Empowering Higher Education Through Mentorship

When James Garfield described the ideal college education as a student on one end of a log and Mark Hopkins on the other, he was emphasizing the importance of a personal, engaged and intellectually stimulating relationship between mentor and student.

Mark Hopkins, then president of Williams College, represented to Garfield the ideal teacher: one who was not only knowledgeable but who could inspire, challenge and personally engage a student’s curiosity and mind.

Garfield’s statement suggests that the essence of a great education doesn’t depend on elaborate resources, facilities or curricula. Instead, it lies in the quality of the teaching and the interaction between student and teacher. The “log” represents a simple setting, highlighting that the power of education comes from direct, meaningful dialogue where ideas are explored in depth and real intellectual growth occurs.

For Garfield, this kind of education was ideal because it fostered an environment of mentorship, where learning was personalized and focused on developing the student’s character and intellect rather than just imparting information.

Garfield’s vision of education, with a teacher and student deeply engaged in conversation, closely resembles the relationship Socrates cultivated with his students in ancient Athens. Socrates famously conducted his teaching not in formal classrooms but in public spaces—marketplaces, gymnasiums and open courtyards—where he engaged students and citizens alike in probing discussions about fundamental questions of life, ethics, justice and knowledge.

Socrates’s method, known as the elenchus, which we now call Socratic dialogue, involved asking his students challenging questions designed to stimulate critical thinking and self-reflection, encouraging them to question assumptions and arrive at deeper understandings.

Just as Garfield valued a learning experience that transcends facilities or structured lectures, Socrates valued a relational and conversational approach to teaching that focused on the journey of inquiry over a transfer of information. For both Garfield and Socrates, the ideal education was intimate, dialogic and centered on developing the student’s capacity to think critically.

Socrates’s relationship with his students emphasized mentorship and the development of independent thought—qualities that Garfield also saw as essential to a transformative educational experience.

In both views, the teacher is not merely a source of knowledge but a guide who engages the student’s mind, encouraging curiosity and the pursuit of wisdom rather than just practical or vocational skills. This approach treats education as a collaborative, intellectually enriching experience, where learning is a shared journey rather than a hierarchical transfer of facts from teacher to student.

Today’s college experience often presents students with a series of false choices—choices that, while abundant, don’t often lead to the kind of meaningful mentorship that James Garfield extolled. That kind of mentoring is reserved almost exclusively for those fortunate doctoral students who happen to find a dedicated dissertation director.

The typical undergraduate path involves meeting general education requirements by selecting from a laundry list of courses, choosing a discipline-based major from numerous options and filling in remaining credits with electives. While this model seems flexible, it often leaves students without a clear sense of purpose, intellectual unity or personal guidance—qualities that Garfield thought central to an ideal education.

Gen ed requirements are supposed to give students a broad foundation across various disciplines, helping them become well-rounded individuals. However, in practice, this often devolves into a checklist approach. Students select courses from a smorgasbord of options that meet the requirements but don’t necessarily connect in a meaningful way or relate to their interests. Rather than experiencing a cohesive exploration of fundamental questions or themes, students might take courses that feel disconnected and leave them without a coherent educational foundation.

An extensive list of possible majors can feel empowering, yet it also poses a dilemma. Students might feel pressured to choose a specific path for career reasons or because they believe it’s “practical,” even if it doesn’t align with their interests or strengths. The focus on specialized, discipline-based knowledge often means that students miss out on an interdisciplinary or broader perspective that would prepare them to think critically across fields.

Garfield’s vision of education emphasized mentorship and dialogue, fostering personal growth and intellectual curiosity, but today’s major-focused model can sometimes channel students into narrowly defined academic silos, limiting opportunities for mentorship or cross-disciplinary exploration.

Electives are meant to provide students with a chance to explore their interests and broaden their intellectual horizons, but without strong mentorship or a guiding framework, students can find it difficult to select electives that add real depth to their education. While the freedom to choose is valuable, this unstructured model can leave students without a clear path or a coherent educational experience, leading them to take courses for convenience or based on minimal criteria, rather than because they serve a greater intellectual or personal purpose.

