Proposal for a TWC University/Academy: Second Stage

[gigagaia]

I'd like to continue discussion for this proposal here in the Prothalamos.

Below is Professor420's summation of what has been produced so far, and some addititions he has suggested/picked up on in debates and discussions with the curia and myself. I like it mostly, so I'll post it up and let it generate some discussion before I suggest some changes myself.

Though this is Gigagaia's idea, I'd like to sum up my/our thoughts about this so far, taking into consideration all the debate and many excellent ideas.

Proposal:

Administration:

• There shall be 2 Faculties:
  
  Arts : For teaching debating, philosophy, TWC history, TWC politics, real life politics, etc… (common community)
  Modding: For teaching modding skills etc… (total war community)
  
  
• The Senate shall be composed of the Chancellor, both Deans, and all Professors. The senate shall ratify all major decisions to the university and set policy and behaviour guidelines. It shall also be the highest body of appeal to which a student may take concerns to.

[Perikles]

I support (III), if there is anything to support...

[Silver Guard]

I disagree on three grounds:
We are here to get away from a school system, if this was more lax it would be better (punishment for not attending???)
Too much Beurocracy, something such as a university, atleast to begin with, should be a simple teachers and pupils, no senate, coucillor or anything, thats silly
No qualifications, this makes debators even more big-headed then they already are, theres no need

The basic idea is good, the implementation atrocious

[imb39]

I disagree on three grounds:
We are here to get away from a school system, if this was more lax it would be better (punishment for not attending???)

It's voluntary and in some cases this might be very ueful. modding is the obvious place for this but it might have some use for the CC. Developing the application of logic, for example, will be a boon for many.

Too much Beurocracy, something such as a university, atleast to begin with, should be a simple teachers and pupils, no senate, coucillor or anything, thats silly

The red tape is purely within the insitution itself. It has no impact on other areas. Maybe it could be refined.

No qualifications, this makes debators even more big-headed then they already are, theres no need

It might even pop a few balloons. Big headed people are big headed. They tend not to need reasons, their mere presence is enough for them.

The basic idea is good, the implementation atrocious

Well, I think that's a very strong word to use. I wouldn't agree with that in anycase, necessarily. You like the basic idea but are not going to offer a potential solution?

[Silver Guard]

It's voluntary and in some cases this might be very ueful. modding is the obvious place for this but it might have some use for the CC. Developing the application of logic, for example, will be a boon for many.

But...punishments? What?

The red tape is purely within the insitution itself. It has no impact on other areas. Maybe it could be refined.

No, too much beurocracy here, its just too complcated

It might even pop a few balloons. Big headed people are big headed. They tend not to need reasons, their mere presence is enough for them.

No need to help them along...

Well, I think that's a very strong word to use. I wouldn't agree with that in anycase, necessarily. You like the basic idea but are not going to offer a potential solution?

It needed a strong word...maybe I was a little harsh, heres anouther:
Proposal:

Administration:
There shall be 2 Faculties:
Arts : For teaching debating, philosophy, TWC history, TWC politics, real life politics, etc… (common community)
Modding: For teaching modding skills etc… (total war community)
The Curia shall ratify all major decisions to the university and set policy and behaviour guidelines. It shall also be the highest body of appeal to which a student may take concerns to.
There shall be a Chancellor who is responsible for general affairs within the whole of the university organising proffessors ect. He shall also be a global moderator of the University forums, responsible for maintenance of the TOS and any other university behavioural standards within the forums. He shall also judge student cases of poor behaviour.
The Chancellor shall be elected from those who volunteer by the Curia at vote (and thus is neccessarily a Patrician). A simple plurality suffices to elect a Chancellor; however, the Curator must approve the election before the Chancellor takes his position, and if the Curator does not approve the choice, the election is repeated, with that candidate eliminated.
Classes shall be conducted in protected subforums, postable only to students and professors (viewable by all), and their structure shall largely be dependant on the proposal of the professor.
Each class will recieve it's own forum, where students and professors may post lessons, questions, assignements and grades, and generally discuss course content.
Professors shall have moderation powers over their own individual class forum, but will be expected to report instances of poor behaviour to the Chancellor.
Classes shall be limited in student numbers, only by the number the professor is willing to teach.
Also, a general forum for non-students to ask questions would be nice, I think, as well as a place for professors/Chancellors to post announcements to the general public.


