91Թ

Published:

We have campus presidents fulfilling roles as philosophers, executives, entrepreneurs and advocates.


By Robert A. Scott, President, 91Թ


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

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

I believe that baccalaureate education should prepare students to learn on theirown and in groups, and to be successful in careers and as citizens in anincreasingly interdependent and multicultural world. I start with the premise thatour graduates likely will be supervised by, or will supervise, or be neighbors of,people of other ethnic, national, racial, or religious groups, and that we aseducators 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,but cannot promise to teach them everything. Students must learn to learn ontheir own.

I think such an education is in the liberal arts tradition, with its emphasis onlanguage and reasoning, but also modern, with a greater emphasis on scienceand cultures than has been the case for “liberal arts” education in recentdecades. In fact, I believe that the promises of the liberal arts have beenoversold in recent years. First, most colleges which have espoused liberaleducation have often ignored science and the comparative study of worldcultures. Second, many courses intended to fulfill lofty catalog rhetoric about theliberal arts and sciences were designed as introductions to “mini-Ph.D.s,” i.e.majors, not as introductions to the general knowledge needed by an educatedcitizen.

I like to think of this modern liberal education as “liberating;” i.e., designed toliberate students from their provincial origins, no matter what their age orbackground. And this liberating education is found not only in the curriculum, butalso in campus activities and in the community beyond the campus.

A president as philosopher knows that the curriculum, the campus, and thecommunity represent the three major spheres of educational activity over whichhe or she has some influence. Therefore, we think of these areas when weinitiate and support activities intended to advance students’ knowledge (bothgeneral and specialized), skills, abilities, and values.

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

I believe there are significant consequences to this trend, and by and large theyare positive. A focus on the student as compared to the faculty means a greateremphasis on learning as compared to teaching, and learning should be the basicactivity of any college. By focusing on teaching, we actually give emphasis to theprivileges and prerequisites of faculty. By focusing on learning, we turn attentionto the needs of students.

This change in focus also has the consequences for activities on a collegecampus. For students, it means greater expectations for their commitment todisciplined education, because students must become active learners instead ofpassive recipients. For faculty, it means giving up the role as source of allknowledge, and becoming more of a facilitator of student learning, with theresources necessary for this to occur.

Historically, the emphasis on teaching has focused on the transaction betweenteacher as fount of knowledge and the student as recipient. In this process, theindividual student is tested to see if the transaction took place. With learning asthe objective, we need to assess the degree to which “transformation” has takenplace; i.e., the degree to which the student, or students working as a team, havebeen transformed by the experience and assisted in development to a new andhigher level of learning, independence, and cooperation.

Too few college presidents think of the whole of education – in the curriculum, onthe campus, in the world beyond the borders of the college. Yet here on LongIsland, we have campus presidents committed to serving as educationalphilosophers as well as to fulfilling their other roles as executive, entrepreneur,advocate, and fund raiser.


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


For further information, please contact:

Todd Wilson
Strategic Communications Director
p – 516.237.8634
e – twilson@adelphi.edu

Search Menu