{"id":11001,"date":"2016-08-22T14:21:32","date_gmt":"2016-08-22T20:21:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/speeches.byu.edu\/?post_type=speech&p=11001"},"modified":"2023-07-17T20:50:51","modified_gmt":"2023-07-18T02:50:51","slug":"lord-requireth-heart-willing-mind","status":"publish","type":"speech","link":"https:\/\/speeches.byu.edu\/talks\/brent-w-webb\/lord-requireth-heart-willing-mind\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cThe Lord Requireth the Heart and a Willing Mind\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"
Our university conference theme comes from Doctrine and Covenants 64:34:<\/p>\n
Behold, the Lord requireth the heart and a willing mind.<\/i><\/p>\n
It seems quite natural to talk about \u201ca willing mind\u201d in this setting of academics\u2014with nearly 1,500 of you whose training and trade is thinking, sharing the products of your thinking with your disciplines, and guiding and focusing the thinking of students. The product of the mind is our business. However, in undertaking His<\/i> work, the Lord requires both a willing mind and<\/i> the heart. Nelson Mandela once wrote, \u201cA good head and a good heart are always a formidable combination.\u201d1<\/sup><\/p>\n One might ask why the Lord needs both our minds and our hearts. It can be argued that the heart is the center of our humanity and the source of our love, motivation, desire, joy, anguish, satisfaction, hope, and aspiration. Consider for a moment how references to the heart are woven so frequently into our everyday idiomatic conversation: soft heart, hard heart, kind heart, halfhearted, bleeding heart, broken heart, heartthrob, heavy heart, faint of heart, eating your heart out, aching heart, from the bottom of your heart, the heart of the matter, follow your heart, heart of stone, heart of gold, bless his heart, heart-to-heart, learn by heart, sinking heart, makes my heart sing, my heart skips a beat, young at heart, pure in heart, my heart isn\u2019t in it, pour your heart out, take heart. . . . I am sure you can think of even more examples. It seems that it is more the heart than the mind that defines us.<\/p>\n You may have read in the national media in recent weeks the touching story of a woman from Swissvale, Pennsylvania, by the name of Jeni Stepien. In 2006 Jeni\u2019s father was shot by a sixteen-year-old assailant in a robbery. He was mortally wounded, and the family made the difficult decision to donate his organs. Arthur Thomas from New Jersey, then sixty-two years old and suffering from congestive heart failure, was the recipient of Mr. Stepien\u2019s heart.<\/p>\n Late last year, ten years after losing her father, Jeni Stepien was engaged to be married, and her first thought after her engagement was, \u201cWho will walk me down the aisle?\u201d<\/p>\n At her fianc\u00e9\u2019s suggestion, Ms. Stepien asked Arthur Thomas\u2014the recipient of her father\u2019s donor heart\u2014to do the honors, and he agreed.<\/p>\n The wedding took place in the church in Swissvale in which Ms. Stepien\u2019s parents had been married. Mr. Thomas suggested that as they walked down the aisle, Jeni grip his wrist, where his pulse was the strongest: \u201cI thought that would be the best way for her to feel close to her dad,\u201d he said, adding, \u201cThat\u2019s her father\u2019s heart beating.\u201d<\/p>\n After the ceremony the bride was photographed with her hand on Mr. Thomas\u2019s chest. \u201cI felt wonderful about bringing her dad\u2019s heart,\u201d said Mr. Thomas. \u201cIf I had to, I would\u2019ve walked.\u201d2<\/sup><\/p>\n In our Latter-day Saint scriptural canon there are 1,534 references to the heart\u2014roughly one every page and a half, on average. There are 475 references to the mind. In our university conference theme, the Lord declared to His servants that He required both. His need for both heart and mind in the lives of those who embark in His work of building Zion should not surprise us, since we are taught that \u201cthe Lord called his people Zion, because they were of one heart and one mind\u201d (Moses 7:18).<\/p>\n I have long thought that, physiologically, the brain was in charge of our body\u2014that it was the master control center. It stands at the head, sending signals to govern our motion, sensing and reacting to sensory input, telling us when to eat and when to sleep, and processing what we see and hear and touch.<\/p>\n Recent research has revealed that the heart has much more control over the brain than was previously known. There are tens of thousands of sensory neurons that relay information from the heart to the brain. In fact, the heart sends more information to the brain than the brain sends to the heart. \u201cThe heart produces hormones released into the bloodstream\u201d that affect the entire body. \u201cThe heart emits an electrical field 60 times greater in amplitude than the activity in the brain and an electromagnetic field 5,000 times stronger than that of the brain.