I was amazed from this conversation by how relevant it is to so many of the topics we have and will talk about. Although I think this is an interesting beginning to our conversation on Wednesday and I posted this anecdote in order to start thinking about finances within universities, I would like to focus on his comment of humanity students as being snooty. How could we have had that whole discussion without even considering how a student at a vocational school might perceive us and our education? This insight from a vocational student towards liberal arts students completely opened my eyes to a new part of the discussion I believe we completely avoided. Although we cannot fill in the voices of vocational students, how can we discuss vocational vs liberal arts without discussing “the other?” Ignoring vocational voices within our argument perpetuates the system of liberal arts students being elite, and while I understand this is a true classification, I believe it minimizes the opinions and views of vocational students as obsolete and unworthy. Sorry for how anecdotal this all was, but please let me know what your thoughts on this are!
Today I was talking on the phone with my boyfriend who goes to a large, private university. He attends the engineering and technology school and is a math and mechanical engineering double major with a minor in computer science and a concentration in physics. He is also a first-generation traditional college student (his parents and grandparents all either went to college and dropped out or completed their bachelor degrees as working adults after traditional college age). He was telling me about how last week his cousin, who is currently in her second year of college, was picked up by her parents at her large state school because she was struggling to get by. I commented on how it was a pity that large universities (like his own) are unable to give students the resources to succeed when they are struggling, commenting that doing so at small, liberal arts colleges like Oberlin is much easier because of financial costs and the ability to monitor all students’ academic achievements. He responded with frustration saying his school is able to afford more student support, rather they choose not to as evident in the billion dollar construction of the school’s second ice hockey arena. I responded discussing the readings we had this week, saying finances are more complicated with tuition and private and public funds complicating the financial structure of the university. He responded claiming that he believed it was simpler than that: it’s related to the fact that his school is a corporation that cares little about its students. He believes his university only cares about how to get students in, not on how to keep them there. I discussed the readings more, telling him about what I have learned. He responded with jealousy, saying he wish he could read more, but after a continued conversation, he concluded by remarking, “well that’s the thing with humanities people. They are all snooty.”
I was amazed from this conversation by how relevant it is to so many of the topics we have and will talk about. Although I think this is an interesting beginning to our conversation on Wednesday and I posted this anecdote in order to start thinking about finances within universities, I would like to focus on his comment of humanity students as being snooty. How could we have had that whole discussion without even considering how a student at a vocational school might perceive us and our education? This insight from a vocational student towards liberal arts students completely opened my eyes to a new part of the discussion I believe we completely avoided. Although we cannot fill in the voices of vocational students, how can we discuss vocational vs liberal arts without discussing “the other?” Ignoring vocational voices within our argument perpetuates the system of liberal arts students being elite, and while I understand this is a true classification, I believe it minimizes the opinions and views of vocational students as obsolete and unworthy. Sorry for how anecdotal this all was, but please let me know what your thoughts on this are!
2 Comments
Eighty leading colleges and universities are today announcing a plan to reverse a decades-long process by which colleges have -- largely through the Common Application -- made their applications increasingly similar. Read the full article here. Oberlin is part of this group.
Georgia Lederman
Notes: September 23rd 2015: Shaping a Curriculum an Liberal v. Educational Nussbaum’s main point: -currently, education pushed towards economics -realistically we should be focusing on how to make a better democracy -difference between general ed. and distribution requirements -purpose of a liberal ed. to create citizens (citizens defined by empathy and perspective-taking) · Walking a mile in someone’s shoes · But scary to teach morality within education structure -At Oberlin, we DO teach morals and ethics, environmental courses… Bok: -students as motivated but directionless -why are people asking for a major? Critical thinking through a particular subject -a well-taught course is the most important (rather than curriculum); TEACHERS Pathways Adrift: -this book has caught a lot of attention. -idea that colleges are not doing what they should be -paint a picture of disconnect between goals and reality; students are not learning what they should be -they argue that peers have biggest learning impact on peers · Making mistakes, getting called out, empathy · Difference between being called out when you hurt someone · Exhausting when POC people teaching about race, Queer people calling about queerphobia etc. These students doing a lot of work not being acknowledged. · Frustrating when people who look the same assumed to have same knowledge Schwartz: we are learning NOW how to “call people out lovingly” Opinion: maybe it is the role of professor to moderate? -Point of a