By Noah Weaver, Spencer Moros, Anneke Roy, and Skyler Martinez
The Traditional framework shows faculty members who benefit by passing on knowledge through the act of education. The students benefit from this by completing their degree requirements through the completion of academic exercises that culminate in their GPA. At the end of it all, students get jobs, which is the “end-point” of the traditional education system. All are enclosed within the box of Lehigh University because this traditional education system may support the faculty, students, and each of their goals, but the traditional model is not inventive. Because the traditional model is so generic, the framework is within a box because no “outside the box” thinking can occur. Furthermore, the flow of the chart is intentionally from top-to-bottom because it is the standard flow of a traditional education system: the University allows the faculty to hold their positions and the faculty pass on their knowledge to the students. The students then meet their GPA requirements and obtain a typical “9-5” job.
The GSIF conceptual framework shows that Lehigh University supports the students, faculty, ventures, and GSIF program as a whole. The students and faculty mentors are both setting out to impact systems for the greater good. Instead of the top-down approach in the traditional system, the students and faculty mentors accomplish their impact-driven work by working as equals (which is incredibly progressive compared to the traditional framework). The students and faculty mentors work together to form ventures that seek to accomplish self-sustaining systemic change in their target environment specific to the context each venture operates within. The ventures, students, and faculty mentors comprise the GSIF program as a whole with the weight of real-world impact (represented by the earth) on the entire system. This approach is bottom-up to represent the limitless possibilities of this newer model, and the circular shape of the entire framework represents the continuity of the work: that is, real-world impact is both limitless and an iterative process.
The GSIF framework is profoundly different from the norm: the students and faculty work as partners (not at the command of the faculty mentor) through social-driven systemic change (instead of mere academic exercises). The students and faculty are attempting to accomplish this through social ventures (instead of simply performing basic research and publishing an article in a journal). The two groups are doing this because they care about self-sustaining systemic change that is bigger than any one person can accomplish, and much more impactful than an “inside-the-box” education can allow for (instead of performing academic exercises for nothing more than raising one’s GPA). Both the students and faculty mentors, and the ventures they comprise held up by the foundation of Lehigh University allow for real-world impact to be achieved. The University, students, faculty, ventures, and GSIF as a whole receive the satisfaction of creating systemic change: this program is much more intensive than a typical educational program, and nobody participating in the program is there for much more than changing systems (and the world) for the better (instead of simply gaining employment after completion of education). However, we all learn new skills along the way, but that is a secondary gain.