Freeing Students from Myopia?: Examining the Claims of Liberal Arts Education

Nathan Lindsay, James Barber, Patricia King, Charles F. Blaich, Debra Humphreys, Marcia Baxter Magolda, Ross Miller

Significance of this Symposium

In this era of heightened accountability and assessment, stakeholders in higher education are increasingly requiring that colleges and universities demonstrate the validity of their educational offerings. As the U.S. system of higher education continues to evolve, constituents in colleges and universities still struggle to define what the purpose of college should be, arguing the liberal education versus the practical education, "the college way versus the university way, tradition or sentiment against size and money, the finishing school and the trade school" (Matthews, 1997, p. 106).

The utility of liberal arts education is a topic that deserves periodic attention and review to clarify how it is being defined, implemented, and measured in different types of institutions. Advocates of a liberal arts education contend that it fosters an appreciation for the complexity of human psychology and experience and promotes the lifelong pursuit of understanding one’s unique, multifaceted identity and relation to society. A group of researchers from across the United States seeks to stimulate a discussion of liberal arts education, with a particular focus on addressing the challenges associated with defining and assessing this important approach to American higher education.

Purpose

The purpose of this symposium is to provide a forum for a discussion examining the claims of liberal arts education, as informed by each of these researchers and the audience. The symposium format has been designed to allow for and encourage the cross-fertilization of ideas, and to highlight the contributions of each of these researchers’ perspectives on liberal arts education as a central issue in higher education. This symposium brings together individuals who have significantly influenced the national discussion on the purpose and impact of college, and liberal arts education, on students.

Organization of the Symposium

The proposed symposium will be a moderated discussion that draws on audience participation and presenter expertise. The presenters will make brief remarks describing the contribution of their perspectives to an understanding of assessing a liberal arts education, and then the moderator will facilitate an open dialogue with the audience. Presenters and audience members will be asked to respond to the following questions:

1. What challenges are associated with defining and assessing a liberal arts education?
2. How should these challenges be addressed in studies of liberal arts education?
3. How should these challenges be addressed in the design, assessment, and implementation of practices intended to foster liberal arts education?

Audience

This symposium is designed to benefit faculty, graduate students, student outcomes researchers, and educators interested in conducting research on and/or enhancing a liberal arts education among college students.

Topics to be Addressed

1. Examining philosophical foundations underlying definitions of liberal arts education; Presenter, Nathan Lindsay
2. Examining claims about liberal arts education; Presenter, Charles F. Blaich
3. Research on liberal arts colleges and achievement of liberal arts outcomes; Presenters, James Barber and Patricia King
4. Student perceptions of liberal arts outcomes; Presenter, Debra Humphreys
5. Assessing institutional practices associated with liberal arts education; Presenters, Charles F. Blaich and Ernest Pascarella
6. Assessing pedagogical practices associated with liberal arts education in the curriculum and co-curriculum; Presenter, Marcia Baxter Magolda
7. Working with institutions to assess liberal arts education; Presenter, Ross Miller

Moderator - Kimberly Johnson

Literature that Influences this Symposium

The purpose of a liberal education, as described by Parker Palmer, is to lessen "smallness of mind, rightness of heart, banality of spirit, frenzy masquerading as efficiency, [and] myopic views of reality" (Palmer, 2002, p. xiii). Publications outlining the benefits of liberal education are myriad and range from the renowned Yale Report in 1828 (see Turner, 1996) to the more recent report, "Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to College," from the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U, 2002). The emphasis on liberal education has ebbed and flowed across generations, alternating with periods of pragmatism and eras emphasizing the basic arts and sciences. As Freedman (2003) pointed out, the percent of students who pursued a liberal education has declined, "from 50 percent in 1970 to 40 percent in 1995" (p. 54). Nevertheless, the proportion of students pursuing a liberal arts education is still remarkably large.

