Until 1450 the educated world consisted of elite who could hire tutors to personally instruct them in the thoughts and philosophies of the day. Guttenberg’s printing press opened up the lines of communication between scholars and subsequently gave anyone who could afford to purchase it, and learned how to read, access to these ideas en-masse. Possibly we can consider this idea the first disruptive technology. The advent of books allowed for better communities of scholars to assemble and share ideas as well, documenting their findings for anyone to access. In theory these early scholars were working as individual communities, often times on the same things at the same time as others. Publishing allowed the new ideas to come together and further the fields of scholarly work. Because we altered, or disrupted the scroll/monk/ink well path and replaced it with movable typeset there was gain for all, except maybe the monks. When we consider the dawn of this online educational era, the traditional schools become the monks, the internet our printing press and online courses our books.
The current society in the United States is struggling to educate themselves to create a better life for themselves and their families. However, jobs that once needed only experience are now requiring college degrees. (The debate about whether I need the manager of Walmart to know Calculus is for another time but worth noting.) With mass quantities of our urban societies trying to balance working to provide in addition to paying their tuition, the creation of online universities allow them to acquire the piece of paper that says they are qualified to be trained for their job. What current universities, both online and brick and mortar, need to accomplish is the creation of affordable education that provides students with what they will need to become contributing members of society. This may require a restructure of what education looks like. Does a degree need to include the liberal arts education to produce competent specialized work forces? Undergraduates at Penn State are required to take classes in physical education, art, language, etc. As a future scientist does one need to know how to throw a ball, or weave a basket? It creates well rounded students, and therefore citizens, but are we not wasting the time and money of all parties involved in order to do so?
Social learning can be done online, with the proper tools. Interactive chats, blogs and forums can foster social, written discourse. Skype and Google Hangouts can provide face to face time. Videos and documents can be shared with ease on a number of platforms. Neither the 200 students lecture hall, nor the current MOOCs are particularly effective social learning, but there are professors starting to make it work. We need to embrace some of these technologies and work towards synchronicity between quality and cost effective educations and stop leaving our economically disadvantaged citizens out of higher education, or saddling American youth with debt they will never balance out with meger entry level pay.
Isaac Jason Bretz says
As a thoughtful and conscientious citizen of the world, yes I should know how to throw a ball, I should know something about art and philosophy, and I wish I knew how to weave a basket. A liberal arts education is designed to help develop critical thinking and a knowledge of cultures, to shake us out of provincialism. If the elites are the only ones with access to this cultural capital, business-as-usual will continue. I am not happy with the way society is currently run, I started to become an informed citizen through a liberal arts education.
Zach Lonsinger says
@Issas, but at what expense do we need informed citizens? $40,000? I agree that we need well-round, informed citizens, but I think we can get there without burdening people with massive amounts of debt.
Katie Bateman says
Isaac- I can’t throw a ball to save my life. It doesn’t inhibit me from being a contributing member of society, as much as I can’t paint, but love to visit art museums. I can’t read music but I can still listen to the radio. Now, as a teacher, a broader education is necessitated I believe, especially at the elementary school level. But had I stayed the path of “hard science” (in my case Marine Science) would it really be necessary for me to have a college level understanding of World Literature to do my job? We teach broad scope subjects through 12th grade, why do we need to continue to pump people with information they will likely never utilize, and won’t utilize in their careers. It seems to me that in order to utilize this new tech appropriately we need to insure the thoroughness and quality of our K-12 education as well. (I mean, that needs to be done any way, but especially so given impending future progress.)
Adam says
There is something to be said for being well rounded. It really bothers me when people say things like “Learning about things we won’t need”. First, how do you know now what you’ll need to know ten minutes from now let a lone ten years. What if something I learned in freshman philosophy leads me to understand the needs of ed tech users and find a better solution to what’s currently being done.
As someone who has a massive student debt I am all for lowering the cost of education. But I am not in favor of cost cutting when it slices into the very nature of well rounded education.
Brandon says
I think we need to be engaging with this assumption that education is only for employment. Of course, that mindset is understandable when it costs 40k a year to get it. How can we get around this, then?
Dean says
I’m in this group but I really don’t agree with what was posted for our group. I did join the group conversation on Friday though, so I was sort of late to the conversation, but here goes…
I was in liberal arts, and it was an amazing opportunity to take classes that interested me but didn’t count towards my major. For instance, I took a drawing class because I wanted to learn how to draw. I still don’t draw, but I was presented with some interesting perspectives that were new to me then and that have remained with me ever since. Our experiences shape who we are.