\u201d Like the brain, the heart has a complex network of neurons, neurotransmitters, proteins, and support cells that equip it to act independently of the cranial brain.3<\/sup><\/p>\n What seems very clear is that physiologically, the heart and the brain work in tandem, communicating with and complementing each other, each with its own set of unique responsibilities in the body\u2019s operation. Emotional and psychological health are linked intimately to the health of the heart. Interestingly, for so many who dread and feel extreme stress at work, researchers have shown that more people have heart attacks on Monday than on any other day of the week.4<\/sup><\/p>\n Now I don\u2019t know whether the anatomical heart is the center of our emotions, but if it does play a role, we should not wonder why the Lord asks for both heart and mind in His work. To attempt His work with the mind only is, well, even less than halfhearted. Especially at BYU, the Lord needs the willing mind; He needs your extraordinary intellect, shaped and sharpened through extensive study. He also needs your heart. As President Spencer W. Kimball stated in 1967:<\/p>\n The uniqueness of Brigham Young University lies in its special role\u2014education for eternity\u2014which it must carry in addition to the usual tasks of a university. This means concern\u2014curricular and behavioral\u2014for not only the \u201cwhole man\u201d but for the \u201ceternal man.\u201d<\/i>5<\/sup><\/p>\n As a university, we will not achieve our mission \u201cto assist individuals in their quest for perfection and eternal life\u201d6<\/sup> without bringing our minds and<\/i> our hearts to bear. If we approach our assignment here without both mind and heart, BYU will be only<\/i> a superb university, not unlike other very fine universities. However, our charge and our aspirations are much grander.<\/p>\n In the remainder of my remarks today I wish to explore several ways that serving from our hearts magnifies serving only with very able minds. I will share six observations I see generally in you whose hearts guide your service here, and along the way I will provide some information relevant to us at this time. Throughout our time together we will hear from some of our faculty colleagues and the students they have influenced. Our story is best told by you and the students you touch.<\/p>\n 1. My first observation is that faculty guided by their hearts are profoundly and energetically interested in the learning of their students.<\/b><\/p>\n This is crucial when we realize that the university must now deny admission to one applicant for every one that is admitted. One of the many ways this observation is manifest is through careful attention to program learning outcomes. Students should understand what they can expect from a program, and faculty should understand how their courses contribute to those expectations.<\/p>\n In an effort to effect continued improvement of learning outcomes at the university, last summer and fall we undertook a campuswide effort to improve the assessment process in all colleges, including General Education. Associate deans on the University Curriculum Council and their college curriculum councils worked with departments to improve and update the learning-outcomes alignment tables for their programs. The Center for Teaching and Learning provided important assistance in this task. Associate deans reported changes made by each department, including examples of improvement, to the university administration. These changes were compiled in a report to our accreditor, the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.<\/p>\n I express deep appreciation for this significant effort to improve the quality of learning outcomes and assessment methods across the university. I hope this will improve the learning experience for our students. We will continue to refine our assessment methods and to use assessment to improve student learning.<\/p>\n Achieving the aims of a BYU education is at the core of our student-learning experience and should serve to guide the details of our teaching. Let me introduce you to Shu Pei Wang of the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages, who will describe how she seeks to put her students on the path of lifelong learning\u2014both in what she teaches and in what she models herself. [Video7<\/sup>]<\/p>\n Professor Wang has distinguished herself as an attentive, caring instructor whose efforts are centered on the learning of her students. I share one student comment from her teaching evaluations:<\/p>\n It may seem exaggerated, but what I have learned from Wang Laoshi and her testimony has altered the trajectory of my life. She has taught\u2014no, shown\u2014me how to continually seek improvement, to take risks, and to have faith that we ultimately <\/i>can<\/i><\/b> succeed.<\/i> [She is] one of my favorites, if not my absolute favorite teacher, at BYU. She has a gift for teaching, a gift for loving her students, and a gift for speaking the language of the Spirit using both Chinese and English. It was an honor to take a class from her.<\/i><\/p>\n Student perception of our teaching effectiveness is a valuable tool in assessing our attention to their learning. We are just completing our first full year using the new student ratings instrument. You will recall that a faculty committee worked on the development of this new instrument for seven years. The new survey tool is shorter, focuses more specifically on student perception of the instructor\u2019s effectiveness and the achievement of the four aims of a BYU education, and provides an opportunity for student comments on all survey questions. Students seem to be happier with the new instrument. Average student response rates have climbed from 67 percent in 2014 using the old tool to 73 percent in winter semester 2016. These response rates are considerably higher than rates for similar student evaluations of which we are aware at other universities.