The Ideal University Model: When May System Failures Lead to Irrational University Behaviour?

Introduction

The reliance on ideal situations provides a simple way of looking at complex problems which if seen from non-ideal framework appear to be impossible to understand and explain. Also using an ideal angle allows us to see at complex situations in a conjunctural fashion, in a way where several conditions or aspects are present in specific forms at the same time. Under different forms, but within the same paradigm, the same set of factors may provide the basis for a different rationale.

Rational behaviour

The concept of rational behaviour has more meaning when it is looked from the ideal point of view as ideal frameworks are based on pure rational logic. Under ideal conditions if rational logic does not prevail implies pure irrationality, which is a decision taken contrary to the rational logic emanating from the ideal system.

System sustainability

Under ideal conditions, rationality maintains the sustainability of the system, and irrationality set conflict effects that may the system move away from the ideal position. Hence, irrationality has a central place in explaining sustainability failures; and deserve special attention.

Goals of this paper

This paper has four goals. The first aim is to define an ideal university model. The second goal is to express this model in terms of academic and non-academic variables. The third aim is to derive the two most extreme sustainability failures within this ideal system. And finally, the rationality or irrationality behind these two types of failures is discussed.

Methodology

Several models are defined in simple terms to facilitate the presentation. By substituting terms from the different models defined, the two types of system failures that are the focus of this paper are derived. From here, the rationality of the decision-making process based on these two types of failures is highlighted. Please, see that Table 1 at the end summarises the terminology used to simplify the presentation below.

Defining the ideal university model

The ideal university system(U*) can be seen as the result of the interaction of responsible faculty(P*) and responsible students(E*), which can be stated as follows:

1) U* = P*E*

Defining the ideal faculty model

The ideal faculty model(P*) can be defined as that where the two responsibilities of faculties are fulfilled, academic(A1*), and non-academic(B1*) as follows:

2) P* = A1*B1*

Defining the ideal student model

In similar fashion, the ideal student model(E*) can be stated as that where all students responsibilities, academic(A2*) and non-academic(B2*), are fulfilled as shown below:

3) E* = A2*B2*

The ideal university model in academic/non-academic terms

By substituting the terms of the ideal faculty model(P*) and of the ideal student model(E*) in formula 3) we have the following:

4) U* = P*E* = A1*B1*A2*B2*

5) U* = P*E* = A1*A2*.B1*B2*

6) U* = P*E* = A*B*

The above ideal model(U*) indicates that for it to be sustainable, both supervisors and students must fulfilled their academic(A*) and non-academic(B*) duties.

Defining a student withdrawal model

When students fail their academic duties(a2*) or their non-academic duties(b2*) or both at the same time, they may be withdrawn(w) from the academic program, which can be expressed as follows:

7) w = a2* + b2*

The withdrawal model above(w) has two main implications, which here are called sure student withdrawal(w*) and sure student graduation(G*), which are stated below:

i) Sure student withdrawal

There is sure student withdrawal(w*) when a student fails both his or her academic duties(a2*) and non-academic duties(b2*) at the same time. This is the extreme case of student failure:

8) w* = a2*b2*

ii) Sure student Graduation

There is sure student graduation(G*) when a student fulfils both his or her academic duties(A2*) and non-academic duties(B2*) at the same time:

9. G* = A2*B2*

Defining a faculty dismissal model

When faculty members fail their academic duties(a1*) or their non-academic duties(b1*) or both at the same time, they may be dismissed(d) from university duties, which can be expressed as follows:

10) d = a1* + b1*

The dismissal model above(d) has two main implications, which here are called sure faculty dismissal(d*) and sure faculty incentive(I*), which are listed below:

i) Sure faculty dismissal

There is sure faculty dismissal(d*) when a faculty member fails both his or her academic duties(a1*) and non-academic duties(b1*) at the same time. This is the extreme faculty failure situation:

11) d* = a1*b1*

ii) Sure faculty incentive

There is sure faculty incentive(I*) when a faculty member fulfils both his or her academic duties(A2*) and non-academic duties(B2*) at the same time:

12) I* = A1*B1*

Ideal university under student induced failure

The ideal university failure(U1*) under extreme student failure(w*) and sure faculty incentive(I*) can be expressed as follows(Notice that this is an specific type of failure of model in formula 4):

U1* = A1*B1*.a2*b2* = I*.w*

i) Rationality

In order to restore the sustainability failure induced by the student(U1*), the student has to withdraw from the academic program(w*), and faculty members should received incentives(I*) to encourage them to continue fulfilling of their responsibilities fully. Notice that this rationality is consistent with the practice as students who fail both duties for sure will be required to withdraw.

ii) Irrationality

It would be irrational under the extreme student failures to grant graduation(G*) to failed students or to penalise faculty members for fulfilling their duties(I*) fully. This just can not be expected in practice.

Ideal University under faculty induced failure

The ideal university failure(U2*) under extreme faculty failure(d*) and sure student graduation(G*) can be expressed as follows(Notice that this is also a specific type of failure in model in formula 4):

U2* = a1*b1*.A2*B2* = d*.G*

i) Rationality

In order to restore the sustainability failure induced by the faculty member(U2*), the faculty member has to be dismissed from university duties(d*), and students should be granted graduation(G*) to encourage them to continue fulfilling their responsibilities fully. This usually does not happens in practice as university tend to see the reputation of faculty members involved in extreme duty failures very closely tied to the university's reputation.

ii) Irrationality

It would be irrational under the extreme faculty failures to give incentives to faculty members that fully failed their duties(d*) and/or to penalise students for fulfilling their duties(G*) fully. However, this is what normally happens when university officials are faced with extreme faculty induced failure as they attempt to protect their own and to get read of the victim, the student, at all cost.

Conclusions

The ideal model framework presented provides a simple way to tackle the complexity related to extreme student induced and extreme faculty induced system failures. It was shown that when facing extreme student induced system failure, university officials act rationally by requesting the student to withdraw and providing incentive to faculties who perform their responsibility fully. However, when university officials face extreme faculty induced system failure, they tend to act irrationally by protecting the offending faculty members and by penalising the victim still more. Hence, extreme faculty induced system failure are the drivers of the irrational behaviour commonly displayed by university officials when making the protection of reputation of the failing faculty member and/or the university the biased "best interest of the system". This type of system failures must be stopped and the theory provided above suggest a clear and simple way of doing it: Penalise the offending faculty members and praise the students who fulfilled their duties and responsibilities under such negative academic and research conditions.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Table 1 : Terminology used

----------------------------------------------------------------

U* = ideal university

u* = non-ideal university

P* = responsible faculty

p* = irresponsible faculty

E* = responsible student

e* = irresponsible student

A1* = academic duty

a1* = academic duty not fulfilled by faculty fulfilled by faculty

A2* = academic duty

a2* = academic duty not fulfilled by student fulfilled by student

B1* = non-academic duty

b1* = non-academic duty not fulfilled by faculty fulfilled by faculty

B2* = non-academic duty

b2* = non-academic duty not fulfilled by student fulfilled by student

w = student withdrawal model

d = faculty dismissal model

w* = sure student withdrawal

d* = sure faculty dismissal

G* = sure student graduation

I* = sure faculty incentive