When you experience or at least learn about the other’s way of life, it can invoke empathetic considerations of the other. Empathy towards other people. I think that empathy should be an underlying tenet of education.
From this conversation about being well-rounded, I am reminded of the Ford Pinto fuel tank controversy where it is thought that engineers made unethical decisions to not redesign the fuel tank to be safer. If you don’t know about this, please check out the Ford Pinto Memo and/or check out my brief description –
Ford designed the fuel tank on the Pinto in a way that the tanks would sometimes explode if the car was rear-ended. People died because of this structural design flaw. Ford then chose not to redesign the placement of the fuel tank. It was cheaper to pay for all of the lawsuits than it was to redesign the Pinto to be a safer car.
I wonder if the engineers and decision-makers at Ford had a philosophy class on ethics prior to choosing not to redesign the Pinto. Back then, were ethics included in designs? Are they today?
I think well-roundedness is important.
—-
And I also think that it’s important to pursue interests outside of the classroom rather than rely on a professor to teach a curriculum that is completely relevant to what you will do at a job. School is good for introducing tools and teaching foundational elements. Pursuing and applying what is learned is up to the individual.
I also graduated in IST in my undergraduate days. During an IST web design class (~1999), I was introduced to Flash animation/programming. After that web class, Flash was never included in any other IST class. But I had interest in Flash, so I pursued learning how to design and develop using Flash outside of the classroom. I then scored an internship that turned into a salaried position designing and developing standalone applications in Flash. But Flash development wasn’t truly taught in IST. It was briefly shown to me as a tech tool, as an option.
So based on my experiences, I think individual accountability is really important in school. Knowledge itself is everywhere. When you figure out what you want to do, approach it with all you got. Own it!
So this post had a bunch of concepts that I stand behind… Well-roundedness, empathy, ethics, and individual accountability. They are all good, from my perspective.
Priscilla Taylor says
I must admit that I struggle with the concept of a “well-rounded” education. On the one hand, it can seen as a time that could have been spent delving deeper into one’s area of interest. On the other hand, I wonder about students that don’t know specifically what they want to study and the exposure to a variety of topics could help them find an area they love. Where does that leave higher education? How do institutions create learning experiences for both types of students?
Katie Bateman says
I think I’m personally approaching this in the view of the non-traditional student. In one of the other blogs I touched on the perspective of undergraduate education as being the “English” Rumspringa, and I think that is important to most of America. However, I also consider the people who are unable to experience the traditional 18-21 undergrad residential experience, those who are getting a degree because their career mandated they hold one- students who I taught who had a baby at 16, or need to work to support other members of their family while going to school. those that have no parents to support them as they experiment with what degrees they want to get. At thousands of dollars a credit, and finances being strained for these members of society is it really beneficial to have them take elective (and possibly extraneous) courses. Yes, there are loans, and some grants, available, but getting out from behind student loans is a massive undertaking that can last for decades in some cases.
Leah Bug says
Wow, what a great post and the responses it elicited! I have to agree with Issac and Adam about the importance of including liberal arts courses in a college degree. I believe part of a thorough education includes broadening your perspective and understanding of other disciplines, cultures, and ways of thinking. If we look back in history, Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers understood the importance of a strong and lasting democracy is an educated citizenry. If a student only has to complete the courses directly related to their field (ie, science or history classes) to graduate, are they going to be well informed citizens? What about the saying that “those who forget history are bound to repeat it?” This also goes for K-12 education. If we continue to only focus on language arts and math, because that is what is tested, then how are we going to develop critical thinkers and science literate citizens to question the elected leaders in our communities and countries, not to mention corporations? The problems our country and world face are extremely complex and the more people have a broader view and perspective of the issues, the better equipped we are in solving these issues. But yes, the cost of a college education is out of control and something does need to change in making higher education more affordable for ALL students.
Audrey Romano says
This one is a tough one to debate. I agree that there’s a problem for economically disadvantaged and other types of adult learners to pay $40k+ for a degree, especially if you’re intending that it directly enable you to get a job. You, as a student, have to consider in your decision what type of education is the best investment for what you’re trying to achieve. But it isn’t as clear anymore. Depending on your career path, the value of education is changing, where degrees are weighed less than competency. Hopefully, that will factor into your investment and that there is a viable option for learning within reach that will suit your goals. But the landscape of higher education and employment are in flux, so it’s just incredibly hard to put a finger on which is best.