<\/p>\n One of the significant advantages of the new tool is that it gives us an estimate of the margin of error for the instructor composite score, the number derived from student responses to the five questions seeking to gauge instructor effectiveness. We have encouraged department chairs, deans, and faculty members to interpret the student ratings in light of these uncertainty ranges. With each new semester we accumulate ratings information that can be used to more reliably track the historical trends in our student evaluations. The more data we gather, the tighter the margin of error, lending greater confidence to the results. We continue to evaluate the reliability of the instructor composite score means, the stability of ratings across semesters, and other statistical properties of the ratings.<\/p>\n Last year we met with all department chairs to present and discuss the new ratings instrument. We have made some refinements to the instrument based on their input and on your helpful suggestions. Minor formatting changes were made to the survey questions to improve clarity, to encourage student narrative response to the survey items, to provide additional context, and to increase usefulness for both faculty and administrators.<\/p>\n Some of you were concerned that the item-specific comment boxes did not permit students to summarize their overall experience in the course. Consequently, we added an additional question to the tool: \u201cWhat additional comments do you have about the instructor or course?\u201d We counsel you to strongly encourage student participation in the evaluations for each class, since higher response rates reduce the margin of error.<\/p>\n As we rolled out the new student \u00adratings instrument, we wondered how it would impact the formative evaluations used in annual stewardship interviews and the summative evaluations used in rank and status reviews. General feedback is that the new instrument has been beneficial in the annual stewardship evaluations. Coupled with mid\u00adsemester evaluations, data from the new instrument serve to guide faculty in improving their teaching. Rank and status files \u00adsubmitted in the past year to the various evaluation committees included student-\u00adevaluation data from both the previous and the new student-ratings instruments. It appears that the inclusion of data from the two different instruments resulted in few challenges during these reviews. Calibration between the old and new instrument was facilitated by earlier pilot studies revealing a very high correlation (in the high 90 percent) between the overall instructor ratings for the previous instrument and the composite rating of the new instrument.<\/p>\n We understand that student evaluations have limitations.8<\/sup> In all of our discussions of the new student-ratings instrument, I have stressed that student ratings are only one element of a comprehensive strategy for assessing student learning and instructor effectiveness. Our next step in pursuing that strategy is the exploration of a robust approach to peer evaluation of teaching. This year we are assembling a task force to undertake the development of an approach for effective and efficient peer evaluation of teaching. As we launch this effort, we recognize that peer evaluation of teaching can be a time-intensive endeavor. We will seek to develop a principle-based methodology that can be adapted to disciplines across campus but that is also sensitive to the load of the peer evaluator. You will undoubtedly hear more about this in the future.<\/p>\n Our mission is to \u201cassist individuals in their quest for perfection and eternal life . . . in a stimulating setting where a commitment to excellence is expected and the full realization of human potential is pursued.\u201d9 <\/sup>I suspect that you routinely seek the best for your students, often imploring heaven in their behalf.<\/p>\n In his address on this campus in 1967, President Kimball stated to the faculty:<\/p>\n I would want<\/i> [the students] . . . to know instinctively by your spirit that you were that morning on your knees with your family and that there were soft words of pleading to your Heavenly Father for guidance, not only for your little family kneeling with you but for your larger family also at that moment scurrying about their apartments to get ready for your class.<\/i>10<\/sup><\/p>\n This is done quietly and invisibly as you \u201cpour out your souls in your closets, and your secret places, and in your wilderness\u201d (Alma 34:26)\u2014and, I might add, in your classrooms, your studios, your laboratories, and your clinics. Your interactions with students every day reflect your deep interest\u2014interest from the heart\u2014in their learning and growth.