major: similar vantage point Opinion: is general ed. limiting or opening? How do we get a liberal education? You could theoretically go to a research university and take a variety of classes (poetry, physics etc.) -At St. John’s no one has a major -Hampshire: everyone makes own major -Opinion: regretting doing own major, because you don’t get to learn a specific methodology -It is becoming harder to fit information into disciplinary model. Gumport: industry versus social institution model -Business mindset Try to define a liberal arts education: Good at confronting moral questions and good at adaptability for later career and changing values -Residential, small classes, humanities majors Concerning salary after college: -How do alums feel about liberal arts degrees? -hiring managers were specifically instructed to hire liberal arts students (english, history, political science) -Surveys of employers say that skills of communication come from liberal arts colleges -liberal arts colleges “train for your last job, not for your first job”. Tied to life-long learning. Debate: Liberal: Essential for functioning social system-democracy Teaching people to work together Bok says three goals to lib: prep for career, prep for citizenship, meaningful lives, · Is it snobbish to think liberal arts is best way towards meaningful life · (Trump supporters—what education might they have had?) -social connections, access, influence, as proponent of liberal arts education -what about integrating two sides? -statistic that six careers over life timeà adaptability -globalizationàempathy/learning to interact with different opinions -how to prepare vocational students for future changes? In welding for example -Lorain county community college -aftermath of auto industry crash in Ohio: vocational training gone badly. People not prepared for future Going forward: think about how other people view liberal arts/vocational Money Robert Bonfiglio, Contributing Writer, The Oberlin Review
September 11, 2015 Students at Oberlin College have a diverse array of interests and passions, resulting in an intersectionality often mentioned as a selling point on admissions tours. One common anecdote we share with prospective students is how chemistry students participate in guided research about the erosion of organ pipes. It is not difficult to find similarly collaborative efforts across the disciplines studied at Oberlin, whether it’s chemists working with organists, artists working with historians or dancers workings with Africana Studies scholars. Many students come to Oberlin because they can see that their interests will be nurtured in this environment. However, during my brief time at Oberlin, I have identified a difficulty that accompanies the exploration of new interests. In the classroom setting, there are times I refrain from contributing because I am lacking the confidence to question. I can feel my curiosity being suppressed. So why do I feel this way? I was often that kid in high school who would be chided by his fellow students for asking a question in math class whose answer seemed obvious. But I was relentless, and day after day I would ask my questions. So what changed when I got to Oberlin? There seems to be a common factor linking all Obies: We want to change something. However, every so often we disagree on how to make that change. These disagreements, when brought up in the classroom, often stifle discussions rather than add diversity to our learning. Little difference in perspective is offered, and the chance to learn for most, if not all, students in the classroom is severely limited. For the rest of the article, click here: A few interesting pieces from the Chronicle and the Council of Independent Colleges (CIC) came out today. The CIC is a organization of about 600 independent liberal arts colleges and universities, and one of their most recent initiatives is "Securing America's Future: The Power of a Liberal Arts Education." Today (9/18) is a symposium bringing together many leaders in liberal arts education, and the CIC has published an essay titled "The Liberal Arts in Action: Past, Present and Future" as part of the campaign and the symposium. There's a related article in the CHE, titled "A Symposium Cautions Against Conflating Education with Job Training," a disappointing choice of words in my opinion. The article talks about the value of liberal arts education and is worth the read; I highly recommend "A Complete Education" which discusses how to enrich liberal arts education and what the author calls "applied disciplines" through experiential learning. From the CHE, an article about a focus group of high school students and their reaction to the new College Scorecard: "What Actual High Schoolers Think of the College Scorecard." I took a look at the Scorecard yesterday and two of our numbers were incorrect (our retention rate is higher than reported and our total population of students is lower). It struck me as a good starting point for students and their families, but there's a lot more to the picture than the Scorecard data. The Scorecard does nothing to educate students and families about the educational experience and opportunities to extend and build upon what's learned in the classroom (study abroad, honors research, community outreach, etc) or the quality of the services and resources (career center, library, writing center, information technology, etc) that are part of the price tag. I understand the need for the Scorecard, and I hope it expands its coverage to include more information. Our last class made me step back and consider why I feel so strongly about the value of a college/university education. I've worked at three institutions after earning my MLS (two research universities and here, at IWU), and even though each was very different in mission, scope, population and location, the focus of the faculty and staff and administrations at each place has been on creating an environment in which