Punishment:
A student who behaves improperly should be reported to the Chancellor. Punishment can range from a warning to expulsion, handed out at the decision of the Chancellor (who may defer the decision to the Dean).
Poor professor performance should be reported to the Chancellor, who with the Chancellor, will seek to rectify the situation or remove the professor and find a replacement (if possible)

Professors:
New professors will be approved by the Chancellor. For review, a professor must have the backing of a Patrician as a testament to their abilities.
Teaching a course qualifies as a contribution towards Patricianship. Another line would have to be appended to the Syntagma.
Professors will have a badge identifying them as an expert in their particular field, to be placed in their signature, that does not count towards signature size limits.


There, basicly cut outeverything unneccissary
After recieing a flailing in a PM for not presenting reasoning in my post, I will do so now:
The school should not need more then one person to deliver moderation/punishment, thus the deans are removed
Proffersors are given more freedom, no need for set lessons, its their choice to tech, let them teach how they wish.
Removal of punishments/rewards. The punishment for misbehavior is being forced to leave the class. The punishment for inatendence is silly, it is voluntary, inattendance is not an issue. In terms of rewards the reward is what you've learnt, not some fancy acheivement in your signature to blaze around
The senate replaced with the Curia, the Curia as it is now is perfectly able to control how the forum layout is managed and changes is set-up. For example, if it gets to large, anouther chancellor may be elected by the Curia
Proffesors need not be Civitates or Patricians, but if they show thier worth they may be elected to these ranks
Proffesors are proffesors, if they're experts they can show it in their posts, not attempt to er-awe people with a badge saying so.
Reputation can be given by anyone as a reward to anyone in the university, the last line was unneccisary

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

folks, I moved the original thread out to the Symposium so the Civitates who were contributing to it could continue to contribute. Do you want it moved back in here?

[Publius]

As imb stated, the system is voluntary. Also while people may come here to escape school, many still come here to learn - the mod forums especially are flooded with questions 24/7, as they should be.

Modding is not something you can learn through osmosis, you need instruction and direction and purpose. I know from personal experience how great it is to help someone learn how to do something, and also how frustrating it can become at the same time when you have to handle the same question again and again on a repetitive basis.

Take for example something very obscure, the rate of fire in towers. Not something you would think you be much asked about ever, yet all of these questions were asked within the last few weeks here:

- Example 1
- Example 2
- Example 3
- Example 4

Now please tell me that it would not have been more efficient if all of these people had been in a 'class' (lets not get frightened by the word now, it merely means we are together at one place, at one time, trying to learn something). Not only would it reach a wider audience, but answers would be longer, more complete, and all in all better. Afterwards, we would have a concrete tutorial in essence that people could peruse at will and use to answer their questions on the topic.

I say all of this from a position of personal experience in these matters.

[Silver Guard]

Publius, please note I think the basis is sound, but that it is too complex and would require (in its present form) almost as many staff as pupils to fulfil all the roles laid out unless there is a sudden group of about 50 more who join the classes. Hense my scaled-down proposal

[Tom Paine]

3 non-professors, all the rest ae professors, in the current proposal. No, it doesn't require as many admins as professors by a long shot. Assuming two deans, which we won't need more than.

[gigagaia]

Silverguard, I'm not overly-enamoured of having the curia be the senate. It will involve politics into the running of the university, which will not be helpful in trying to deliver education. We don't want things like professors and students being caught up in politics within the curia, for instance. Further, the only attachment the University should have with the curia is through elections of the chancellor and pertinent laws. After all, professors and students do not have to be civitates. If they want to appeal to the curia, I'm not so sure how they would do so if the curia was the senate.

Let the curia elect the chancellor (With the approval of the curator), but keep politics away from academics. The curia should be a body which watches over the University but one which does not control it, given that many members may not even be civitates in the first place.

The system surrounding the university is as lean as we can get it. The deans help the chancellor moderate the forum and help regulate the classes (this will be a big job for one man) and choose professors to present, the Chancellor performs some of those tasks but also acts as a judge and will likely set any policy decisions and the Senate (made of professors, deans and chancellor) will ratify all changes and act as a court of last-resort.