The "Greater Expectations" report asserted that a division need not exist between practical and liberal education, and that combining these philosophical approaches can "promote the kind of learning students need to meet emerging challenges in the workplace, in a diverse democracy, and in an interconnected world" (AAC&U, 2002, p. vii). The report further called for liberally-educated students to become empowered, informed and responsible learners charged with "maintaining the integrity of a democratic society" (p. xii). The authors encouraged institutions to provide educational environments that "foster intellectual honesty, responsibility for society’s moral health and for social justices, active participation as a citizen of a diverse democracy, discernment of the ethical consequences of decisions and action, and a deep understanding of one’s self and respect for the complex identities of others, their histories and their cultures" (p. xii). In doing so, they offered an educational experience that has the potential to transform not only students’ perspectives, but also students’ lives and their greater communities. This work is continued in subsequent reports from the Association of American Colleges and Universities that follow up on the vision articulated in "Greater Expectations" (AAC&U, 2004; AAC&U, forthcoming 2005).

A liberal arts education has traditionally avoided pecuniary or professional emphases, electing to focus on learning that develops the whole person. The liberal arts student is often described as one who is highly literate and has had opportunities for "broad and deep learning," allowing him or her to acquire "a rich fund of meaningful knowledge" (American Association for Liberal Education, 2003, para. 7). By developing students’ appreciation for learning and abilities to apply higher order thinking skills, educators in the liberal arts provide students with skills they can use in many different contexts throughout their lives. In summary, liberal arts educators aim to free students "from the constraints of ignorance, sectarianism, and myopia" (AAC&U, 1998, para. 4).

To achieve these goals, it could be argued that "a college’s purpose is not to transfer knowledge but to create environments and experiences that bring students to discover and construct knowledge for themselves, [and] to make students members of communities of learners that make discoveries and solve problems" (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 15). Holistic and interdisciplinary approaches are receiving more attention, trying to achieve the right balance of depth and breadth (Colby et al., 2003). Baxter Magolda (2004) further supports this holistic approach as a means to achieve self authorship; she suggests that self authorship is vital to contemporary college learning outcomes, and states, ". . . a holistic approach to education for the 21st century must focus on self-authorship as its central goal" (p. 29). To improve institutional effectiveness and reaffirm their traditional objectives, a number of liberal arts colleges have undergone revitalization efforts in order to stem the "erosion of mission" that was occurring (Hartley, 2003, p. 77).

Several recent studies have investigated the role of liberal arts education in student development (Baxter Magolda, 2004; Pascarella et al., 2004; Hurtado, 2003; King & Baxter Magolda, 2002; King & Baxter Magolda, in press). To improve the collegiate learning environment, university leaders and teachers are fostering an appreciation for diversity through "the inclusion of diverse traditions in the curriculum, pedagogy, and scholarly inquiry" (Chang, 2002, p. 131). In addition to what is formally studied and taught, researchers assert that much of students’ learning occurs outside the classroom through their informal interactions (Gurin et al., 2002). Similar to this notion, many define the "collegiate ideal . . . by the peer society of students [and] by extracurricular activities" (Geiger, 1999, p. 59).

Even with perspectives such as these in mind, it is still very difficult to define a liberal arts education. One might ask: Is a liberal arts education obtained only in certain types of institutions, certain types of majors, or through certain types of educational approaches? For example, some might argue that such an education only occurs in liberal arts colleges, where the central goal is the education of undergraduates. With this focus, these colleges may see themselves as "standard bearers, holding out the promise and the reality of education for education’s sake" (Breneman, 1994, p. 3). Advocates of these colleges claim that they are unique in that "more than any other kind of institution, [they] concentrate on personal development, the shaping of first-rate human capital, as well as intellectual achievement. The platitude about educating the whole person is not a platitude at these colleges" (Gring, 2000). In contrast, Delucchi (1997) asserts that many liberal arts colleges suffer from a "myth of uniqueness," considering the "inconsistency between liberal arts claims and curricula" (p. 423, 424).