<\/p>\n The experience of one of our nursing students, Ragan Porter, illustrates this kind of influence by Kent Blad, associate dean in the College of Nursing. [Video11<\/sup>]<\/p>\n President Gordon B. Hinckley\u2019s declaration on the occasion of President Cecil O. Samuelson\u2019s inauguration in September 2003 is relevant here:<\/p>\n We should not have failures on this campus. We are more than teachers. We are shepherds. And we know that the spirit of shepherding resides in the hearts of those who serve here as members of the great Brigham Young University faculty.<\/i>12<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n 2. Faculty who are motivated by the heart are more interested in what they give than in what they get.<\/b><\/p>\n President Kimball stated, \u201cThis university is not the place for mercenaries.\u201d13<\/sup> So many of you could be elsewhere\u2014with higher salary, more space, more time for research, and more equipment\u2014but you have chosen BYU, often at some sacrifice. Despite sacrifices, I believe we have compensatory help. With increasing frequency, it seems, our faculty and students are recognized nationally and internationally for their accomplishments. Faculty are drawn here by our mission, with a preeminent commitment to students and a deep desire to contribute in unique ways in this unique environment. Professor Brad Bundy of the Department of Chemical Engineering articulates the sentiment of so many of you. [Video14<\/sup>]<\/p>\n I am grateful for the influence you have in students\u2019 lives. We have a rich tradition of this kind of influence. I want to commend departments for careful attention to quality hiring in building this kind of unique faculty. I recognize that faculty recruitment is a time-intensive process, but it is an opportunity to continue to build and strengthen programs.<\/p>\n Faculty hiring at BYU is nominally a three-decade commitment for the large majority of faculty. When new department chairs and deans are appointed, I tell them that they will deal with a variety of issues\u2014students, financial management, space allocation, curriculum, research, etc. I try to reinforce that, while all of these matters are important, the single most important decision they will make will be their recommendation of new faculty for hire and the subsequent development of those hires.<\/p>\n We begin each search process with a pool of applicants who are equipped\u2014through the quality of their graduate programs and the rigor of their preparation in the discipline\u2014 In the last seven years, after 904 faculty campus interviews, we have hired 435 continuing faculty status\u2013track faculty. Think of the impact of your hard work. In those seven years we have replaced nearly one-third of the total complement of continuing faculty status\u2013track faculty at the university.<\/p>\n We approach our rank and status decisions with the same care, and we see retention and promotion through the same lens as we do the hiring process. We hire only those who we think will be successful here, and we seek university processes and resources to maximize the possibility of success. I hope the motivation for qualifying for continuing faculty status and promotion at the university comes from the heart rather than from the Rank and Status Policy.<\/p>\n Since 2010, after careful review at multiple levels, 271 faculty have been awarded continuing faculty status, 226 faculty have been promoted to the rank of associate professor, and 175 have been promoted to the rank of full professor. Based on the quality of the faculty we hire and the mentoring provided, we believe our success rates in the rank and status process are higher than at comparable universities. BYU\u2019s fulfillment of its core mission rises and falls on your contributions as faculty, and your influence extends far beyond the development of students\u2019 ability to think.<\/p>\n 3. Faculty serving with the heart are committed and equipped to bring heaven\u2019s influence into their interactions with students.<\/b><\/p>\n Let me quote from a 1975 address President Kimball gave here at BYU:<\/p>\n Your light must have a special glow, for while you will do many things in the programs of this university that are done elsewhere, these same things can and must be done better here than others do them. You will also do some special things here that are left undone by other institutions.<\/i>15<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n Learning seems to flourish when it is \u00adcultivated in an inspired environment. Before they are hired, all full-time faculty at BYU are approved by the BYU Board of Trustees, which is chaired by the First Presidency of the Church. The finest disciplinary preparation of faculty is a baseline expectation for them, and the board trusts us to make that evaluation. My sense is that what they are most keenly interested in is our ability to build faith in the students. That sets you apart from any other faculty body in the world.<\/p>\n
\nto contribute in significant ways through their scholarship. Of that candidate pool, a subset is identified who are also passionately committed to teaching here and for whom interaction with students will be their priority. The pool is further filtered as we select applicants who are uniquely and unapologetically anxious to both intellectually enlarge and spiritually strengthen students\u2014applicants who are \u00adprepared to serve with both mind and heart.<\/p>\n