|
|
Liberal Education, Winter 2004
Looking Forward: Liberal Education in the
21st Century
By Bobby Fong
|
W. B. Yeats envisioned history as cyclical,
a series of gyres, or spirals, marked by the reworking of
enduring tropes. As an example, for him epochs were demarcated
by "violent annunciation," whether Leda"s
rape by Zeus, the shadowing of Mary by the Spirit of God,
or the rough beast of the Second Coming that "Slouches
towards Bethlehem to be born."
In reviewing the concerns that led to
the founding of the Association of American Colleges in 1915,
I was struck by how contemporary they are. The great fear
was that the growth and success of public institutions, with
their focus on vocational preparation and specialized knowledge,
would work to the detriment of liberal education. Leaders
of church-related institutions worried about the place of
faith in the academy amid the larger concern that education
of character for citizenship and service was giving way to
career preparation. The founders sought to establish a national
forum for higher education, as opposed to regional interests,
but they could only dimly perceive how the academy would be
shaped by the democratization of higher education. Writing
in a new century, I see how these concerns have evolved over
the past nine decades, but also how they remain characteristic
of the questions that still occupy the Association of American
Colleges and Universities today. Perhaps that should not be
surprising, for if at the heart of liberal education is the
rehearsal of the human condition, then the questions we ask,
even of our purpose as a higher education association, should
be perennial ones.
Liberal and professional education
What should be the relationship between
liberal education and professional education? In the first
decades of the last century, these tended to be regarded as
divergent models. Liberal arts college curricula were still
largely based on courses taken in common: As late as the 1960s,
Hamilton College had a universal rhetoric requirement for
all first-year students, each of whom made a public declamation
in chapel to the entire freshman class assembled. By contrast,
while the value of liberal learning was not lost on public
institutions, it was embodied at those institutions in general
education requirements, generally taken in the first two years
of matriculation, before students turned to practical studies.
Over time, the growth of specialized knowledge strengthened
the importance of the major, and from the mid-century on,
higher education was generally characterized, even at liberal
arts colleges, by recurrent adjustments between the proportion
of graduation requirements given to general education and
that increasingly given to the major. Thus, the common curriculum
of a St. John"s College is now considered unusual, not
for everyone, a far cry from the days in which common curricula
were widespread attempts to represent the learning required
of any educated man.
If the curricula of liberal arts colleges
retain a distinctive characteristic today, it is in the relative
paucity of professional majors. The national liberal arts
colleges award at least half of their degrees in the liberal
arts: Students study economics, not business; the sciences,
not engineering. Professional preparation is to be reserved
for post-baccalaureate study. But such colleges are a small
minority. The majority of baccalaureate colleges, in common
with master"s and doctoral universities, award more
than half of their degrees in professional studies. If we
accept the conventional wisdom that liberal education and
professional education are antipodes, then the fears of the
founders of this Association were justified: Professional
education has become predominant. The progress of our Association,
however, has superseded this conventional distinction.
A new integration
In a changing world where 30 percent
of our graduates may eventually work at jobs that do not yet
exist, training for a specific career is insufficient as preparation
for lifetime employment. Professional advancement is predicated
on the capacity to change in response to new situations and
challenges, to re-create oneself over time. This realization
has engendered renewed appreciation for liberal education,
where studies were intended to form lifelong learners. However,
rather than understanding liberal education as simply designating
traditional subject matter areas such as the humanities and
the sciences, AAC&U has gone further. In the Association"s
2002 report, Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning
as a Nation Goes to College, "liberal education"
is used to refer to certain learning outcomes. Liberal learning
is no longer relegated to general education: It denominates
any study that inculcates the abilities to communicate effectively;
think knowledgeably, insightfully, and critically; work cooperatively;
and behave ethically and responsibly. The operative concern
is how any subject, any major or professional program, can
be taught liberally.
This has been a monumental conceptual
and pedagogical move. It calls for the infusion of liberal
education into professional studies, and it spotlights the
importance of curricular coherence if liberal learning and
professional education are to be integrated. Butler University
has five colleges, a college of liberal arts and sciences
together with schools of education, performing arts, business,
and pharmacy and health sciences. All students, regardless
of college, have traditionally fulfilled requirements taken
within a general education core curriculum. Recently, however,
discussions have begun with regard to how the business and
pharmacy curricula could be revamped to integrate liberal
study in order to better prepare graduates for their professions.
Greater Expectations has catalyzed similar discussions
around the country at institutions ranging from research universities
to community colleges. The integration of liberal studies
and professional education, not their divergence, is the new
shape of this trope for our century.
Habits of the heart
Hitherto, I have discussed the reshaping
of liberal education to develop habits of mind needed to support
lifelong learning for careers. That is an important but not
sufficient rationale for the contemporaneity of liberal study.
The founders of the Association in 1915 had feared that career
preparation would supplant a traditional aim of college: the
formation of character for citizenship and service to society.
