The Challenges
Facing Colleges And Universities Today
Higher education in the United States is in a state of
crisis. Costs of education have increased
precipitously, multiplying by a factor of 12 over the past 30 years, which has
resulted in total
student loan debt of over $1 trillion, all at a time when recent college graduates
face a grim
job market. Perhaps even more troublingly, recent studies by prominent economists argue that since 2000, the demand
for high-skilled labor has declined, which is likely to push more educated workers
further down the income scale, and potentially squeeze out less educated and
unskilled workers altogether.
Policymakers, educational leaders, parents, and students are
all grappling for solutions to these challenges. Recently, President Obama set
forward a sweeping proposal for curbing tuition costs. This will be
accomplished, in part, by tying federal financial aid to a ranking system, which
will assess the overall value of an undergraduate education, according to a
formula that considers tuition prices, graduation rates, and the employment
prospects of recent graduates.
Meanwhile, Florida’s public university system is exploring
a differential tuition model, where students pursuing degrees in fields like
engineering or biotechnology—which are considered of “strategic interest” due
to superior postgraduate employment rates—would end up paying less for their
education than students in other paths of study, such as the humanities. The
program has come to be known as the “$10,000 degree challenge” since Governor Rick
Scott is challenging the state’s public universities to provide this education
for a cost of just $10,000. In Texas, Governor Rick Perry is pushing for similar
changes in the tuition structure of state universities, with $10,000 degrees
available for students studying subjects like computer science, math, and
various specializations in information technology.
In the eyes of some
critics, an emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) must
come at the expense of other fields of study, specifically, the humanities (which is
generally understood to comprise subjects such as history, philosophy, music,
literature, foreign languages, and other related disciplines). This is what’s happening in North Carolina,
where, in addition to pushing for a more employment-focused university
curriculum, Governor Patrick McCrory has been highly critical
of humanities education.
This isn’t just
a problem in North Carolina. Budget cuts at public universities have gutted
entire programs, while the number of today’s college students studying the
humanities has dropped substantially.
This has also resulted in a major reduction
in the number of humanities courses offered.
Many of those who advocate for an elevated emphasis on STEM
education believe that, in a world where
65% of today’s elementary school students will be performing jobs that don’t
exist today (due to exponential advances in science and technology), a strong
background in math, science and engineering is increasingly crucial to our
national future. Observers often cite the more rapid growth in STEM
jobs, as compared to the rest of the US economy, as well as the increased demand
for STEM-related skills even in jobs outside of traditionally scientific fields
like medicine or engineering, and thus argue that our educational system needs
to more effectively impart STEM skills to a greater number of people.
These STEM advocates are correct in their assessment of the
situation. In a world that is increasingly driven by concepts
like Big Data, there is no question that all of today’s graduates need a basic
grounding in math and science, particularly advanced mathematics, statistics,
and computer science. Allowing students to graduate from college without demonstrating
some basic grounding in these subjects, does them a major disservice. Yet, the
humanities have a vital role to play in providing all college students,
whatever their academic or career goals, with a complete intellectual toolkit,
as they seek to understand, create, and achieve in today’s world.
The Study of Humanities
Helps Facilitate Innovation, and Produces Better Employees
In his book The Innovator’s DNA (co-authored with
Jeff Dyer and Hal Gergersen), Harvard Business School professor Clayton
Christensen argues that one of the most critical skills of successful
innovators and entrepreneurs is the ability to associate ideas, that is, to connect
“seemingly unrelated” concepts, often from different disciplines, in order to
come up with new approaches and solutions.
Christensen draws upon the example of Steve Jobs, and
numerous other impactful entrepreneurs, to illustrate this point. Jobs enrolled
at Reed College, a liberal arts school in Oregon, and ended up dropping out
after 6 months. However, Jobs spent the following 18 months exploring a variety
of creative classes at the university, including a course in calligraphy. Jobs’ credits
the calligraphy course for the proportional font spacing and varied typefaces
found in even early Apple computers, and which was one of the distinguishing
features of Apple’s early technology.
Just a few days after unveiling the game-changing iPad
tablet, Jobs observed:
“We're
not just a tech company, even though we invent some of the highest technology
products in the world. It's the marriage of that plus the humanities and the
liberal arts that distinguishes Apple.” Reflecting further upon his trajectory
as a creative thinker, he further remarked “It
comes down to trying to expose yourself to the best things that humans have
done, and then try to bring those things in to what you’re doing…Creativity is
just connecting things.”
