There has been an interesting series on edwired about changing higher education to match the “free” economy. The series is called “The End of Western Civilization (as we know it).”

My question is this: Would the amorphous, free learning environment that the author appears to propose actually contradict the content of the learning? Part of education (a liberal education) is to learn the structure of and connections between spheres of knowledge. I would be concerned that the undirected learning approach might create a contradiction between content and vehicle.

Thoughts?

Roger ScrutonI’m a big fan of Roger Scruton. His books on philosophy and culture have done much to create my love of philosophy and to deepen my understanding of culture. He has a recent article called “Two Virtues of Western Culture” which addresses culture, philosophy, and education. It is an excellent article.

It’s been a week since I finished up my subbing job, and I’m finally writing a post about it. It was a long eight weeks, and I’m so glad it’s over. It was a blessing to have a steady job and actually know the names of the students in the classroom, but it was a job I was quite ready to finish with.

My last week of school was busy with grading tests and projects. I had three CP (college prep) classes whose project was to create a booklet on the Renaissance. They had 5 various topics and each topic needed to have 75 written words and 2 pictures. We spent 3 days in the computer lab so they could work on their project. Of course when the projects were due on Wednesday only about 1/3 of the students turned them in. As I began grading I began to suspect plagiarism. I would put a sentence or two into Google, and sure enough every word in their project would be found on the internet.

Thursday, I gave the students the chance to rewrite their project. The penalty? They would only lose 10 points (otherwise the highest grade possible was a 50%). Several students asked to redo their project.

The best situation was a student who kept looking at his project wanting to know if I had graded it. I wouldn’t tell him, but asked if he needed to take it back. He didn’t. When I went to grade his project I knew he didn’t write it, but I couldn’t find it on the internet. So I went to the school library and enlisted the help of the librarians. They pulled out 3 books some of the students had used. Looking in the books I found 3 of the 5 topics. I figured that was enough evidence for me, especially since one of the other topics started with the phrase “Plato said…” I knew a 9th grader wouldn’t have written that!

The last few days I’ve been checking out job postings in a couple of potential grad school locations. It seems me that basically anything above entry level requires a degree in a particular field. My major was humanities, which means I didn’t train for some particular job — I trained for all of them. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like many employers see it that way.

My suspicion is that I could do just about any of the jobs I’ve looked at. There might be a slight learning curve as I became acquainted with the jargon of a particular profession. Nonetheless, my liberal education would probably give me an immediate advantage over everyone who didn’t major in the field, and a long-term advantage over many who did.

Several of the jobs I looked at were for teaching in public schools. Though I understand the advantages of having certified teachers, certification, like most other screening processes, has its flaws. It can allow in people who aren’t really capable, and bar some who really are. Basically, in order to be certified, you have to have taken certain classes. It doesn’t matter much whether you can actually do the stuff they teach in those classes — you have to take them. As I was lamenting this fact earlier, Lincoln helpfully shared something he had told a friend with a similar problem: Look for a job teaching gym; then you can teach whatever you want. Ha.

I could go on about my ideas on education, but maybe I’ll save them for a later post. I guess the lament of this post is that our world seems to have no place for the generalist. The liberal arts are confined to a small corner of academia. Classic ideas have no currency in our society. Does anyone else think this is a problem?