By the closing decades of the last century, their fear seemed
well-founded. Colleges had rejected the practice of in
loco parentis; the central purpose of the university
was generally avowed to be the discovery and transmission
of knowledge; matters of religion, morality, and ethics were
considered inappropriate for the classroom, smacking of indoctrination
rather than intellectual inquiry. Higher education"s
purpose was to train the mind; character formation was a concern
of the family, the church, the courts, but not the academy.
There were good reasons for this renunciation.
Too often religion had been an opponent of scientific progress
and rational inquiry. The education of a gentleman was predicated
on class and gender distinctions. God and country had been
invoked to spur the slaughter of millions in a series of world
wars. Morality, supposedly rooted in timeless truths about
human nature, turned out to be parochial, culture-bound, and
selective in its charity.
In retrospect, however, this wholesale
renunciation has now come to be regarded as an abdication
of responsibility to our students and our communities. Students
need to be equipped for living in a world where moral decisions
must be made. And in living, and in choosing, character counts.
How one earns a living should be an extension of the values
that inform one"s life, and there inevitably will be
continuity between personal values and how one engages with
society. Character is formed by neglect as well as by cultivation,
and the academy has had to reassess its refusal to help students
grapple with moral imperatives.
This turn has been made possible intellectually
by a new humility regarding the limits of empiricism and rationality.
The empirical method explores the "how" of things,
but not the "why." Rationality may chart cause
and effect, but it does not exhaust meaning. Epistemologists
have suggested that what and how we know are premised on assumptions
of what we imagine our world and ourselves to be. There is
no value-free inquiry because values necessarily underlie
inquiry.
A key insight of cultural studies is
that we cannot be human in general: We inevitably express
our humanity in particular, culturally mediated ways. Language
is a quintessential human capacity, but no one speaks "language";
one speaks English, or Chinese, or Swahili. So too it is with
human values, wherein the very definitions of "justice"
or "love" are culturally mediated. There can be
no unitary moral orthodoxy, but there are universal longings
to make a world more just, more tolerant, more compassionate,
more inclusive than the one we have inherited. The challenge
to the academy is to find ways to speak authoritatively and
constructively to issues of citizenship, service, leadership,
and character without imposing a single model of morality.
The postmodern university is poised to
accept that challenge. Given a more humble, more nuanced,
and culturally sensitive approach to ways of knowing, there
is place once again in the academy for exploration of ethics,
for case studies of decision-making behavior from literature
to business. There is place once again for inquiry into religion
and spirituality. There is place to engender not only habits
of the mind, but also, in Tocqueville"s famous phrase,
habits of the heart, which will enable students not only to
make a living but also to make lives that are personally fulfilling
precisely because they are implicated in the well-being of
others.
As with the integration of liberal education
into professional studies, inquiry into ethics, religion,
and spirituality cannot simply be segregated into certain
courses in a general education requirement. It must be infused
into the curriculum. Moreover, service learning and volunteerism,
issues of leadership and citizenship, necessarily extend beyond
the classroom and beyond the campus. There is an experiential
component here that encompasses co-curricular activities and
internships. The important thing, to my mind, is that there
is a renewed determination within the academy to address these
issues. The founders of the Association in 1915 were right
to fret about the potential neglect of issues of faith and
character formation. What they did not foresee was an ebb
tide reversing its flow.
National aspirations and access
In an address to the first meeting of
the Association in 1915, Robert Kelly called for the development
of a "national educational consciousness" consonant
with his sense of America"s ethnic, regional, religious,
and political diversity coming together to form a common national
destiny. Over the last century, the conditions for such a
national educational consciousness certainly have been achieved.
In contrast to a time when going to college was an option
for only a few, the 2002 executive overview to Greater
Expectations begins, "The United States is fast
approaching universal participation in higher education."
It goes on to note that 75 percent of high school graduates
get some postsecondary education within two years of receiving
their diplomas. The nation has grown more ethnically diverse,
but higher education has become a common conduit to flourishing
in American life regardless of social origins. It sends a
high percentage of its secondary school graduates to higher
education; America can aspire to universal participation in
higher education.
But this aspiration is troubled on two
counts. First, we may have already reached high tide in access
to higher education. The growing economic disparity between
rich and poor makes college increasingly unaffordable for
many. State underwriting of public education keeps tuition
low relative to the actual cost of education, but the effect
has been less to provide access to the desperately poor than
to subsidize college for the middle- and upper-classes, who
actually may have the financial capacity to pay more than
they do. The recent recession has spurred cutbacks in legislative
support to higher education, but rather than a temporary expedient
in hard times, there is fear that, going forward, education
will no longer be a civic priority for which the public is
willing to pay, especially through tax increases. Most ominously,
while college-going has increased among high school graduates,
the high school dropout rate is worryingly high, especially
among the poor and peoples of color who are experiencing the
fastest incidence of population growth. Those most in need
of the advantages provided by a college education are those
increasingly denied access to that opportunity by lack of
prior academic preparation and by lack of ability to pay.
