Keith Acheson
From IAE-Pedia
Contents |
Introduction to Keith Acheson
- "It is better to ask for forgiveness than to beg for permission." (Keith Acheson's motto. Source unknown.)
General Background Information
B.S. (1948) and M.S. (1951) Lewis and Clark. D.Ed, (1964) Stanford. Joined the University of Oregon faculty in 1967 and is now a professor emeritus.
History of Computer in Education Activities
Develop a relatively detailed picture of the Pioneer's pioneering work over the years.
Some of his major achievements:
- Pioneering work in use of VCR in research at Stanford. Used one of the first VCRs in his doctoral dissertation work on clinical supervision of teachers.
- Teamed with David Moursund in starting the doctorate program in computers in education at the University of Oregon.
- Started University of Oregon College of Education graduate programs in Canada.
Up Close and Personal
Personal stories about the Pioneer. These can be contributed by many different authors. A possible format for an entry is:
Story or Comment from (name of contributor #1)
Story or Comment from (name of contributor #2)
Etc.
Autobiographic Insights
Here, we want to capture one or both of the following:
New
This is a "light hearted" email message sent by Keith Acheson to Dave Moursund on 7/2/07.
A number of colleagues from the mid-1960s at the UO College of Ed meet for lunch weekly (sometimes weakly) at an "uptown" pizza place. The topics of discussion typically range from current events to whomever’s current concern can capture the interest of the group. The discussants can be given names (chosen at random) e.g., Harry, Bob, Dave, Dick, Ray, Knute, Keith, Bill, and sometimes Henry, Chet, Clarence, or Mark. We have special interests that include Anthropology in Ed, Brain Research in Ed, Computers in Ed, Psychological Research in Ed, Science in Ed, Clinical Supervision (and Clinical Depression) in Ed, Mathematics and Administration in Ed. and other, more esoteric concerns about Ed.
One day’s dominant topic spun around computers and intelligence, thus capturing several of our interests and, perhaps, capabilities. For some of us, computers are "electric typewriters," and the Internet is a substitute for prowling the stacks at UO, Stanford, Berkeley, or even Harvard. For others, a computer provides a sophisticated apparatus for doing complex statistical analyses of important events such as horse races. Some of us feel that computers should have a handle to crank, as did the telephones, automobiles, and phonographs we recall from childhood.
One consistent concern is a current emphasis on raising funds for new buildings versus finding and funding new professors to fill roles as course instructors and advisors to doctoral and masters students. We see, at UO and other universities within our personal experience, a shifting of emphasis from tenure-track appointments to the employment of "adjuncts." My personal experience as an "adjunct professor" included a short sabbatical from UO to SFU in BC where the photographer for a faculty card asked, "What the hell is an adjunct professor?" My answer was, "I don’t know, but I are one."
During that leave from UO, I returned for meetings of the faculty senate to which I had been elected. My proposal was for the UO to become more active in the Pacific Rim, based on personal experience in Guam and Samoa, and with advisees from South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, British Columbia, Yukon, Mexico, Central America, and South America. The proposal was eventually adopted, despite protestations from professors who felt we should continue to pursue our European heritage, or avoid being overrun by Asians. Following that personal triumph, I talked with the University President (Paul Olum) at our local airport. He had attended the senate meeting that approved my proposal. I hastened to say that I had not wanted to imply that we had no activity in that region. He said he understood that and added that the Pacific was "in our backyard."
Further conversation with the President included my appreciation of the Provost, with whom I had signed an agreement to work part-time for three years upon retirement. The Provost had once called me about a master’s degree program in Canada (that I had started). I had asked, "Is it good news or bad news?" He answered, "Very good." So I gave him the information he needed. When I signed the retirement agreement, he said he was looking forward to doing so also, soon. My retirement was hastened by a non-fatal heart attack. His attack was fatal and occurred before he could retire.
What the President told me about the Provost was that "he was one of those who expected to be a factory worker following military service in WWII, but found out in the service that he was smart and, therefore, became an academic thereafter."
I met with a recent Provost to express the concern of the pizza parlor professors and found agreement about the problem. We did not reach a conclusion about the solution, but did identify one possibility, i.e., budget priorities. The UO College of Ed gets high ratings in national magazine surveys. An important factor in those ratings is the ratio of grant dollars to the number of professors. The College has been very successful at increasing the former and decreasing the latter. Recently, some of the latter persons have been departing and taking along former prizes (or the ability to get them). Perhaps it is time to consider the ratio between the number of advisees in graduate programs and the number of qualified advisors.
Within our group I recall attending a party to celebrate the successful completion of one member’s 50th doctoral advisee. That member [Bob] scheduled an hour per week for each advisee and ultimately had 66 successful completions. I also recall a problem with a national accrediting agency (NCATE) that noted a professor [Keith] with more than 50 master’s degree advisees. Are these ratios rational determinants of quality? Perhaps there are other ways to judge successful programs. The criteria seem quite clear for athletic departments. Traditional academic areas have prizes that are widely recognized, e.g., Nobel. Some practitioner areas also have notable rewards, e.g., Pulitzer.