Perhaps, idealistically, “gened is the cornerstone for preparing students to live and work in our diverse global society” (http://gened.psu.edu). It can provide a learner with a completely different lens through which to interpret the the world beyond the degree-focused curriculum. Echoing what Dean said, I totally appreciated the variety that my gened education provided. I am totally athletically-challenged, but learned confidence from taking a Kraf Maga class. I was focused on science and engineering, but found my Western Civ course to be completely fascinating in learning how scientific and architectural discoveries played roles in those cultures and history. British Lit had me reading stories that enraged me, poems that puzzled me, and tales from perspectives I would have never picked out on my own that changed me forever. Empathy is totally a component in applying knowledge into the context around you. If only YouTube commenters had experienced a diverse gened curriculum, then perhaps comments would have more empathy and value.
I mention again that I have a career in a field (web technology) that is completely different from my degree (environmental science). Eight years ago, when I got hired as a web designer in the Teaching and Learning with Technology unit here at Penn State, the director (who is also a professor) at the time said that my science degree would serve to my advantage because of the completely different perspective it will give me in my work. Prior to this, I had felt like it was a hindrance because it didn’t apply directly to my new career; that I was lacking in the right foundational understanding of my work. Even still, It took me a long time to understand what he meant.
I have a friend who is currently taking a highly acclaimed MOOC: Learning How To Learn (https://www.coursera.org/course/learning). He was describing to me just today about the difference between focused and diffuse modes of thinking and how over-learning and choking can hinder learning. It seems like being able to allow your brain into diffuse modes of thinking may potentially allow you to become more innovative. Developing an understanding of the multi-faceted context of world beyond the singularly focused skill-acquesition might the one thing to get your further along on the path to success.
pul121 says
I am not sure if all jobs need college degree because there are simple jobs that can’t be replaced. I think college is not the only place to offer education but there are other kinds of educational systems that can provide skills and hands-on experiences. However, how do we allow students to get what kind of education suits them is a big challenge. In addition, I don’t think online education is going to replace traditional schools. I would say that online education provides opportunities for those who can’t afford to go to school, who have problems going to face to face classes, and who want to investment their knowledge to get education. Everyone has different needs and strategies to obtain information knowledge and skills so all kinds of accesses should be available for choosing.
Michael Sean Banales says
This got to be quite the heated debate. To be honest, I largely agree with this group (or at least the majority of this group) about the role of online education and the needs for a “well-informed” citizen.
Several people have argued that a well-rounded education leads to a more thoughtful and informed citizen. I don’t think there’s much of a debate there. However, the question remains of how do we offer higher education to a broader group of people. Yes, the liberal arts courses will help develop a person further and broaden their horizons, but will that truly be a critical piece of their education? If it greatly increases the costs of education to the point of not being affordable, why not strip that cost out and allow for more people to at least take that first step?
Admittedly, at it’s core, we are slashing things to lower the costs. However, we are not to the point where we can even pretend to offer a well-rounded education for everyone. At least allowing them the chance for that advanced degree to further their education in some way and hopefully improve their lives would be a step towards a more well-rounded and informed citizen. The potential also exists to teach individuals how to better themselves in a positive way that they could pursue on their own. I would love to know how to weave a basket, but give me 30 minutes and the internet and I’ll figure out how to do it on my own. We can cut the majority of liberal arts credits and work on teaching these individuals who can’t afford a traditional education to learn on their own and at a much more reasonable cost.
Priscilla Taylor says
This post assumptions of higher education are based on the experience of the United States although the experiences in other countries greatly varies. This blog post makes the assumption that education is the way to create a better life for one and one’s family. There are highly educated people that are homeless, unemployed, or underemployed. This assumes is that education is only about what we need for a particular job. The changing landscape of the workforce makes it unpredictable and the jobs students are being prepared for may not be exist in the future. An assumption is made that money is the sole reason why certain populations of students are not pursuing postsecondary degrees. Similarly, it is not only “economically disadvantaged” students that are not receiving degrees; there are students from all economic classes that do not attend college. An example of this is the un-school movement where students from higher economic classes are opting out of higher education.