Search News


Browse Archives

News

Promoting Liberal Education

January 30, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Redefining liberal education and building stronger public support for its concepts is no easy task. So when the Association of American Colleges and Universities a year ago announced a campaign to do those things, it was perceived as requiring a 10-year campaign.

One year in, hundreds of academic leaders active in the association gathered in Washington to talk about -- among other topics -- progress on the campaign. Some of the key areas for consideration were a set of principles that the association hopes to draft to define liberal education, and data that suggest some notable gaps between student perceptions of the quality of their general education and their actual knowledge base.

On Friday, participants discussed a draft set of principles, likely to be revised before they are issued next fall at the earliest. The draft talks about how changes in the global economy make it more vital than ever to provide students with an “empowering liberal education." Rather than recommending specific courses, the report outlines themes, or “learning outcomes,” from the very generally academic -- quantitative literacy and knowledge in the sciences and humanities -- to those that also relate to ethics and society broadly, such as civic knowledge and engagement.

The draft encourages undergraduate research and study abroad opportunities as an essential ingredient of the cake, rather than just the icing. For academics, that might be old news, but “the public is oblivious to this,” said Carol Geary Schneider, president of AACU. “There are … very strong reform movements, and no demand from the public.” Schneider told the crowd of over 100 faculty members and administrators that the goals in the draft “should be familiar to you, we took them from your campus statements.”

The point of Friday’s session was to open the draft up to suggestions. “Every word is negotiable,” Schneider said.

One thing that people seemed to agree on quickly was that, currently, students’ take on general education requirements is that they are loosely connected courses in an outdated system that, annoyingly, wants to delay their graduation. The draft suggests giving students a “compass,” or cluing them into the educational outcomes they are shooting for.

“I like the idea of giving students a ‘compass,’ ” said Jonathan Daube, president of Manchester Community College, in Connecticut. Administrators “should suggest to faculty that they explain to students why they’re taking [a particular course outside of their major]. It can’t be something we just put into faculty mailboxes.”

Bernice Braid, director emeritus of the honors program at Long Island University, agreed, saying that students need to be told why a breadth of knowledge will make them better professionals and better citizens. “It has to be more than ‘learning how to read a poem will change your life,’ ” she said.

Carol Lucey, president of Western Nevada Community College, said that having firm principles for a good liberal education would help her do assessments that she can share with policy makers, and would help her talk with students who “come to college with a single agenda: job training.” She added that, in today’s global economy, a research lab technician might have to be prepared to become a medical technician “if that job is outsourced in a year and a half,” and that a broad education will equip them to make such transitions.

In an effort to embrace thematic learning outcomes, as opposed to rigid lists of required classes, committees at Ohio State University and the University of Texas at Austin recently issued reports identifying educational goals that can pervade many courses, so that students are working toward them even within their major. Ethics, for example, can be treated in physical and social science classes, as can writing, and students may push back less if they have a greater range of choices with which to fill requirements.

Figuring out the right way for each campus to promote liberal education was also a theme at a discussion Saturday of the AACU's recent report on the gap between the general education students think they have received and evidence about the actual quality of their knowledge. Ross Miller, director of programs for the AACU, acknowledged that there are problems with many measures of student knowledge. But even accepting those flaws, he said, it's clear that there is considerable evidence that students aren't emerging from college with all the skills they need.

Rather than critiquing those national studies, he said, educators should accept that "there is something going on here that is not quite right" and that ultimately "we don't have a good idea of how well we are doing."

Colleges are better off if they provide "rich local data" that show the impact of a college education on students -- and then use that data to improve programs, he said.

Judith Eaton, president of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, said that accrediting agencies could help -- in that they were now pushing colleges to provide such data. Eaton said that this represented a significant change. Five or more years ago, she said, accreditors were doing "an audit of process" and looking to see if colleges had some sort of system in place to measure student learning. Now, most accrediting agencies are looking at the data produced by those systems: "evidence of student achievement."

Eaton said that this shift was a good one, and would reinforce the efforts of AACU to promote liberal education. But she was less encouraging about the potential impact of the pending reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, which may or may not move ahead in the coming months. Provisions in both the Senate and House of Representatives versions of the bills, she said, would ask accreditors to collect much more information from colleges on graduation rates, transfer records, job placement success levels, etc. Eaton said that it all added up to "a good deal of additional work."