It would be disingenuous to boast about universal participation
in higher education if America is creating a permanent underclass
that cannot even complete high school.
Second, there is concern over the shifting
shape of higher education in the years to come. Increased
access has been made possible by the proliferation of educational
opportunities, in particular the growth of online and for-profit
entities. What this means for educational quality, however,
is uncertain. For-profit enterprises are not uniformly certified
by accrediting associations, but rather than pursuing such
accreditation, they are seeking federal legislation to mandate
the acceptance of transfer credits earned through their courses.
The needs of non-traditional age learners and those who cannot
afford to stop out from jobs to be full-time students have
led to a different pattern of working toward a degree: the
accumulation of credits through sporadic attendance at multiple
institutions as well as through taking courses online. This
has resulted in efforts to create a national clearinghouse
for student transcripts so that credits can be tracked more
easily. The cumulative effect, however, may be to equate education
with certification for careers, where what is charted is mastery
of subject matter, not liberal education. We have been down
this road before, and what threatens is another cycle in the
tension between vocational preparation and liberal learning.
Threats to coherence
In the earlier discussion, I identified
coherence in the curriculum as an essential characteristic
of the integration of liberal and professional education,
and of education for citizenship and service. Our Association
has long argued that liberal education is not achieved by
taking any number of classes, but rather by intentionally
patterning courses of study that link and synthesize ways
of knowing and doing. Perhaps the most important triumph of
AAC&U in the last century has been in convincing the academy
that aggregating credits does not an education make. Our conferences
and activities have been designed to foster institutional
efforts toward curricular coherence. I fear, however, that
the portability of credits necessitated by nomadic learners
threatens such coherence.
The educational path of a nomadic learner
is not, by definition, marked by continuity within an institution.
What coherence there is in such an education must be constructed
by the learner. One might argue that this is a natural extension
of students taking responsibility for their own learning.
Unfortunately, this overlooks a fundamental dimension of education:
that learners be exposed to, even confronted with, topics
and methods which they never imagined had relevance to their
lives. Longitudinal studies of liberal arts college graduates
repeatedly show that recent alumni most highly prize study
in the major, but that as graduates are further removed from
their undergraduate experience, it is liberal learning that
becomes more esteemed. A customer-based, cafeteria approach
to curricular coherence, I believe, does not bode well for
liberal education because that is not what will be sought.
Greater Expectations rightly
extols liberal learning as essential to the development of
democratic leadership. Ironically, however, the democratization
of higher education may threaten the coherence of the very
education in which our Association calls for liberal education
to be embedded. I fear that nomadic learners, and the bureaucratic
processes and technological innovations that make their education
possible, may re-create the divide between vocational education
and liberal learning. I fear that a nomadic learner"s
eschewing of a long-term affiliation with a learning community
may fatally impede opportunities to educate for character,
citizenship, service, and leadership. When no one ever knows
the learners, can the learners ever be challenged to know
themselves?
Liberal education will persist and even
flourish for full-time students, particularly at residentially
based institutions marked by intentional coherence within
the curriculum and beyond, encompassing co-curricular life
and experiential learning. But the parallel development of
programs and services to accommodate the peripatetic needs
of the nomadic learner may not be fertile soil for liberal
learning. In the name of democratizing higher education, then,
we may be perpetuating two tracks: a careerist track for the
nomadic learner and a liberal education for the elite, those
prosperous enough to afford or fortunate enough to earn scholarships
to attend college full-time.
A challenge
The challenge to us as educators individually
and as an Association collectively is whether we believe that
liberal education should be as universal as we have presumed
that higher education is becoming. Going forward, liberal
education and higher education may decidedly not be the same
thing. If the American public insists on the primacy of career
preparation, public higher education, tied to public subsidy,
may not be able to answer the ambitious call for curricular
coherence in liberal learning that this Association has issued.
The private sector may answer affirmatively, if it wills to
do so, but would the Association then revert to what it originally
was established to be in 1915, a social solidarity of higher
education institutions not under state control? This is one
chasm, that between private and public education"s commitment
to liberal education, most of us had presumed, at least within
the auspices of AAC&U, had been closed.
Although Yeats believed that history
was cyclical, he did not believe it to be static. The gyres
of history spiral onward, and although we revolve back to
a similar point in our circling, we can see how the present
moment is not the same as, but superimposed upon an analogous
moment in the past. That, at least, is a sort of progress.
Liberal learning, I have said, is the rehearsal of perennial
questions, not that they are irresolvable, but that resolutions
are local and, like theology, must be reworked for our time,
our circumstances, and our needs. We can learn and have benefited
from the wisdom of those who came before us, and it is because
of their fears, hopes, and achievements that what we face
in this new century seems so familiar. As T. S. Eliot wrote,
"And the end of all our exploring/ Will be to arrive where
we started/ And know the place for the first time."
Bobby Fong is president
of Butler University.
To respond to this article, e-mail: liberaled@aacu.org,
with author's name on the subject line.
|
 |
|