A New Take on an Old Idea

Are we really missing out on knowledge that our schools and institutions should be teaching us? The answer to this question is looked at closely in a recent Bloggingheads video involving William Deresiewicz, of Yale University, and Mark Edmundson, of the University of Virginia. The two discuss the modern ways of the University and how a elite education might not necessarily be as great as it’s hyped up to be.

The video is set up with the screen divided in half with Deresiewicz on one side and Edmundson on the other. I found this quite interesting and fitting because when one made a statement we were able to see how the other reacted and what kind of facial expressions he made. This was fitting since these gentlemen though relatively close on the east coast are from different areas and could have different takes on some of the topics. Also, the video was part of a larger page that allowed the viewer to access some of the articles that these two men had written in regards to the topic at hand. I found this helpful in further clarifying the statements and ideas that they were discussing.

The article that seemed to be one of the central pieces to their discussion was Deresiewicz “ Disadvantage of an Elite Education”. This article was central to the idea that true teaching involves one on one time between students and their professors. I highly agreed with this statement because, being the type of person who learns better in an intimate environment, being thrown into a classroom with two hundred other students can be quite difficult to handle. This has actually been something that has played a part in my own life.

Six months ago I was faced with the question of which college would I like to attend in the fall? I had already prepared for this selection at the time and had narrowed it down to two schools University of California, Irvine or Chapman University. Ultimately, I chose Chapman, even though University of California, Irvine, was better specialized in my field of study, chemistry, because of its smaller size and the personal attention I would receive if I were struggle with some of the material in my classes.

Further the two men discuss this idea of leaders and thinkers of an institution. They came to the consensus that a leader buys in to all the ways of the school and its structure. Leaders are those who follow without question and are able to rise up to the top of their institution. While, thinkers are skeptics, they question everything and accept nothing. The idea of leaders and thinkers are at complete opposite sides of the spectrum, most college students fall somewhere in between the two. The real question should be how far to the thinker/leader side are they? In my case I fall somewhere between completely neutral and a leader. I have a tendency to follow what I’m told and sometimes forget to stop and think, is this really right or am I just being oblivious to my own surroundings?

The idea that schools are trying to produce leaders rather than thinkers that way leaders can comeback and later invest in their institution and help the institution continue to modernize and grow, brings forth the idea that universities are simply industrial complexes. A school that aims to produce all leaders is like a car factory in that the cars are produced and produced and once they are sold the money is used to further establish the factory and improve tools and machinery. The university is like that car factory and the cars are the leaders who are produced that comeback later in life and donate to their alumni to keep the school moving along. This idea of a school being an industrial complex makes absolute sense when being looked at from the standpoint of the alumnus who donates back to their institution.

Furthermore, in regards to universities and the two central questions: what is the good life? And what is the good society? It’s difficult to pin point an absolute answer to these two questions. The meaning of the good life/society for one student may be totally different from that of another. The two may have similar parts and expectations but, rarely will they be the same exact thing. Ultimately, only ones own self can answer the question of what’s the good life/society.

Lastly, a piece not mentioned in the video but, discussed in Deresiewicz’s article of how students at elite colleges are deprived of some of their innate freedoms can be seen from Deresiewicz’s observation at Yale. “I’ve been struck, during my time at Yale, by how similar everyone looks. You hardly see any hippies or punks or art-school types, and at a college that was known in the ’80s as the Gay Ivy, few out lesbians and no gender queers. The geeks don’t look all that geeky; the fashionable kids go in for understated elegance. Thirty-two flavors, all of them vanilla.” I found this highly interesting because modern society is the same way. They develop this idea to the public of what’s wrong and what’s right and the public is unwilling to go against the common ideals.

All in all the segment of the video makes one really think about their university and gives them a different perspective to look at rather than the one being shown to them everyday at school.