It is that time of the year. School is about to begin for one more season. Soon the younger children will be taking the busses to their classrooms. And soon afterwards millions of young adults will troop onto our college campuses, there to prepare for the challenges looming upon graduation.
But what will they be learning? What is the point of spending so many years absorbing materials that may never be applied in the real world? This is a more significant problem than many people realize. Indeed, these questions are currently roiling the waters in higher education.
For many years, members of the professorate have claimed that they specialize in teaching “critical thinking.” This, they say, is why college graduates are liable to be hired for more responsible and better-remunerated jobs than mere high school graduates.
It is certainly true that, over the long haul, the recipients of a college degree are better off financially. But it does not seem to be the case that improvements in critical thinking are the cause. Indeed, a recent book, Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses, presents compelling evidence this is a myth. Research is beginning to demonstrate that few experience such a benefit.
I am reminded of the situation on the nation’s colleges during the nineteenth century. At the time, most students were required to study Greek and Latin. This had been so since the Middle Ages when a majority belonged to the clergy and hence needed to read the Bible in the languages in which it was written.
One might have supposed that in a more secular world, this prerequisite would have been suspended. It was not, mostly due to long tradition. Nevertheless, its continuation was justified on the grounds that training in these languages improved a student’s ability to think logically.
It took studies by the embryonic discipline of psychology to demonstrate that this was fiction. There was no such effect. As a consequence, college requirements were gradually altered to better reflect the needs of the marketplace.
We are today faced with a similar situation. Until now the putative value of critical thinking has gone unchallenged. As a time-honored rationale, it was simply taken for granted. Even though there were no specific courses in such thinking, and despite the fact that there were no explicit techniques for imparting it, it was assumed that most college courses conferred it as a side effect of teaching their subject matter.
In fact, if college professors, especially in the humanities and social sciences, are critical of anything, it is capitalism and imperialism. The market system is widely condemned as sponsoring exploitation at home and abroad, and therefore as worthy of being relegated to the ash heap of history.
If, however, this turns out to be a comforting fairy tale intended to justify efforts at indoctrinating students in a teacher’s ideological preferences, what might replace it? May I suggest that a credible candidate is “self-direction.” This goal is more in tune with the needs of the work place and is thus more likely to promote individual success.
In our more professionalized society, those who climb to positions of leadership need to be capable of making good decisions, even in an environment of uncertainty. They must therefore become self-motivated experts who know what they are doing and have the confidence to do it—and do it well.
Instead of stressing enervating assignments that reward the conformity of bogus group projects or demanding answers consistent with conventional liberalism, students must be encouraged to think for themselves. This does not mean being “critical” in the sense of criticizing entrepreneurship or economic success. It does, however, imply a need to reintroduce the “marketplace of ideas” currently being honored by lip service.
Students who are truly self-directed need to be provided with the intellectual and emotional resources to stand up against criticism when they attempt to be innovative. They must also learn to take risks and to learn from their mistakes.
These are tall orders, but it is time that our colleges and universities started to address them. If they do not, then many of their graduates will be launched into the world with a piece of paper—and little else.
Melvyn L. Fein. Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
Kennesaw State University
No comments:
Post a Comment