The current model, with its emphasis on choice and specialization, doesn’t provide most students with the kind of mentorship that Garfield admired: a one-on-one relationship with a teacher who serves not only as an instructor but as a guide through the intellectual journey of college.

Without sustained mentorship, students may navigate their choices without ever experiencing the kind of guidance that challenges them to question, refine and develop their goals and understanding of the world. In this sense, today’s college experience can be isolating—offering students an abundance of options without the meaningful, dialogic relationships that would help them make sense of their choices.

---

As a thought experiment, I’d like to propose an educational model that combines the best of both worlds: a pre-professional education that prepares students for a career or for graduate or professional school and a Mark Hopkins model where faculty and students move beyond the traditional lecture or specialized course and engage in sustained, meaningful dialogue and mentorship—a model that prioritizes deep intellectual engagement, dialogue, curiosity and personal growth over mere content delivery.

This approach would meld our current model that emphasizes acquiring technical skills and knowledge within a discipline, with a supportive intellectual community where students learn to question, think critically and engage in purposeful inquiry.

Under the Mark Hopkins model, faculty mentors would work closely with a small cohort of students, meeting regularly to explore timely and significant intellectual issues, often connected to the mentor’s research interests or scholarly expertise.

This setting provides students with an in-depth, guided experience in intellectual inquiry, exposing them to research methods, critical thinking and a level of academic mentorship rarely found in traditional classrooms. Each mentor would not only guide discussions and explorations but also oversee undergraduate research projects, allowing students to apply their learning practically while contributing to their field of study.

The core components of the Mark Hopkins model involve:

• Faculty-driven inquiry: Faculty mentors introduce key intellectual issues, topics they find pressing, relevant or aligned with contemporary debates in their field. Instead of passively receiving information, students are encouraged to dive deeply into complex questions, analyze various perspectives and actively participate in constructing knowledge. This approach reimagines the university as a space not just for learning existing answers but for developing new questions.
• Collaborative exploration: Each cohort becomes a mini community of inquiry, engaging in regular discussions and reflections on their shared topic. The mentor facilitates the dialogue, guiding students as they explore and challenge each other’s ideas, drawing on readings, case studies and real-world examples. This collaborative environment teaches students the value of intellectual exchange, debate and listening—essential skills for both professional and personal growth.
• Research and application: The model’s mentorship aspect extends into undergraduate research, where each student or small group undertakes projects related to the cohort’s theme. Under the mentor’s guidance, students learn research methods and apply them to independent projects, making the process of inquiry hands-on and experiential. This aspect reinforces the specialized skills developed in students’ major fields while showing them how to apply those skills in an integrative, meaningful way.
• Reflection and purposeful exploration: An essential part of this model is encouraging students to reflect on their academic and personal journeys, considering how their studies connect to their broader goals and values. Faculty mentors guide students to see their education as part of a larger narrative—one that includes professional ambitions as well as questions of meaning, ethics and citizenship. This reflective aspect fosters a sense of purpose, helping students understand not only what they’re learning but why it matters.
• Long-term mentorship: Unlike conventional courses, this model prioritizes continuity and depth. Mentorship continues over an extended period, possibly throughout the student’s entire undergraduate experience, fostering a unique relationship between mentor and mentee. This continuity allows mentors to support students in their development, providing guidance not only in academic matters but in broader questions about life, career and self-identity.

Obviously, adopting this model across a campus would require faculty members to radically rethink their role. A simple solution is for a select number of willing faculty mentors to form inquiry groups that complement students’ major studies.

The Hopkins model could transform college education by centering mentorship, inquiry and purpose at its core. This approach would offer students a chance to explore the big questions, connect knowledge with values and engage in a holistic, transformative educational journey. Through its emphasis on dialogue, mentorship and shared exploration, it revitalizes the idea of college as a utopian space for growth, reflection and the pursuit of wisdom.

