The introductory class that I am teaching this term made me wonder and question, yet again, what exactly higher education is about.
I have noticed over the past couple of years that students get a lot more focused when we discuss the economic rationale behind why anything that can be outsourced will be outsourced, and why activities that can be automated will be automated. It is understandable--students immediately see the link between the concepts and their own lives and futures.
From the back row, a student’s hand went up. "If robots do our work, then what happens to finding our purpose in life through work? What about human interactions?" Her voice seemed laden with emotions.
When it comes to such questions on what it means to be human, students know what my answer will be. With a smile, I remind them that those questions are beyond the scope of the course in economic geography, and that I hope they would take courses in the humanities and the social sciences to understand such important issues.
Technological advancements, which are difficult to keep up with anymore, will raise challenging questions on what it means to be human. Even now, most public policy questions that we are grappling with are all variations of that very question. The examples are endless and include abortion, healthcare, social security, unemployment benefits, and war. Technological advancements will only further muddy the issues.
Our responses to each and every one of the public policy issues depend on our own constructs of what it means to be human, and what it means to belong to a society and to a country. Above all, what it means to be one of the more than seven billion humans on this wonderful planet.
One would imagine that education, especially at a level beyond high school, would prepare adults for such inquiries. Unfortunately, that is rarely the case, for at least two important reasons.
The first is the simplistic formulation that higher education is about economic betterment. Hence, for instance, all the rah-rah for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and professional-sounding majors. This is flawed for a number of reasons, especially when we think about the fact that these jobs are subject to those same outsourcing and automation dynamics. I should note in this context that my undergraduate degree is in electrical engineering.
The second reason that students do not get to systematically think about these questions is because colleges and universities have practically abandoned those in their curricular offerings. On their part, students typically treat the humanities and social science requirements of a liberal education to be nothing more than items on a checklist to be completed on their way to getting the diploma. In order to attract the uninterested students, academia has gone after making courses “attractive” to them. My favorite, of the ones I have come across in the news, is a course on Lady Gaga. It will require quite some effort on a student's part to use that course as a vehicle to understand what it means to be human!
The result is that I doubt whether students will really have enough structured opportunities to think through the kind of important questions that the student raised. If this is how we "educate" students and prepare them for the rest of their lives that begin with Commencement, then what have we really accomplished?
6 comments:
Given that "education" is a life long affair, how about liberal arts education after students have done their STEMs, and hopefully got a job.
I believe universities have not focused at all on continuing education in the field of arts at all. In my field of management, there is a fair opportunity for earning a degree as you work for those who didn't do a MBA first time around.
If universities designed liberal arts education around the working professional, I believe a good purpose would be served. It would also meet the criteria I have been parroting for long - you need to be of a certain age and kicked around by life to understand the liberal arts better. In the college where I did my undergraduate from, there was a degree offered on philosophy to 18 year olds - a complete waste of time I believe. If it was open for a ripe old man such as me, I would join without batting an eyelid.
In theory, your idea of such questions as something like mandatory continuing education for working people sounds good. In reality, that, too, won't work. for various reasons that we both can imagine.
I agree with you that a typical 19-year old might not care about these issues at all. But, that is also my point--higher education is not about the trades. The hassle began when we started equating higher education with economic betterment, which then have transformed universities into some bizarre monster that is neither about education nor about the trades.
I blame the liberals for this! Out of the goodness of their hearts, they believed that everybody ought to be able to get such intellectual food for the soul. A secular "religious" project to get humans to salvation and we prove, yet again,that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
BTW, the latest update on this expensive road to hell: the graduating class of 2013 is the most indebted ever, reports the WSJ (http://t.co/pCi15fi7Sc)
the report notes sarcastically:
"There is one piece of good news for the class of 2013: they aren’t likely to hold the title of “Most Indebted Ever” for long. Amid continued growth in both tuition costs and student lending, they are likely to pass the mantle to the class of 2014 next May just as they assumed it from the class of 2012."
The Amercan norm of over consumption to the point of indebtedness is exacerbated when the want is categorized as a need. In a lot of ways higher education is a want, yet we (high schools are the worst) are giving the impression that it is a need. A college degree is being billed as a ticket to prosperity and a sound investment no matter it's costs. In a lot of ways higher education is like the housing market. "Don't worry about the huge debt, your income and the equity are surely to rise." Equity in this case being the value of a degree. But in reality, the income is not there and the degree is over valued in many cases.
We have a Taiping Rebellion in the making and the Occupy Movement was just a taste.
I challenge my students to pick the right career and associated education for a life that will happy and secure. I was the only teacher, aside from her mother, who applauded our Salutatorian for wanting to be a hair dresser. Mat people cutting hair report being happy and secure.
Society, particularly us in education need to quit selling a bill of goods; however, students need to quit buying it too. Taking only 12 credits a term, accepting all aid from the award letter (including living expenses), not having employment, and buying books at the bookstore are all cardinal sins to a student who is borrowing money to attend.
I read this guest op-ed to my students:
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/04/educated_and_unemployed_wheres.html
Shame on us for duping her. Shame on her for getting two expensive private college degrees to attempt entry into a saturated public education market. Also, can she not realize there are plenty of English teaching jobs? Sorry you can't stay in Portland, you just might have to move to China, South Korea, or rural America.
Ramish I like your idea of more education after workplace entry.
Yes, Mike ... In this blog, I have plenty of posts on how higher education is a bubble waiting to burst, and how the higher education industry runs a ponzi scheme ...
And, yes, studies show that Americans have become less willing to move even within the US. Seems like that old idea of the adventurous American in pursuit of opportunity is fast evaporating.
I agree that Portland is a wonderful place to live. But then people should not criticize later that all they can find is a barista job.
Meanwhile, from the world of higher education is this op-ed by the chancellor of the state's university system:
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/05/lets_collaborate_to_promote_fo.html
She writes there that "universities can't rope in the cost dragon alone." As I have noted in my blog, even WOU built a $25 million health and wellness center. I teach a class in a brand new dorm/classroom building and the entrance feels like an entrance at a resort facilty. We continue to construct buildings when the signs over the past few years have been in terms of online learning that doesn't require classroom space ... there is more I can list, and that is merely from WOU!!!
Oh well ... as long as I get my paycheck should be my attitude. If only ...
Sorry, today it was my full intention to push a few students away from your classes; at least for now. My student teacher is out for the week, so what do I do? Seize the opportunity to give them The Talk of course. Debt is dangerous and abstinence, or least protection with limited partners, is the best for their health, and such and such. You should see their faces when I drag it on for a while until finally letting them sigh in relief that I am speaking of credit and not sex.
Today's article:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-06/student-loans-debt-for-life
I remember the weight of my own debts, college included. For my wife and I, two Bachelors and two Masters, $36,000. I can't imagine being one person and having $65,000, let alone $150,000!
watch out, mike ... pretty soon you will start using words like ponzi and bubble when you talk about higher ed :)
i suppose my latest blog post is a continuation of this discussion ...
Post a Comment