 |
| University of California, Berkeley |
Menand states in his Theory I that college acts as a sorting mechanism and a tool for the American meritocracy. Professional schools can trust G.P.A. as a measure of intellectual capacity and productive potential (P. 74). Grades matter more than if the student actually learns anything. On average, adults with college degrees do make more money than those without.
Theory II is the opposite. Grades do not matter as much as what is learned. "College exposes future citizens to material that enlightens and empowers them, whatever careers they end up choosing" (ibid.). The trouble with Theory II is many students, especially those pursuing business degrees, don't learn much (as shown by the results on the Collegiate Learning Assessment) after three years of college. Students spend less time studying than they did fifty years ago. Lastly, the process of college is socially inefficient, since students pursuing vocational degrees don't care about classes in the liberal arts, but still have to take them to get a bachelors degree. It gets worse: "half of all Americans who enter college never finish" (P. 78).
So why force vocational students into these classes? Instead, why not track students? This is what many European countries do. Only the elite go to college. The rest go to vocational schools where they will never have to try to understand Nietzsche and Plato. The vocational schools offer work skills, not a B.A. degree. Menand hints that were we to do this, it would mark the end of our liberal arts schools. Perhaps it should be done anyway. I teach a lot of low-level students this year. Out of my 140 students, perhaps 60 will end up graduating from a four-year institution. Yet when I polled them, almost all of them want to go to college and get a bachelors degree.What a waste! Most of my students and more than half of 18-year-old American kids who enter post-secondary studies would be better served with vocational training. Most people don't want to take the time to understand Nietzsche and Plato, and only a motivated elite will get something out of the process.
Six–Year Undergraduate Completion Ratesa
- The systemwide graduation rate for University of California (UC) students is about 80 percent, compared with just under 50 percent at the California State University (CSU). Only about 30 percent of California Community College (CCC) students who endeavor to transfer or graduate with an associate’s degree or certificate actually do so. (Source, California Legislative Analyst's Office http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/calfacts/calfacts_010511.aspx)
That's assuming that college students know what major they want to go to, and to be quite honest, I don't really think that's the case. The opportunity to look into other subjects, which they clearly won't try without institution or someone's recommendation, is excluded when you try to push for that specialization. If that person still continues on the path that he doesn't really understand or like, isn't it more likely that person will drop out?
ReplyDeleteI don't know why we have to look towards Europe for every solution that we apparently don't have; it's not like we're in Europe, so isn't it likely that cultural differences might hinder not just the institutionalization of something else, but also the social change for it?
The system you suggest we use is very top heavy, more so than the current system of higher education. I don't think it'll go well both politically and socially unless something drastic happens. After all, even with the current system it feels like administration sometimes have no idea what they're doing, so making it even more constructed around a system of specialization just means that an administration that's already inefficient at solving lower educational problems has to streamline the higher education.
Yes; it's either administrators do the sorting or the students themselves. Since the students, left to their own devices, have a fifty percent attrition rate and only an elite see the value in a rigorous liberal arts education, I think it's time for change.
ReplyDeleteFrom a fellow teacher:
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. However,it is usually parental pressure that forces poor students to go to college. Even in the elementary grades parents would be concerned about how their children with low I.Q.s who could barely read and certainly could not solve a simple math problem would get into college. I always wanted to tell these parents that their children do not belong in college and should pursue other avenues, but I wouldn't dare.This attitude has rubbed off on the students. Certainly young people, for the most part,consider themselves failures if they don't at least start college.