There are other, more mundane measures, for example, "98% of our graduates find a job." I observed that sort of criterion as a member of an accrediting committee visit to a prominent West Coast institution that emphasizes technology. My other surprise was the high military rank of other committee members despite their current civilian roles and titles. One, with whom I shared a cab, had experience as president of two institutions in his state, and also as chancellor of both. The reports of the committee led to the continuation of accreditation. My report, as I recall, was mostly positive, but it did note a comment by a non-white faculty member. It included the word "racism." I was not asked to be on other visits.
When you are a member of a visiting accreditation committee you hear lots of comments such as "The architecture department is trying to steal our space." Those complaints do not amount to accusations that equal a suggestion of racism. Evidence of racial discrimination (or “lack of cultural diversity”) draws a much more pronounced response. Since my retirement as a UO professor, circa 1992, I have made a number of observations that fit my field of specialization, i.e., clinical supervision (and clinical depression), e.g., Plan, Observe, and Give Feedback. Some of these observations include time at other universities as a visiting faculty member. Others occurred as a consultant or presenter for other organizations. As one who has lived with a succession of neutered cats, both former males and former females, I know that "consulting" and "presenting" can go on beyond one’s ability to produce new material.
The current situation in the College of Education at the University of Oregon is not one that has sought my consultations or presentations. Nonetheless, here goes.
The most recent dean arrived after my retirement, so I had no experience working for him. I have worked with (not for) the most recent head of Teacher Education for more than a quarter century as a colleague, co-author, and friend. I have known the leader of a charge of lack of "cultural diversity" in the programs and conduct of the College of Education at the University of Oregon since 2002. That leader has both Native American and Hispanic credentials. I had returned from my last tour as a visiting faculty member in another culture (Canada). She offered to share her office space and computer with me when I needed access to the university computer network. My co-author had graduated from Hotchkiss and Harvard on scholarships. She had graduated from Choate and Yale on scholarships. I entered OSC in the summer of 1943 with a scholarship from Grant High School in Portland, was drafted and returned near the end of the war on the GI Bill. One of our recent benefactors at UO was at Grant High School when I was, but we did not meet. His reason for choosing a place that prepares teachers was his experience at an elementary school near mine in Portland.
I assume that our current UO president’s public school experience was in Medford since his father, Otto, my brother, Russ, and Bill Bowerman shared a house there before their marriages. I have been at UO since 1967, following 12 years teaching in Oregon public schools, 3 years at Stanford gaining an Ed.D and 3 years at Lewis and Clark. I have met the current UO president twice, once on the phone when he was the UO attorney and more recently in the UO library.
The purpose of this letter is an offer to help in any feasible way in current concerns of the university. A recent vice-president shared experience on several committees and activities during our tenure as did a number of my current colleagues. I am apprehensive about how to communicate with university officials, assuming that there are acceptable and unacceptable channels.
My thoughts on strategies have tended to be more whimsical than practical. Here is one example. We could choose a name for the pizza parlor professors that could permit a catchy nickname such as Erudite Emeriti in Education at Eugene and Elsewhere, i.e., EEEEE, to be called “BIGFOOT!”
I would be pleased to receive editorial suggestions for this effort, with an exception to those that can be sung as “Anything you can do, I can do better!”
One thought I had was to enter a meeting of professors with the excuse, "Sorry to be late, but I had to stop off to pick up a Nobel and a Pulitzer." One bigfoot, whose name is Harry, replied, "Is that your ONLY Nobel?
Written in the Past
Autobiographic material written by the Pioneer in the past.
Interview Questions and Answers
If the Pioneer is still living, it is highly desirable to do an interview via phone, email, or in person. Here are two sample questions:
Q. Looking back over your pioneering activities, which do you feel best about?
A. (Response not yet provided.)
Q. Drawing upon your years of experience in the field of education, what do you think are some of the very best ways to improve our current informal and formal educational systems?
A. (Response not yet provided.)
References
Acheson, K. and Gall, M. (2002). Clinical supervision and teacher development: Preservice and inservice applications. Wiley/Jossey-Bass Education.
Acheson, K. and Gall, M. (1999).La supervision pédagogique.
Acheson, K. (1987). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers preservice and inservice applications.
Acheson, K. (1986). It is time for principals to share the responsibility for instructional leadership with others. OSSC Bulletin.
Acheson, K. (1985). The principal's role in instructional leadership. OSSC Bulletin.
Acheson, K. (1980). Clinical supervision and teacher development : Preservice and inservice applications. Wiley/Jossey-Bass Education.
Acheson, K. (Editor) (1977). Five dimensions of demonstration.
