not whether it will displace residential education but how it will be used. And let me say that when we thought about creating edX and Harvard X, the Harvard component, we said that there were three goals. One was to increase access to the best courses, to everybody in the world. One was to improve teaching on our own campuses. The third was to promote research into how people learn, because we saw this just as a tremendous opportunity to rethink what we do and to actually know whether we're making a difference with the educational innovations. Now, having said that, what really excited us was something that we heard from various faculty, including faculty at MIT who had had their courses on OpenCourseWare, which was this extensive MIT imitative that Chris could tell us all about, where courses were put online. They were not curated the way that edX courses are curated. But sometimes it would be video, sometimes it might just syllabi. People put varying amounts of work into it. But one of the curious things that some of the MIT faculty said was, when we put the courses online, actually our teaching really improved. It got much better. Now, part of this was, the whole world could see their teaching. Part of this was, their colleagues could see their teaching. And so they really had to up their game. And I'll be quite honest with you. We saw this as a way to start a new conversation about what teaching can and should be on our campuses, because I think that the university of the future is still going to be a physical place. And it's still going to be a place where a lot of the learning comes from human interaction. There's a fair bit of virtual interaction that can be quite meaningful. But for the foreseeable future, the virtual interaction is not going to produce the results that in-person interaction produces. Now, having said that, I believe that strongly it needs to be tested. And we are very much committed to research. I want to just say one other thing, that in my role as provost, I've decided to go around different parts of the university to see various forms of pedagogy that I hadn't been too familiar with. When I was a Stanford, I taught in the business school for many years. But actually, I did not teach by the case method. I taught a course on economic evaluation of health care. And it was sort of a hybrid between a typical business school course and a typical lecture course in university, although it was highly interactive. I want to see a Harvard business school case method course. And Harvard Business School invented the case method as it's used in business schools. And it was really quite edifying to see how the teaching worked. I want to see a Harvard Law School case method teaching course. Harvard Law School introduced the case method, period, predating the business school. I want to see a design studio critique session for a studio course at the Graduate School of Design. Each form of teaching-- and I've seen many conventional lectures and seminars and so on-- and each form of teaching is distinct. And what I realized is that although this have largely evolved to meet the needs of whatever the professional school is or the undergraduates, there are actually ways that these forms of pedagogy could be improved by learning from what the others are doing. And I could go on and on about how this works. And one of my goals for Harvard, and I suspect this is going to happen naturally everywhere, is that we will not only use online tools to improve teaching, but actually seeing how others in our own universities teach, we'll start to question how we're teaching and adopt some of the most promising methods that are used by others.