---

Certainly, a hybrid approach that combines personalized, dialogic education with today’s discipline-based, pre-professional training would be challenging to scale, given typical faculty resistance to curricular changes and a preference for teaching specialized courses. However, there are innovative ways to merge the type of education Garfield admired—characterized by deep engagement and mentorship—with structured programs that students and their families seek for career preparation. This approach would cultivate both critical intellectual engagement and the acquisition of practical skills.

Here’s how:

1. Integrate small, discussion-based seminars across all levels. Incorporating seminars focused on fundamental questions and broad ideas into the curriculum—at each stage of a student’s academic journey—would allow all students, regardless of major, to engage in critical thinking, ethical reasoning and creativity. These discussion-based or studio or research-focused classes would encourage students to explore connections between specialized knowledge and larger societal issues, fostering a broader intellectual curiosity and skills valued across all professions.
2. Create interdisciplinary learning communities. Establishing learning communities that bring together students from various disciplines to tackle complex, real-world issues would allow students to see how different fields intersect. For example, a public health learning community could draw students from biology, sociology, ethics and public policy, fostering dialogue and collaboration that balances technical expertise with interdisciplinary insights. These communities would encourage students to apply their specialized knowledge to broader challenges.
3. Institute mentorship and apprenticeship models. Structured small-group mentoring, modeled after Garfield’s log concept, could pair students with faculty or industry professionals, offering mentorship that goes beyond coursework. This model would allow students to engage deeply with their fields of interest while receiving guidance on broader questions about professional ethics, societal impact and career purpose, fostering a more holistic educational experience.
4. Replace or supplement senior projects with interdisciplinary capstones. By replacing traditional senior projects with interdisciplinary capstone experiences, students could apply both critical thinking and technical expertise to solve real-world problems, whether in the community or industry. These capstones would integrate big-picture questions with practical applications, requiring students to bridge specialized skills with issues that matter to society.
5. Incorporate internships, service learning and research, followed by reflective seminars. Providing opportunities for internships, service learning or research allows students to apply their discipline-specific skills in practical settings. Follow-up seminars could facilitate reflection, encouraging students to connect theory with practice and consider their role within larger social and ethical contexts. Such experiences would prepare students to navigate the complexities of their chosen professions with greater awareness.
6. Offer flexible pathways for core requirements. Students could fulfill core requirements through courses focused on big questions or interdisciplinary themes alongside pre-professional and discipline-specific courses. Flexible pathways would enable students to develop a broad intellectual foundation, allowing them to explore new ideas while advancing in their chosen fields.

In these ways, campuses could provide an education that marries specialized, technical training with a mentorship model emphasizing dialogue, reflection and purposeful exploration. This combination would ensure that students not only acquire expertise in their fields but also understand the broader implications of their knowledge, preparing them for the adult challenges they will face in the personal and professional lives.

---

Integrating a Mark Hopkins–inspired mentorship model into the college experience redefines education as one centered on meaningful, close relationships between students and mentors. This approach goes beyond skill acquisition, offering students an immersive engagement with the life of the mind—a rare opportunity that, for many, may only come during their college years.

Embedding mentorship in degree pathways empowers students to connect their studies with a profound sense of purpose. A mentorship-driven model underscores the value of inquiry, encouraging students to explore complex ideas, apply theory to real-world situations and cultivate critical thinking in close collaboration with experienced faculty.

This model combines the rigor of specialized study with transformative personal growth, creating an education that is both practical and richly human. By drawing on a college’s most valuable asset—its faculty mentors—students not only gain knowledge but also the opportunity to engage deeply with expert scholars as they explore topics of lasting significance.

More than an alternative educational model, a mentorship-integrated approach is a transformative pathway, inviting students to pursue an education marked by depth and relevance. It connects learning to life, linking technical skills to an inspiring relationship with a mentor who exemplifies what it means to engage in serious inquiry and reflection.