College Programs Aren’t One-Size-Fits-All

Question: What would be\r\nyour ideal solution to the “problem of general education?"

\r\n\r\n

Louis Menand:  Yes,\r\n general education, of course, are\r\nthe courses that every student’s required to take in order to graduate \r\nfrom\r\ncollege.  And most colleges that\r\nhave a general education requirement, so called, use a distribution \r\nmodel, I\r\nthink that’s what Yale uses, in which students have to take three \r\ncourses,\r\nusually, in each of the three divisions in the academy, natural science,\r\n social\r\nscience, and arts and humanities. \r\nAnd generally, they can take any three courses.  So\r\n that doesn’t really add up to a very\r\nprescriptive curriculum, obviously, because students can cherry-pick the\r\n courses\r\nthat they’re interested in, or the courses they think will be easy.

\r\n\r\n

So a real general education model that is, say, one\r\n that I\r\nthink has some legitimacy is one that has requirements that actually are\r\n shaped\r\nby a rationale of the particular kinds of knowledge that students are \r\ngoing to\r\nneed.  Columbia has one, Harvard\r\nhas one, Stanford and Princeton have them, obviously Chicago, St. \r\nJohn’s, they\r\nhave a Great Books curriculum, and so on. \r\nSo, those are the models that are available.

\r\n\r\n

My own view is that the general education \r\ncurriculum that a\r\ncollege picks has to be appropriate for the kind of student body that it\r\nhas.  I don’t think the same\r\ncurriculum fits every student body. \r\nNow, that’s a little bit of a circular proposition, because \r\nColumbia has\r\nthis Great Books curriculum, it’s called Literature and Humanities in \r\nthe\r\nContemporary Civilization, and they’ve had the same, roughly the same\r\ncurriculum for about 50 years.  So\r\nwhen students apply to Columbia, they already know, they’re already \r\nselecting\r\nthat curriculum, that’s something that they want when they apply to\r\ncollege.  If you were to impose\r\nsuch a curriculum at Harvard or Yale, students would object, probably, \r\non the\r\ngrounds that they’re being required to do something that they basically \r\ndidn’t\r\nopt for when they applied.  So\r\nColumbia kind of gets away with it because it’s grandfathered in, so to \r\nspeak,\r\nto the institution.

\r\n\r\n

I think at a place like Harvard, our experience, I \r\nwas\r\ninvolved with, at various stages, in trying to implement a new general\r\neducation curriculum, our experience was that Harvard’s all about\r\nspecialization, that’s not just true of the professori, it’s also true \r\nof a lot\r\nof the undergraduates, too, and they come, they kind of know what they \r\nwant to\r\ndo, they select it because they have a strong aptitude for something in\r\nparticular.  So to try to have a\r\nkind of one-size-fits-all general education curriculum for them will \r\nprobably\r\nnot fly.  You know, you have to\r\nhave students wanting to take the courses, otherwise you’re not going, \r\nthey’re\r\nnot going to be very effective.

\r\n\r\n

So Harvard has something that manages, I think, to \r\nprovide a\r\nlot of options for students, but still fairly prescriptive about the \r\nkinds of\r\nsubjects that the courses ought to cover. \r\nJust started, the new curriculum has just begun this year, it \r\nactually\r\nseems to have gotten off to a pretty good launch.

\r\n\r\n

Question: To what extent\r\nare curricula shaped by “consumers” (parents of students)?

\r\n\r\n

Louis Menand:  Yeah,\r\n zero.  Because, I mean, ideally, zero.  Because the way universities operate is the decision \r\nabout\r\nwhat students need for the degree are... is the decision made by the\r\nfaculty.  Should not be made by any\r\nother group, administrators, trustees, parents, students, and so on.  Obviously input is helpful to faculty\r\nin trying to come up with a curriculum, but ultimately it’s the \r\nfaculty’s job\r\nto know what students need to know. \r\nMake a decision about it and present it.

\r\n\r\n

The difficulty with coming up with a curriculum is \r\nmainly\r\nthat faculty aren’t trained to think in terms of general education.  They’re trained to think in terms of\r\ntheir own discipline, or their specialty. \r\nSo when they’re asked, what are your views about what everybody \r\nought to\r\nknow, it’s not something that they’ve ever really given thought to, it’s\r\n not\r\npart of their training.  They have\r\nviews, but they tend to be quite eccentric and quite different from one\r\nanother.  So getting faculties to\r\ncome to a consensus about something that they’ve never really thought \r\nabout or\r\nhad to worry about in their careers before can be a rather slow process \r\nand a\r\nlong process, it certainly was the case at Harvard, and it’s the case \r\nwith most\r\nof the general education curricula that I know of, it takes four or five\r\n years\r\njust to get everybody on board with one idea.

The "problem of general education" haunts any college trying to design a core curriculum, but standardizing across schools is a poor solution.

Do you worry too much? Stoicism can help

How imagining the worst case scenario can help calm anxiety.

Credit: OLIVIER DOULIERY via Getty Images
Personal Growth
  • Stoicism is the philosophy that nothing about the world is good or bad in itself, and that we have control over both our judgments and our reactions to things.
  • It is hardest to control our reactions to the things that come unexpectedly.
  • By meditating every day on the "worst case scenario," we can take the sting out of the worst that life can throw our way.
Keep reading Show less

Study: People will donate more to charity if they think something’s in it for them

A study on charity finds that reminding people how nice it feels to give yields better results than appealing to altruism.

Photo by Pixabay from Pexels
Personal Growth
  • A study finds asking for donations by appealing to the donor's self-interest may result in more money than appealing to their better nature.
  • Those who received an appeal to self-interest were both more likely to give and gave more than those in the control group.
  • The effect was most pronounced for those who hadn't given before.
Keep reading Show less

U.S. Navy controls inventions that claim to change "fabric of reality"

Inventions with revolutionary potential made by a mysterious aerospace engineer for the U.S. Navy come to light.

Credit: Getty Images
Surprising Science
  • U.S. Navy holds patents for enigmatic inventions by aerospace engineer Dr. Salvatore Pais.
  • Pais came up with technology that can "engineer" reality, devising an ultrafast craft, a fusion reactor, and more.
  • While mostly theoretical at this point, the inventions could transform energy, space, and military sectors.
Keep reading Show less

160-million-year-old ‘Monkeydactyl’ was the first animal to develop opposable thumbs

The 'Monkeydactyl' was a flying reptile that evolved highly specialized adaptations in the Mesozoic Era.

Credit: Zhou et al.
Surprising Science
  • The 'Monkeydactly', or Kunpengopterus antipollicatus, was a species of pterosaur, a group of flying reptiles that were the first vertebrates to evolve the ability of powered flight.
  • In a recent study, a team of researchers used microcomputed tomography scanning to analyze the anatomy of the newly discovered species, finding that it was the first known species to develop opposable thumbs.
  • As highly specialized dinosaurs, pterosaurs boasted unusual anatomy that gave them special advantages as aerial predators in the Mesozoic Era.
Keep reading Show less
Quantcast