海角直播

By Robert A. Scott, President, Adelphi University

College presidents, it seems, are variously viewed as budget masters, lobbyists,听high stakes 鈥減anhandlers,鈥� and land development entrepreneurs, but rarely as听educators and rarer still as educational philosophers. These varied views of the听college president may be especially true at public institutions of higher education,听for in this sector the pressures are great for mass instruction in large classes and听for specific career training, often seen as the politician鈥檚 antidote for social ills.听As a result, we have universities with enrollments of 50,000, lecture halls with a听thousand students, and catalogs filled with college degree offerings in听occupations that should either be left to on-the-job training or continuing听education.

Fortunately, not all higher education is of this type, and not all college presidents听are limited to the role of organizational executive. And while I will leave it to听others to judge my role as a philosopher, I do have ideas on both baccalaureate听and graduate education.

I believe that baccalaureate education should prepare students to learn on their听own and in groups, and to be successful in careers and as citizens in an听increasingly interdependent and multicultural world. I start with the premise that听our graduates likely will be supervised by, or will supervise, or be neighbors of,听people of other ethnic, national, racial, or religious groups, and that we as听educators must design an education that will prepare them for their new world.

I also believe we should promise our students we can help them learn anything,听but cannot promise to teach them everything. Students must learn to learn on听their own.

I think such an education is in the liberal arts tradition, with its emphasis on听language and reasoning, but also modern, with a greater emphasis on science听and cultures than has been the case for 鈥渓iberal arts鈥� education in recent听decades. In fact, I believe that the promises of the liberal arts have been听oversold in recent years. First, most colleges which have espoused liberal听education have often ignored science and the comparative study of world听cultures. Second, many courses intended to fulfill lofty catalog rhetoric about the听liberal arts and sciences were designed as introductions to 鈥渕ini-Ph.D.s,鈥� i.e.听majors, not as introductions to the general knowledge needed by an educated听citizen.

I like to think of this modern liberal education as 鈥渓iberating;鈥� i.e., designed to听liberate students from their provincial origins, no matter what their age or听background. And this liberating education is found not only in the curriculum, but听also in campus activities and in the community beyond the campus.

A president as philosopher knows that the curriculum, the campus, and the听community represent the three major spheres of educational activity over which听he or she has some influence. Therefore, we think of these areas when we听initiate and support activities intended to advance students鈥� knowledge (both听general and specialized), skills, abilities, and values.

Recent court decisions, state-level policy pronouncements, and conclusions听expressed by education experts all place increasing emphasis on the student as听the focus of higher education, as opposed to the teacher or faculty member.听Without fanfare, but with great impact, a one-hundred-year-old trend of faculty听emphasis on the development of knowledge, in contrast to the development of听the student, is being called into question. While challenges to this trend have听been noticed over the past several decades, never have so many voices from so听many quarters focused on this one issue.

I believe there are significant consequences to this trend, and by and large they听are positive. A focus on the student as compared to the faculty means a greater听emphasis on learning as compared to teaching, and learning should be the basic听activity of any college. By focusing on teaching, we actually give emphasis to the听privileges and prerequisites of faculty. By focusing on learning, we turn attention听to the needs of students.

This change in focus also has the consequences for activities on a college听campus. For students, it means greater expectations for their commitment to听disciplined education, because students must become active learners instead of听passive recipients. For faculty, it means giving up the role as source of all听knowledge, and becoming more of a facilitator of student learning, with the听resources necessary for this to occur.

Historically, the emphasis on teaching has focused on the transaction between听teacher as fount of knowledge and the student as recipient. In this process, the听individual student is tested to see if the transaction took place. With learning as听the objective, we need to assess the degree to which 鈥渢ransformation鈥� has taken听place; i.e., the degree to which the student, or students working as a team, have听been transformed by the experience and assisted in development to a new and听higher level of learning, independence, and cooperation.

Too few college presidents think of the whole of education 鈥� in the curriculum, on听the campus, in the world beyond the borders of the college. Yet here on Long听Island, we have campus presidents committed to serving as educational听philosophers as well as to fulfilling their other roles as executive, entrepreneur,听advocate, and fund raiser.

漏 Robert A. Scott, 2007.听A previous version of this essay appeared in Liberal Education, 1993.

For further information, please contact:

Todd Wilson
Strategic Communications Director听
p 鈥� 516.237.8634
e 鈥� twilson@adelphi.edu