Jobs’ life illustrates how varied learning and educational
experiences, particularly in the humanities, can contribute to one’s
creativity. Exposure to a diverse and complex array of information, concepts,
and experiences, across a variety of disciplines, by definition, means that one
now enjoys access to more idea libraries from which to engage in association. Thus,
it’s important for all students, including those STEM majors who might be the founders
of tomorrow’s Apple, Google or Facebook, to gain the sort of broad exposure,
which the study of the humanities can provide for students.
Christensen and his co-authors also argue that questioning is an important skill for innovators, that
is, a belief in the value of inquiry, and a desire to “challenge the status
quo.” Studying subjects like history, sociology, or literary criticism, which
typically don’t offer clear, binary answers to complex questions, can, at their
best, serve as a springboard for rigorous critical
inquiry, which is demanded of those who wish to facilitate disruptive change in
any field.
Scientists can also benefit from a strong grounding in the
humanities. Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein, a MacArthur Fellowship recipient, who
has extensively explored the foundations of human creativity, conducted a study of
more than 200 highly accomplished scientists, and found a strong correlation between
success in the sciences and engagement with artistic and creative ventures. Based
on these findings, Dr. Root-Bernstein thus believes that schools should
“emphasize cross-disciplinary skills” and “place arts on a par with the
sciences.”
Dr. Root-Bernstein offers compelling examples of
how the arts and sciences (and individuals adept in one or both disciplines) can
come together to produce tremendous progress in science and technology. For
example cellular phone encryption technology (vital for mobile device security)
is based on the concept of “frequency hopping”, which was in large part
developed by composer and author George Antheil, in collaboration with actress
Hedy Lamarr, during World War II. The images
gleaned from NSA and NASA satellites are enhanced by use of Renaissance-era artistic
techniques like chiaroscuro and false
coloring, while Samuel Morse (telegraph innovator and Morse code co-founder),
and Robert Fulton (who developed the first steamboat successfully used for
purposes of business/commerce), were both prominent artists, prior to their
storied scientific achievements.
The humanities are of great value not only for potential
entrepreneurs and discoverers, but also for the majority of students, who will
go on to work for various government, business, and non-profit organizations.
Employers consistently rank effective communication skills, both written and oral, to be amongst
the most valuable traits for functioning as an effective member of any
workplace. There are few better means to hone these abilities than through
engaging at the university level, whether that is through intensive writing
courses that really push and test a student’s communication abilities, or via classes
in public speaking, rhetoric, debate, drama and theater, all of which both
demand and mold successful communication.
As noted earlier, a strong capacity for critical thinking is another
quality coveted by employers.
The humanities are an excellent vehicle through which to improve one’s ability
to assess arguments, evidence, and situations with a thoughtful, nuanced
perspective, which is the hallmark of an effective critical thinker.
When assessing a
historical question, there’s often a variety of evidence and perspectives,
often conflicting, contradictory, or incomplete, that must be sifted through,
in order to make sense of a particular issue or event. The same is true if one
takes courses in literature and fiction, where the motivations and actions of
characters are often subject to considerable interpretation and ambiguity.
Anyone who has attempted to study the Civil War or French Revolution in depth,
or work through a Fyodor Dostoyevsky or Toni Morrison novel, will be more than
willing to attest to this point. Learning to effectively grapple with these various
complexities can mold a student into a sharper, more incisive thinker, and is a
further testament to the value of intense study of the humanities.
What Philosophers Had
to Say about Income Inequality
Income inequality in the United States, now at it’s highest
levels since the eve of the Great Depression, is a topic of considerable
interest in the nation today. In addition to being the focus of prominent
economist Thomas Piketty’s new book Capital
In the 21st Century (currently
the #1 selling book on Amazon), inequality was a major catalyst
for the Occupy movement, and was an important issue in the 2012 presidential
election. After his reelection, President Obama also devoted considerable
attention to this issue. Economists like Nobel Prize winners Joseph
Stiglitz of Columbia University and Paul
Krugman of Princeton University have argued that income inequality has
slowed the recovery from the Great Recession.