In essence, we don't need to scale down the university. It's already lean and allows for flexibility. If we have 4 classes to start with 10 students each (i've got at least 4 eligible Professors lined up), I think that will be a large enough body for the administration to cover. I agree that there are superfluos lines within, but the general idea is sound. It has in it an administration to run the university's day-to-day needs (Chancellory and deans), an administrative body to regulate the university as a whole (the senate), systems of punishment to keep poor students from ruining the experience and systems of reward to encourage standards of excellence. These are key elements to constructing an academy of this sort.

I would say, however, that the first senate is the curia. After the professors and classes are ratified, the curia should cut all ties save the Chancellor and let the university work its magic in TWC.

So why are the deans superfluos? I find them to play important and helpful roles.
Why can't the senate be made up of the profs and the chancellory/deans? As tGS has noted, there are only 3 non-professors in the entire university. That's even less beureaucratic and political.

So in summation: Why does it need to be scaled down? I find the proposal very un-complex. It contains very a simple system of administration (Chancellor, deans, Professor-led senate) doesn't it?

[Silver Guard]

My opposition with deans is that until the thing gets too large for one chancellor they are not needed. Aren't you being a little optimistic with 40 students immediatly? I'm sure they'll fill up, but only in time
The other thing is the independance of the proffesors, they're doing this out of their own free will and have nothing in store but rep. They should be afforded complete control over their own classes and freedom to do what they will, after all, they are their classes, class rules ect. are up to them, not the chancellor, therefore his work is significantly reduced

With the Curia reduced as it is, it is best to use its smaller and so less beurocratic nature to our adantage in not organising, but deciding the layout ect. of such a sub-forum

[gigagaia]

Silverguard, I'll do my best to address your main points here:

• Needs based on capacity: I'm not sure what your logic is here though. The idea of the institutions of the deans is to support the chancellor in the micro-management (bah, not the best of words, so don't hold it against me) of discpline and course selection for the university. These are big jobs and cannot be totally handled by one person alone. The Chancellor will have many other responsibilities, such as external communications (such as contacting people for guest lecturing and promoting the University) and perhaps even presenting reports to the Staff/Curia etc... Let the deans set direction for their faculties and manage most of the day-to-day "sentencing" of bad behaviour within the forums. The idea is to loosen the work load and
• Professors: The deal here is that they do have complete control over their classes, but merely must report violations of the TOS and Uni. Constitutionish document to the deans to ensure that proper punishment beyond moderation is handed down. They perhaps don't need the power to moderate the forums and they certainly shouldn't decide who is to be expelled from the university in general (and thus eligible to register for classes) on a personal basis. Further, they definitely need oversight on the part of the Administration and they can't do that for themselves. Their attention should be towards delivering a quality education to students and not moderation. Let professors teach thier classes and deans/chancellor worry about the general direction and administration of the structure of the university.
• Curia: The curia is still a political body, and as such will have politics present in the decisions and debates which take place within its halls. It shouldn't be allowed to spill those facts over into the functioning of the Unviersity. Better to simply let the officials and professors convene on important matters. They will be far less political as they more of a stake in the direction of the university and more experience with its functioning. Besides, the curia is a political body, not a regulatory body and we shouldn't flood it with votes and cases (student deliquency). That is why there is a senate and Chancellor; to run and regulate the body.

[Oldgamer]

The notion of punishment has been proposed throughout the Academy idea. I realise why it's there. But let me tell you how I've handled "unpleasantness", in my career.

Approximately 50% of the material that is on any given examination, in my sections, has been covered in class. If a student has attended my classes poorly, he will have little likelihood of passing the exams, and therefore, the courses. Since my subject is philosophy, I am most likely to assign essay questions. A person does not understand philosophy unless he can write about it. These questions will always have been covered in class, instead of assigned readings.

Note that I have never dropped a student for failing to attend class. They could miss the entire semester. Also note that, after the first exam, most of my students are in class for every session. Coming up with a score of 35-50% on an exam gets people's attention. Since I never grade on the curve, the high or low performance of any student has no effect on any other.

Improper behavior in class? Each instance results in a loss of a letter grade on the next examination. I've never had this policy successfully challenged before, because I'm fair. I warn everyone about attendance and behavior policies in the first class of a semester.