As these differing viewpoints reveal, questions remain about whether a liberal arts education is specific to an institution or an institutional type, whether it is specific to a set of disciplines, or whether it is better described as a set of pedagogical practices.

Outcomes for the symposium

It is our hope that participants (presenters and audience members) leave the symposium with

1. A clearer understanding of liberal arts education as a complex and multifaceted concept, including learning outcomes that are associated with liberal arts education;
2. Knowledge of current initiatives to facilitate and document this kind of learning; and,
3. A list of resources that will assist others interested in pursuing these questions in more depth.

References

American Association for Liberal Education. (2003). The academy’s education standards. Retrieved April 19, 2005 from http://www.aale.org/highered/edstand.htm

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2002). Greater expectations: A new vision for learning as a nation goes to college. Retrieved April 19, 2005 from http://www.greaterexpectations.org/

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (forthcoming 2005). Liberal education outcomes: A preliminary report on student achievement. Washington, DC: AAC&U.

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2004). Our students’ best work: A framework for accountability worthy of our mission. Washington, DC: AAC&U.

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (1998, October). Statement on liberal learning. Retrieved April 19, 2005 from http://www.wilson.edu/president/spc_all/spc_aacu.htm

Barr, R.B. & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change. (November/December), 13–25.

Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2004). Self-authorship as the common goal of 21st century education. In M. B.

Baxter Magolda and P.M. King (Eds.), Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship (pp. 1–35), Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing.

Baxter Magolda, M. B. & King, P. M. (Eds.). (2004). Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing.

Breneman, D. W. (1994). Liberal arts colleges: Thriving, surviving, or endangered? Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Chang, M. (2002). Improving campus racial dynamics. Review of Higher Education, Winter, 125–140.

Colby, A., Ehrlich, T., Beaumont, E., & Stephens, J. (2003). Educating citizens: preparing America’s undergraduates for lives of moral responsibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Delucchi, M. (1997). "Liberal arts" colleges and the myth of uniqueness. The Journal of Higher Education, 68: 414–426.

Freedman, J.O. (2003). Liberal education and the public interest. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.

Geiger, R. (1999). The ten generations of American higher education. In P. G. Albach, R. O. Berdahl & P. J.

Gumport (Eds.), American higher education in the twenty-first century: Social, political, and economic challenges. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Gring, D. M. (2000, June 30). Liberal arts colleges are more important than ever. The Richmond Times Dispatch. Retrieved on November 5, 2003 from www.roanoke.edu/president/tdispatch.pdf

Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., and Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review. Retrieved on September 30, 2003 from http://www.gse.harvard.edu/~hepg/gurin.html

Hartley, M. (2003). "There is no way without a because": Revitalization of purpose at three liberal arts colleges. Journal of Higher Education, 27(1), 75–102.

Hurtado, S. (2003). Institutional diversity in American higher education. In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodard, Jr., & Associates, Student services: A handbook for the profession (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

King, P. M. & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (in press). A developmental model of intercultural maturity. Journal of College Student Development.

King, P. M. & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2002). Toward a developmental model of intercultural maturity: an holistic approach to collegiate to collegiate education. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning: Vol. 10. Improving student learning theory and practice – 10 years on (pp. 269–284). Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff & Learning Development.

Matthews, A. (1997). Bright college years: Inside the American college campus today, NY: Simon & Schuster, 45–108.

Palmer, P. (2002). Foreword. In W. M. McDonald (Ed.), Creating campus community: In search of Ernest Boyer’s legacy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pascarella, E., Cruce, T., Wolniak, G., and Blaich, C. (2004). Do liberal arts colleges really foster good practices in undergraduate education? Journal of College Student Development, 45(1), 57–74.

Turner, F. M. (Ed.) (1996). The idea of the university, John Henry Newman. Yale University Press.