Additional research also suggests that income inequality in
the United States is closely associated with increased
homicide rates, elevated
infant mortality, as well as decreased
levels of educational attainment. Given the potential impact of inequality on society,
it is clearly a crucial topic that needs to be better understood. Yet,
without studying the humanities, and in particular philosophy and history, it
will be increasingly difficult to understand issues like income inequality, and
to sustain and nurture American democracy as a whole.
A study
by economist Angus Deaton and psychologist Daniel Kahneman found that for annual
incomes of up to $75,000, income was closely correlated with various measures
of happiness, including stress levels.
After $75,000, however, this effect disappears, with additional income
not significantly impacting these measures of satisfaction. Yet, in a puzzling
twist, when people were asked whether their life was “going well,” those with
higher incomes were more likely to answer in the affirmative. Deaton and Kahneman’s work sheds a
fascinating light on how we understand and react to our financial status.
Utilitarian philosophers, such as Jeremy Bentham and John
Stuart Mill, believed realities and situations should be assessed
by whether they provided the greatest amount happiness (defined by Mill as the
“absence of pain”) for the largest possible number of people. Utilitarian thinkers would examine Deaton and
Kahneman’s findings, and probably argue that high levels of income inequality
were a net negative, because with a skewed wealth distribution, many people
(those on the lower end of the income distribution, whom there are necessarily
many of in a highly unequal society), are not experiencing their optimal levels
of happiness. When presented with some of the aforementioned data linking
inequality with worsened educational outcomes, and increased infant mortality
rates, Bentham and Mill would likely cast an even more critical eye towards
income inequality.
At the same time, if income inequality were to somehow
increase average incomes substantially (as has been argued by Judge Richard
Posner, a prominent United States Court of Appeals judge, and the most cited legal scholar of
the twentieth century), then utility for the greatest number of people, in the
form of personal happiness, would be maximized. In such a scenario, income
inequality could actually be a net positive.
The late John Rawls, perhaps the most prominent American
philosopher of the 20th century, argued that
various personal advantages which individuals enjoy (whether in terms of
talents and abilities, or social status and income), are justified only if the
manner in which these advantages are rewarded (for example, through large
earnings, or considerable political power) is, in a macro sense, beneficial
to everyone in society, no matter what their income status or intellectual
abilities. Rawls doesn’t argue that everyone needs to be equal in terms of
income or power, but rather, that society is structured in a manner where
inequalities and disparities are advantageous to the worst-off in society (that
is, they are better off than they would be under some other societal
structure).
Rawls also believed desirable positions (such as a coveted
job at a respected company, or the ability to run for elected office) should be
available to all
people, on the basis of fair and equal competition. According to Rawls’
formulation, this requires not just that positions be made available on the
basis of merit (for example, without racial or religious discrimination, or
undue advantages due to family connections), but also that all people have the
proper starting
point (such as access to educational resources), to be able to viably
compete for desired positions.
That is, Rawls argues for not just an equal right to seek out and obtain the
employment that one desires, but also an equal opportunity to acquire the knowledge, and develop the skills
necessary, to effectively compete for such positions. As Rawls puts it: “In all parts of society there are to be
roughly the same prospects of culture and achievement for those similarly
motivated and endowed.”)
Whether Rawls would consider the current income distribution
justified would depend in part on whether
this distribution is beneficial to the worst off in society, that is, whether
it leaves the most socioeconomically disadvantaged Americans better off than
they would be in the absence of such inequality. Rawls would also examine the
degree to which all people could obtain the jobs they desired, based on the
aforementioned framework.
Hypothetically, if income inequality and wealth disparity
improves the economy as a whole, and if it ultimately also benefits those in
the lower strata of society (as Judge Posner argues),
current levels of inequality might be a net positive. However, given that the poor seem to be
suffering from elevated levels of educational
underachievement , while facing lower
life expectancies and limited access
to the legal system , Posner’s assessments are, to say the lease, debatable. These
realities also suggest that the equality of opportunity that Rawls so valued, isn’t
present in today’s America. Thus, Rawls would likely cast a wary eye towards
current levels of income inequality.
Why does it matter what Rawls, Bentham, Mills, or any other
philosopher thinks about income inequality? Can’t we just use the statistical
and economic data before us to reach a decision as to how to reach a sound
understanding on this topic? Actually, that isn’t possible.