[Silver Guard]

• Needs based on capacity: I'm not sure what your logic is here though. The idea of the institutions of the deans is to support the chancellor in the micro-management (bah, not the best of words, so don't hold it against me) of discpline and course selection for the university. These are big jobs and cannot be totally handled by one person alone. The Chancellor will have many other responsibilities, such as external communications (such as contacting people for guest lecturing and promoting the University) and perhaps even presenting reports to the Staff/Curia etc... Let the deans set direction for their faculties and manage most of the day-to-day "sentencing" of bad behaviour within the forums. The idea is to loosen the work load and

However, here lies the problem, in my proposal I reduce punishments, Oldgamer seems to have experience in this so I'll leave it to him to decide which way is better. Proffessors should decide the punishments in their own classes, they're not being employed, they're volunteers, thus should have complete control over the running of their classes with no interferrence, if someone dosn't like how its done, they can leave. This complete control deals with the course selection as well, the proffessors can deal with that themselves, the chancellor only has to deal with entrances and serious complaints.

• Professors: The deal here is that they do have complete control over their classes, but merely must report violations of the TOS and Uni. Constitutionish document to the deans to ensure that proper punishment beyond moderation is handed down. They perhaps don't need the power to moderate the forums and they certainly shouldn't decide who is to be expelled from the university in general (and thus eligible to register for classes) on a personal basis. Further, they definitely need oversight on the part of the Administration and they can't do that for themselves. Their attention should be towards delivering a quality education to students and not moderation. Let professors teach thier classes and deans/chancellor worry about the general direction and administration of the structure of the university.

Oversight of the administration? Why?
Yes they should have the power to expell students from their classes, though not from all classes, thats the chancellor's job. If the chancellor is in desperate need of help, appoint anouther one, two chancellors should be easily enough.

• Curia: The curia is still a political body, and as such will have politics present in the decisions and debates which take place within its halls. It shouldn't be allowed to spill those facts over into the functioning of the Unviersity. Better to simply let the officials and professors convene on important matters. They will be far less political as they more of a stake in the direction of the university and more experience with its functioning. Besides, the curia is a political body, not a regulatory body and we shouldn't flood it with votes and cases (student deliquency). That is why there is a senate and Chancellor; to run and regulate the body.

Think of Britain, it has a minister of enducation and an entire section of goverment for running colleges and education in general. The curia can do this quite easily, and what does less political mean? Whats so important about that?

[Tom Paine]

Britain also has massive amounts of political debate; education becomes the manifesto. Remember Blair? "What are your three priorities?" "Education Education Education". No, one needs to separate the Curia and this if only to avoid leak-over of politics.

[Silver Guard]

Britain also has massive amounts of political debate; education becomes the manifesto. Remember Blair? "What are your three priorities?" "Education Education Education". No, one needs to separate the Curia and this if only to avoid leak-over of politics.

The difference being we're not competing for populatity against other parties. What politics are there to leak over? A discussion on, for example, the running of the TW community can't realy get sucked into th university

[Perikles]

However, here lies the problem, in my proposal I reduce punishments, Oldgamer seems to have experience in this so I'll leave it to him to decide which way is better. Proffessors should decide the punishments in their own classes, they're not being employed, they're volunteers, thus should have complete control over the running of their classes with no interferrence, if someone dosn't like how its done, they can leave. This complete control deals with the course selection as well, the proffessors can deal with that themselves, the chancellor only has to deal with entrances and serious complaints.

The argument Gigagaia gave in favor of deans dealt heavily with the faculty-running and micro-level management being too much for the Chancellor to handle, and you seem to have sidestepped this with an issue of punishment. The Deans are not there just to hand out punishment, they are there to provide a close support to the Professors because the Chancellor simply cannot be. The idea of a united Academy, under one umbrella, is different from a bunch of seperate ad-hoc classes. The Academy provides the support and infrastructure professors need, and in order to interact and teach inside of said infrastructure, there needs to be some sort of administrative hierarchy (and a very thin one we do have). If a Professor needs a certain resource or feature or forum or anything to that effect, it is much better that he go to the Dean (for talking it over as well as implementation), rather than the Chancellor (seeing as there are many other things for the Chancellor to do). The other option is to give all professors administrative level control, which I doubt you support. Or, we can have multiple administrators, which, in essence, is what we have.