But she cautioned that the data Congress was seeking was not necessarily the kind of data that helps colleges promote liberal education.

One professor in the audience challenged Eaton's positive portrayal of the role of accreditors. This professor said that regional accreditors -- which accredit institutions' performance and quality over all -- generally help colleges on liberal education. But he said that many colleges are "held hostage" by specialized accrediting agencies (those that accredit individual academic programs, most of them professional). He said that these groups use the accrediting process to block requirements or policies that might promote a liberal education.

Eaton acknowledged the problem. "This is about competition for money and for curricular space," she said. Eaton said that she thought many specialized accreditors were paying more attention to the need to balance their programs' needs against those of institutions, but she said that the tension remained.

Ronald A. Williams, president of Prince George's Community College, told those at the meeting that there was yet another challenge for their efforts: the need to figure out just what a liberal education is. All of the talk about measuring impact suggests more consensus than may exist, he said.

Williams said that there are areas -- critical thinking, literacy of various types -- on which there is agreement. And he said that colleges are quite successful at measuring progress in these areas.

But Williams noted that AACU endorses broader concepts of defining a liberal education, believing -- as he said he does as well -- that a liberal education promotes good citizenship and social responsibility. That's where things become "particularly problematic," he said.

Just as educators have to accept that their student bodies are diverse these days, so they need to accept that the values of their students (not to mention parents, legislators, the public) are diverse. "We can't assume homogeneity of social or ethical values," he said. That means colleges need to engage in more public discussion about what values they are promoting and why, he said.

To those who assume that a good liberal education yields a certain kind of educated person, Williams offered a fact that -- to judge from the looks exchanged around the room -- clearly got the audience thinking about the values they believe are associated with liberal education. The statement from Williams: "The people who lead us into wars are always among the best educated people in society."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Promoting Liberal Education

  • Yale Report of 1828
  • Posted by R.J. O'Hara on January 30, 2006 at 5:36am EST
  • Any discussion of liberal education in the United States should start from one of its foundational documents, " The Yale Report of 1828."

  • Posted by John McCreery on January 30, 2006 at 7:15am EST
  • One has to wonder if, given the current political climate, "LIBERAL education" is what we should be trying to promote. As a liberal myself, I love the term. But if the job is to promote general education to legislators to many if not a majority of whom "Liberal" = "Diabolical" a different way to describe the project might be more productive.

  • "Besty credentialed" not "best educated"
  • Posted by GG on January 30, 2006 at 8:10am EST
  • The quotation from President Williams at the conclusion of this article is misleading. The people who lead us now (and even who have led us in the past) are often the "best credentialed" in the country perhaps, but that is not the same thing as the "best educated."

  • Credentials v. Ed-ja-ma-cation
  • Posted by A.D. on January 30, 2006 at 8:41am EST
  • " .. The people who lead us now (and even who have led us in the past) are often the “best credentialed” .. perhaps, but that is not the same thing as the “best educated.”

    Recall "The Best & The Brightest" by David Halberstam. All them Hah-vad boys and 50,000 "military advisors" in Vietnam. All them smarts, ed-ja-macation and macho, and for what? LBJ, 500,000 U.S. troops, and 58,000 U.S. dead.

    All I know is, the average community college student and her/his parents wonder how much good will come of their investment of their hard-earned money. By age 18, teaching good citizenship and "social responsibilty" is one heck of an upward push. And the parents can spot a BS artist with credentials, a million miles away.

  • The question is which is to be master
  • Posted by tom abeles on January 30, 2006 at 10:25am EST
  • When one went to a university, in the past, and when one enters, for example, a military academy, expectations for a degree have been clear.

    Today, the dynamics is more complex with departments competing for FTE's, specialized programs dictating course requirements and students wanting flexibility to design their own path.

    Additionally, institutions are competing for students, except, perhaps medallion campuses.

    So, Humpty Dumpty was right after all, and the only control is the ability to award a degree- and that may be negotiable.

    Welcome to the global megamall of post secondary (and potentially all) education.