students (and faculty) can work together to ask questions, develop ideas, debate issues, create, experiment and share what they've learned. All students should have the chance to be a part of that experience. I look forward to next week's discussion about shaping a curriculum - thanks everyone for a great few weeks. -Brittany With all of the reporting around College Scoreboard this week, it struck me how difficult it is for a non-academic consumer of information (like myself) to find out exactly what a large set of data like this means. So I stopped skimming all the headlines and took a closer look... for what it's worth. Mixed Messages ProPublica's report "Colleges Flush with Cash Saddle Poorest Students with Debt," focused on how selective institutions drive up debt for low-income students: "More than a quarter of the nation’s 60 wealthiest universities leave their low-income students owing an average of more than $20,000 in federal loans." This seems to support the findings from the Hoxby-Avery study from 2012 (see table 1: College Costs and Resources by Selectivity). But what's striking is that the way the messages of the two sources are presented, you might come to two completely different conclusions about the data. ProPublica = selective institutions are expensive for low-income high-achievers Hoxby-Avery = selective institutions would cost less than non-selective schools for low-income high-achievers Technical Barriers I tried to look at the data myself. It wasn't easy. I went to College Scoreboard, ED's public-facing website and downloaded the raw data. I immediately realized:
Comprehensiveness of Data? And to add to the confusion, eLiterate reports that there are problems with the actual information gathered, including a big chunk of degree-granting community colleges simply overlooked. On the numbers around completion rates, ED acknowledges that their data doesn't reflect the reality of adult education. Again, from e-Literate, a quote straight out of Dept. of Ed's report on College Scoreboard: "The most commonly referenced completion rates are those reported to IPEDS and are included on the College Scorecard... However, they rely on a school’s population of full-time students who are enrolled in college for the first-time. This is increasingly divergent from the profile of the typical college student, particularly at many two-year institutions and some four-year schools." What to think? Even without considering the effects of well-documented psychological phenomena like confirmation bias and priming, it seems like a herculean challenge to get a solid grasp on this stuff. Any strategies to share? In David Walker’s Appeal, a famous manifesto written in 1829 calling for enslaved Americans to take action, Walker asserts that the “ignorance” of black Americans is largely at fault for the continued slavery and lack of revolt (David Walker’s Appeal). He calls for educated black men to “enlighten” those who lack education: “Men of colour, who are also of sense, for you particularly is my APPEAL designed. Our more ignorant brethren are not able to penetrate its value. I call upon you therefore to cast your eyes upon the wretchedness of your brethren, and to do your utmost to enlighten them”.
Furthermore, David Walker asserts that one of the most damaging things is when individuals think that they are free, when societal inequalities still dictate their agency. He cites a black man who worked as a shoe-shiner, who claimed: “I am completely happy!!! I never want to live any better or happier than when I can get a plenty of boots and shoes to clean!!!” (Walker 29). If this individual understood the reality of power in the 1820’s in the American south, he would not see himself as free. This passage made me think about Charles Murray’s Article “ Are Too Many People Going to College”, in which he weighs the economic value of of going to college versus receiving a vocational training. Murray suggests that for a man of medium academic ability deciding between getting trained to be an electrician or pursuing a degree to become a manager, he should choose to be an electrician—he will likely make more money in the long run. Lastly, he cites “the satisfaction of being good at what one does for a living” as another reason to choose a position as an electrician. When comparing Murray’s and Walker’s Appeal, it is easy say that Murray leaves out discussion of power dynamics within American society. How is Murray’s electrician related to Walker’s shoe-shiner? Does the electrician deny himself the opportunity to see the world in greater complexity? Is it elitist to think of higher education as the key to seeing things the way they really are? Who should be going to college? Rachel Mead: 9/9/15: Higher Education in the United States: A Quick Historical Overview Small group summaries: · Mimi, she/her; Sam, he/him · Alumni- Oberlin History, Blodgett o roles of learning and labor, integration of white female students and black students o conservatism/radicalism o myth & reality perpetuate Oberlin’s radicalness o Ivy $ from slavery, Oberlin $ from black students’ tuition · Adams & Jefferson o difference of opinion re: collegiate culture o “virtue” gained from higher ed. o difference of opinion based on time period? · Ebony & Ivy, Wilder o slavery necessary à still using unjust labor o labor, labor, labor o institution as playground, labor done by enslaved people o how to transition out of slavery model AND out of learning and labor model? o Berea College maintained learning and labor… why did it work there? o Warren Wilson, Deep Springs, etc. · Delbanco o ch. 2 § building character at college § critical thinking? § learning passively/actively o ch. 3 § university/college hierarchy—we are at the bottom as a small liberal arts college § scientism, scientific research—questions in humanities are just as important as questions in the sciences, so why are scientific questions and methods applied here? · Cole (provost @ Columbia) o “core values” of higher (research) education o patriotic, idealist, leaves out $$ aspect… o wild & strange view of academic history and freedoms o defines this history as superior and inevitable (Whig history) o creating public memory, ulterior motives, agenda? o “disinterestedness,” descriptions of what teachers should be pushing for o rewriting/leaving out less successful histories meat of discussion: · CORE VALUES o core values… who do these values serve? o no universal truths o timeless values idea is out of touch o is Cole setting out ideals like Jefferson, or describing how the system currently works, as he sees it? o enlightenment & founding principles o Jefferson’s words are specifically for his vision of UVA; Cole’s are more generic, not specific to any institution o re: writing while higher ed. is under attack… how does his approach compare w/ Delbanco’s? § C: American universities as the envy of the world, core values have led to this; not a lot of nuance § D: laments loss of focus on character, but still thinks knowledge is important § C. seems to support “globalization” of education, “international communities” · spreading OUR system so that everyone can reach a common goal o would you leave any of these values off? what is the GOAL of higher education? § these are perfectly good values, we just don’t actually hold them § à role of myth? · college is a business, doesn’t just borrow business ideas à dismissal of $$ issues doesn’t make sense · these are things (values?) you need, not that you create; instrumentality for…? who knows? · equating university w/ free speech · professors are the focus, not the university · talking, but things don’t get done · is college not the real world? o we separate ourselves from the world… importance of learning from people who aren’t like us o not bringing anything into the world o Oberlin as a sample of the real world; not so much a bubble as microcosm · what is the relationship between college & learning? o tension between creating people with skills vs. life of mind approach… why are these treated as mutually exclusive? · this class is personal to many of us, how did we personally come to these readings? · is higher ed. a bubble or a reflection of society? wrapping up: · time for reflection is missing · learning for the sake of learning means different things to different people, plays different roles among priorities · have to fight for change in higher ed. (ß history lesson) · civil discourse: no wasted discussion as long as we try to listen and learn · disabilities in education are a focus for many in this class · bubble residential college experience comes from a history of exclusion--is it worth it? can it function without that exclusion? o can we have the personal connection in a democratic educational system? · what’s the point of this class? · talking to people about Oberlin experience, ask how has it affected us, how has it prepared us? · different missions of different kinds of higher ed. o importance of undergrad ed.? o how do you replicate the personal nature of the Oberlin experience at a bigger place? Elena Robakiewicz: Class Notes 9/9
· Oberlin history---we can have myths and truths, but ultimately both are important in understanding the past and forming the future o Not all myths about Oberlin history are true, but Oberlin is still a progressive place and thrives off of its history · Delbanco o Chapter 2---college is meant to grow character § It helps with critical thinking · Has been important since the Puritans (concept of grace) § Throughout American college history, the truth is unknown and questionable · Focus on philosophy, dead language literature, religion, etc. (NOT SCIENCE) o Chapter 3---over time, colleges have turned into research-based universities § Has been an increase in college’s interaction with the economy § Scientific research is easier to see as progress · Science moves forward and has tangible results; humanities often have no answer, creating the illusion of minimal progress § Although there is a push towards universities, let’s not give up on liberal arts · Ebony and Ivy---schools needed slave labor to economically thrive o Why was Oberlin the opposite? § Ivy’s used slave labor to build their school, feed their students, clean the halls, ect., greatly profiting from the institution § Oberlin pushed for an abolitionist agenda because it needed the funding from all possible communities · Plus idea of learning and labor made it more accessible for individuals · Cole---colleges and universities have always been a hub for academic freedom o The American university has been so successful because we have important core values § Universalism, organized skepticism, creation of new knowledge, free and open communication of ideas, disinterestedness, free inquiry and academic freedom, working for the “common” good*, international communities, peer review system, governance by authority, intellectual progeny, vitality of the community* · Believe that some of these are important and valuable for a thriving academia---peer review system, organized skepticism, etc. · Working for the “common” good and vitality of the community o Are we actually working towards this? How conscious are individuals (particularly professors and those part of the system) to these values? o Is this an accurate depiction of the history of universities? § Likely too idealized; missing many of the struggles of history; only talking about those we are good and passionate about their jobs § Where are the struggles? Is this too idealistic? o What is Cole’s purpose in writing this article? § Attempt at spreading American education values globally? § Trying to promote strong, research-based universities? § Trying to display what a good professor/university is? |
Steven VolkI'm a professor of History at Oberlin College (Oberlin, OH) where I also direct the Center for Teaching Innovation and Excellence (CTIE) Archives
November 2015
Categories |