Oversight of the administration? Why?
Yes they should have the power to expell students from their classes, though not from all classes, thats the chancellor's job. If the chancellor is in desperate need of help, appoint anouther one, two chancellors should be easily enough.

I would really appreciate if people who have any experience with this gave feedback, because personally, I know how much work is involved, and it is simply too much for one person to administrate the entire thing effectively. Why have two chancellors doing the same thing? Instead, why not divide the tasks up into an administrative body of three? Why make it get to a 'desperate' point, that we know will happen, where we need an emergency appointment and conflict of duties, instead of setting it up in advaince so it runs smoothly? I still don't see an argument for how Deans are unneccssary or get in the way of running the school effectively.

Think of Britain, it has a minister of enducation and an entire section of goverment for running colleges and education in general. The curia can do this quite easily, and what does less political mean? Whats so important about that?

Why in the world should a bunch of people who have no attachment to the Academy have direct oversight, instead of merely being a rarely-used higher body? We don't pay taxes to TWC, and thus the Academy isn't run by TWC member dollars, and the Patricians in the Curia have no rightful claim to oversee the Academy. In a nation, Colleges and schools get money (alot of it) from the government, which gives the government the right to demand certain things (such as Standardized Testing or military recruiters). No such situation exists in TWC, so if you want to compare the Curia to Parliament, you are fighting a losing battle. While I'm not sure exactly how its done in Britain, I know in America if a school doesn't want/receive government money, they do not have to conform to government demands/standards as far as education goes. And since the TWC government isn't subsidizing the Academy, it has no inherent right to oversee it (except in cases expedient or helpful to the Academy as allowed in its Constitution).
Why should the Curia have oversight instead of the Senate (being composed of staff of the university)?

A message from Professor420

[Silver Guard]

If the academy produces such an amount of work and micro-management just to keep the proffessors working according to what the academy wants, not what they want, and if they need infrastructure and support just to teach, then I will vote against such a beurocratic institution, where everything has to be official and passes through a council just for a proffessor to change the way is own lesson is taught

[PyrrhusIV]

I've always supported the idea of a university, to contribute to the TWC experience and aspect of it. Adding this gives it more depth. Although this is more of a discussion topic then a support topic, I can do very few things other than support. I've seen many of the patricians in this topic making excellent suggestions.

[gigagaia]

If the academy produces such an amount of work and micro-management just to keep the proffessors working according to what the academy wants, not what they want, and if they need infrastructure and support just to teach, then I will vote against such a beurocratic institution, where everything has to be official and passes through a council just for a proffessor to change the way is own lesson is taught

I'm not sure what you mean here Silverguard.
You won't support it because it has a formal and established infrastructure which facilitates the professors' abilities to teach their class in an effective manner? The whole reasoning that Professor and I have presented to you is that there will be issues that need a structure to solve. That with any institution there will need to be an administration who tends to the day-to-day needs. The idea behind having a couple of deans to assist the chancellor is that the task will likely prove to much for just one person. Can you show me that one person can handle it all? Disciplinary actions, reviewing potential professors, reporting to the senate (likely the curia too), running the PR for the academy, bestowing potential honours on graduates, supporting professor needs, maintaining professor standards, making announcements and representing the acadmey in the external. These are all just some of the basic functions that any kind of "school" would need to be able to succeed and thrive. There may be more, but these are simple functions that will come up with even a trimmed-down institution. Again, can only one person reasonably argue this?

I am confused because to be frank and honest, I don't understand where the proposal says that the Senate decides how things will be taught; The very thing you are railing against doesn't even seem to exist. The idea is that the professors choose their course, what the content is and how it shall be taught. The senate, Chancellor and Deans merely approves the classes (ie. making sure the content and syllabus are suitable and the professor is committed to teaching it) and sets down minimum standards of behaviour expected of all students, which are then enforced largely by the deans. They also promote the university and are responsible for ensuring that professors uphold standards of their own. These are just a few tasks that will uphold the standards of education that we will hope to deliver, which will in turn earn a reputation for the school and attract more students and hopefully more members. Further it will increase the quality of the education that students recieve and therefore better enrich our community, which is the very goal of this proposal.
You haven't shown how any of this will negatively impact the university's ability to deliver quality education to people which will in turn enrich our members and therefore our community, so I challenge you to do so.