  • "set of draft principles"
  • Posted by savvydapunch on January 30, 2006 at 10:41am EST
  • Does anyone have a link to the draft set of principles referred to in the article?

  • "Liberal" education
  • Posted by Andy Kohen , Prof. of Economics on January 30, 2006 at 11:06am EST
  • IMHO, we ought to be careful not to confuse "liberal" in the socio-political connotation with "liberal" in the educational connotation. What I mean by the latter is that education is liberating from biases, preconceptions and misunder-standings that constrain thought and imagination. Understood that way, we can probably get consensus (if not unanimity)that "liberal" professors/education are/is desirable, not objectionable nor to be scorned.

  • Liberal Education
  • Posted by Dr. F. Gump on January 30, 2006 at 2:50pm EST
  • "Rich man goes to college, poor man goes to work . . ." does anyone else remember the rest of the words to that old Charlie Daniels' song?

    Liberal = generous, correct? Liberal helping of food add to one's girth and weight, no?

    Community college students tend to select a lean diet of courses leading to an immediate job. They would probably choose medicine, law, or engineering, but most can't afford the eight years (or background knowledge or aptitude/skills in math/chemistry.

    The sons and daughters of the truly wealthy can afford to take their time, read much literature in many fields with little direct relation to an immediate career need, and possibly inherit the family business. Lifelong learning; a truly liberal education with generous portions from every source of academic nutrient.

    Families of old money would certainly seem to have every reason to be opposed to most citizens having a liberal education. How might the peasents react if they ever really come to understand how things work?

  • I second Andy Kohen
  • Posted by kenneth d feigenbaum , professor at UMUC on January 30, 2006 at 4:35pm EST
  • Professor Kohen in one sentence encompasses the "liberating goals of education" I applaud him and wonder how much of his synopsis of what is liberal education came from his "weaning" at Monteith College. I also find little new,in a broad philosphical sense that was not said by Alfred North Whitehead in his "The Aims of Education" published in 1929.

  • Posted by Thane Doss on January 30, 2006 at 6:50pm EST
  • "What I mean by the latter is that education is liberating from biases, preconceptions and misunder-standings that constrain thought and imagination. Understood that way, we can probably get consensus (if not unanimity)that “liberal” professors/education are/is desirable, not objectionable nor to be scorned."

    One person's constraint on imagination is why another person wants unconstrained freedom to wiretap, and one person's set of biases, preconceptions, and misunderstandings is another person's definition of reality. Consider W.'s explanations of why Cheney, Rice, and Rumsfeld are more objective than newspapers, so he doesn't need to read newspapers.

    Given major movement on the right to render words like "science" and "scientific theory" meaningless by redefining them to include everything they exist to exclude, I don't think we can expect much success from insisting that people recognize different meanings of the word "liberal." Perhaps we should consider speaking of a "broadly functional" or "multifunctional" education instead. Or perhaps to choose wording close enough to a sacred object that people might not choose to redefine it, maybe we should call it a "luck-and-pluck enhancing" education.

  • Liberal Education
  • Posted by Bernard Johnston , President at Athena Productions, Inc. on January 31, 2006 at 5:00pm EST
  • I welcome R.J. O'Hara's endorsement of the Yale Report of 1828; and add here the l945 Harvard report entitled "General Education in a Free Society," an analysis sadly now abandoned by Harvard itself to its great disgrace and disadantage. Educators and educrats alike are again reinventing the wheel in their naive efforts to define liberal education without benefit of the most worldly and "classical" definitions already available. All teachers should read the above sources, including also Stringfellow Barr's essay "Liberal Education: A Common Adventure" and Alfred North Whitehead's "The Aims of Education." Bernard Johnston

  • Posted by Mark on February 2, 2006 at 2:00pm EST
  • "Dr F. Gump" offers:

    >Liberal = generous, correct? Liberal helping of food add to one’s girth and weight, no?

    In a word, no. Liberal = of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts. From Latin liberalis: suitable for a freeman. "Liberating" the mind, et cet.