Whether one views the current wealth distribution as
problematic or acceptable depends in large part upon how we view questions such
as whether unearned advantages (like the family and society one was born into)
should drastically
affect one’s life chances, or what obligations
members of a society owe to each other, and whether
social mobility is important, and how it ties to inequality.
The conclusions that any individual reaches on these issues,
are in large part underpinned by moral and philosophical concerns. By better understanding the reasoning of
those philosophers who preceded us, and the broader themes and framework that
drive their thinking, we can better assess our respective positions, and thus have
a deeper, more meaningful conversation about our own nation’s path forward on issues
like income disparity.
Studying History Allows
Us to Understand Today’s Society
A basic understanding of American history is also crucial to
maintaining a democratic society. How can we truly understand the current outcry over the NSA
spying scandal, and the potential dangers of an expansive security state more
generally, without considering
past programs of domestic surveillance,
or how the nation approached
questions of civil liberties during prior times of war and conflict? Along
these lines, how do we analyze labor issues, such as the unionization campaigns
of today, without probing the broader history
of the labor movement? Or what about how the recent recession and recovery compares
with past economic turnarounds from major downturns, and how our solutions
to the recent crisis are similar to, and differ from, those applied in previous
crises?
Why College Is The
Ideal Place To Study Philosophy and History
Engagement with topics like philosophy and history is a
lifelong, dynamic process. And yet, colleges and universities, as the final
place where most people will formally study such a broad array of subjects (as
opposed to the highly specialized and segmented curriculum of graduate school,
or the very specific demands of the working world), is an important juncture. Furthermore,
since most of
today’s high school graduates attend colleges (either 2 or 4 year) and
universities, these institutions bring together a large portion of the
population, from which to create a common academic grounding in these subjects,
which will be highly beneficial to the political process as students become
voters. Additionally, since most
members of Congress hold college degrees, the university must be understood as
a shared experience for not just voters, but also, future elected
officials.
If we hope to build an informed, engaged citizenry, whatever
their individual political stances, requiring the study of philosophy and
history, is an important starting point.
A Required Curriculum
in Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science
Recognizing that all students must study the humanities, does
not mean that those focusing on the humanities need not study other subjects; on
the contrary. In a world where big data is
increasingly expected to both drive decision making, and serve as a source of
future employment, and in a time when the National Academy of Sciences warns of a “gathering storm” in American education,
due to major fissures in math and science education, it is clear that everyone
needs a basic understanding of math and computer science, preferably as a part
of the core college curriculum.
At a minimum, all
students should be asked to demonstrate basic proficiency in both mathematics
and statistics. Math not only provides students with important critical
thinking and logic skills, but is the underlying basis for important concepts
and themes in disciplines ranging from engineering to medicine to economics . Statistics
is no less important, since statistics is a core tool for a variety of
undertakings, from making strategic business
decisions to political forecasting to research in
psychology. Additionally,
since statistics, particularly in politics and healthcare, are often used in an ideologically
biased manner, and misused or misinterpreted, it is vital
that students develop a strong understanding of statistics on their own, so
that they aren’t vulnerable to the deceptions posed by,
as Mark Twain once put
it “Lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
Students should also take at least one course in the fundamentals
of computer science, which can help shape a very basic understanding of how the
Internet and digital technology works. The lives of humanities majors will be
just as affected by technology,
science and data as everyone else, and so must have a core grasp of these
critical concepts. This idea was best captured by the title of a recent
book arguing for increased technology literacy, from media theorist Douglas
Rushkoff: Program or Be Programmed.
Conclusion
Valuing science and technology doesn’t mean that we can in
any way afford to undermine or ignores the humanities. A solid grounding in the
humanities, ideally through required courses in philosophy, American history, and
English, should be mandatory for all students. Study of arts, theater,
literature, anthropology, world history, and more should be encouraged and
supported as well, financially as well as in spirit, and both inside and
outside of the classroom.
Higher education in the United States is largely broken, whether we
consider the costs of education, the job prospects of recent graduates, or the
need to provide graduates with the skills to compete in today’s hypercompetitive
global marketplace. It is as crucial as ever to fix those problems. But, in
seeking solutions, let’s not allow any of those realities to allow us to
minimize or dismiss the vital importance of the humanities for all university
students. We do so at our own peril.