  • Artes Liberales
  • Posted by K. Mathews on February 7, 2006 at 9:20pm EST
  • Not to put too fine a point on what amounts to a margin note in this debate, but the "liberal arts" (artes liberales) were so dubbed by the Romans because they were the subjects that only a man free of the daily demands of labor could afford to pursue. In other words, the leisurely pursuits of society's affluent. This original meaning cleaves closely to Dr. Gump's understanding that "the sons and daughters of the truly wealthy can afford to take their time, read much literature in many fields with little direct relation to an immediate career need." The product of a large, urban, commuter university, I have witnessed the pressures many working students (of all ages) feel to justify the long hours, expense, and myriad other sacrifices necessary to complete 120 credit hours toward a meaningful degree. I applaud the efforts of the AACU to develop a strategy that will lead to a better understanding (through data, anyone?) of what a liberal education--even (or especially) as part of a professional degree--imparts to a student.

  • Posted by Dan Lilienthal , Ever ask a student? at Wash U in ST Louis on March 6, 2006 at 6:05pm EST
  • Just a quick post, but I've noticed for reading this site that those who run colleges and universities do so in a bubble, taking very little consideration the interests of students. While faculty such as all of you on this site are talking about one thing, students and recent grads are saying how the purpose of college is to get a degree. Time for an image change.

  • Yeah Dan
  • Posted by Dr. F. Gump on April 13, 2006 at 10:50pm EDT
  • Dan wrote: "While faculty such as all of you on this site are talking about one thing, students and recent grads are saying how the purpose of college is to get a degree."

    Yeah Dan, my brother's a doctor. Who cares what they think? I just want to pay him $20, have the government pay $160, and I'll take the cheap drugs to get high.

    I don't want to listen to what my bro the doctor lectures me about to get better, I don't want to read the package inserts or wellness literature, I just want a cheap fix to last me a short while.

    Let's just give the kids all diplomas for free. Nothing is what they will be worth soon after we start doing it, because employers will increase their messages to Washington to STOP FUNDING A BIG RIPOFF.

    If you just want a fake diploma and no real education, get a diploma mill fake. No studying, reading, or thinking involved.

  • Hybrid Core
  • Posted by Advisor Ian , Program Advisor on May 30, 2006 at 3:25pm EDT
  • Part of the problem of "liberal education" is that in many places it has been replaced by a "general education" with no guideposts except "fulfill this requirement." The problem being that education intended for liberation is suddenly transformed into a "tasky thing" to get out of the way so you can graduate.

    I don't deny that the word "liberal" has been corrupted for political purposes, not so different than the fact that the word "love" might just as easily mean "lust after" in today's corrupted usage - the worst problem being the making of our own language uninformative and irrelevant - especially when such vague English terminology is described more specifically by 3 or more words in another language (Greek, for example).

    So it is with the curriculum. In allowing all sorts of classes fulfill vague notions of requirements, there is less meaning to the overall concept of a "liberal education" and, hence, students begin to feel that the classes are just there to bilk them of more money. I have one advantage over my peers in this matter: I chose to dual degree in two very different colleges as an undergrad. One had a core program and the other had a general education. Both were designed to fulfill "liberal education requirements," but the core program had far more meaning because there was - by design - a particular intellectual journey underlying course designs that might have become incoherent if left to ASC's many departments to bicker over (and, yes, it's about money, so they DO bicker over it). What's missing from those courses that provide student development that we all can supposedly agree upon is developing a sense of meaning for the rest...

    Consider this: I had a nursing student ask me why she should bother with a class on ethics. I was a bit dismayed because it seemed obvious to me, yet there I was as an advisor justifying someone else's class with, "Well, even if you feel your ethics are perfect, you might still want to learn how a patient with a gunshot wound might rationalize their situation." She smiles and says, "thank you, that really helps," yet now I am perplexed... What went wrong there? Why didn't she enter the class knowing it wasn't there for brainwashing? Is it something I will need to address in my UNIV class in addition to the myriad of other things already crammed into that one credit orientation class? How much time will it get? Ten minutes? Is that enough?

    What I'm proposing is a hybrid core. There needs to be at least one class explaining WHY the students are bothering with a general education curriculum. I'm not talking about a pat answer, but that the documents mentioned above and many more that explain the WHY of higher education ought to be included. Students ought to enter college with a sense of purpose and meaning beyond "well, it seemed like the thing to do at the time because (I was bored/I want a "good" job/ all my friends are here/ I'm here for the beer)."