General Education for the Information Society

 

In 1988, I wrote The Meaning of General Education (Teachers College Press), a history of innovations in the general education curriculum as U.S. institutions responded to the impact of the industrial revolution in the 20th century.  Much has happened in the intervening 3+ decades as the Information Revolution matured, creating a new context—whether you call it the global information society or the fourth industrial revolution – in which we need to consider freshly the role of general education.  I have written a couple of blog posts about the issue over the past couple of years.  Now, I’ve written an expanded piece on the role of general education in this new environment in a free ebook.  It is available here. 

Please take a look and share your thoughts.

 

 

Thinking About K-14

 

President Biden’s new infrastructure proposal includes an education element that would, essentially, provide free access to the first two years of undergraduate education for all Americans.  It is a major educational innovation that responds the maturation of the Information Society, just as universal access to high school was a response to the maturation of the Industrial Revolution early in the 20th century.  It also builds on several state-level initiatives, such as the recent New York State move to make free access to the first two years of college available to high school graduates in New York. 

The move toward a national pre-K-to-14 public education has some broad implications for higher education and for American life.  Looking at the pre-K part of the plan, for instance, there are benefits that go well beyond the obvious one of giving all children a better start to their education.  It also means that many mothers will be able to rejoin the workforce and help provide financial security for young families.

That said, the potential changes for higher education raise some important strategic planning needs for higher education.  Some thoughts:

*Assuming that free access to the first two years of college is limited to community colleges, one impact could be that both public and private four-year institutions lose enrollments in those first two years while the demand for community college enrollment expands significantly. Some four-year public institutions have regional campuses that they may want to transition to serve as community colleges.  Other institutions may want to focus on upper-division majors and graduate programs, partnering with community colleges so that students can effectively migrate to a four-year program. 

*At many universities, supporting introductory and general education courses is a job assigned to graduate assistants.  If funding for K-14 is limited to community colleges, institutions with graduate programs may need to find new work for graduate assistants.  This could mean putting more energy into serving adult learners, so that, while their relationship with students begins at the Junior year, they can maintain a relationship with them far beyond the undergraduate degree.  Historically, institutions have talked about the three-legged stool that supports learning:  instruction, research, and public service. The K-14 movement might open new doors for doctoral students to participate in research transfer and other forms of community engagement related to the research and dissemination function.

*The K-14 movement would mean a more seamless curricular sequence between high school and college.  This raises obvious questions about the role of general education in the undergraduate curriculum and the relationship of undergraduate general education to the high school curriculum.   The goal would be to minimize duplication in general education courses taught in both high school and college and, importantly, to ensure that there is a logical progression—curricular unity—in general education from high school through the first two years of college as students prepare for both adult citizenship and, ultimately, a profession. 

* The move also raises other curricular questions.  Should there be a “gap year” built into the educational experience?  If so, should the gap be positioned (a) between high school and college? (b) between the first two years of college and the upper division of the undergraduate experience?  (c) at the end of the undergraduate experience?

*What are the implications for colleges that want to attract adult learners and international students into associate and baccalaureate degrees?

The K-14 movement is very likely to continue regardless of how this one Bill fares in Congress.  There is much to consider in terms of strategic planning in this new environment.  Now is the time for higher education to begin thinking seriously about the best ways it can serve its students and its public purpose as the Information Revolution matures and the interest in a K-14 environment continues to grow.

Thoughts?

John Meacham's "The Soul of America"

The Soul of America by historian Jon Meacham is about events in the history of the United States, but it is also book for our times.  Published in 2018—in the midst of the Trump Administration—it looks at other times when our core beliefs were challenged in order to inform our lives today.  “The war between the ideal and the real,” he writes, “between what’s right and what’s convenient, between the larger good and personal interest is the contest that unfolds in the soul of every American. . . The message of Martin Luther King, Jr., –that we should be judged on the content of our character, not on the color of our skin—dwells in the American soul; so does the menace of the Ku Klux Klan.  History hangs precariously in the balance between such extremes.  Our fate is contingent upon which element—that of hope or that of fear—emerges triumphant” (p. 7). 

            He begins with a look back to when the Presidency was first defined during the debates that led to the Constitution.  Alexander Hamilton proposed that the president be elected for life. Others suggested that Congress should select the President.  Their trust in George Washington led them to a create an elected office as “an act of faith in the future and an educated wager on human character. From the start,” he writes, “Americans recognized the elasticity of the presidency and hoped for the best” (pp. 25-26). 

            Meacham goes on to take a fresh look at times when that hope was tested, starting with the Civil War and its aftermath—the Ku Klux Klan and Reconstruction.  He examines the rise of Theodore Roosevelt and Progressivism as the Industrial Revolution matured and, with it, brought millions of immigrants into the nation and sparked new cultural tensions as the idea of America as a “melting pot” took hold.  He documents the rise of women’s suffrage movement in the early 20th century and the cultural conflicts that attended the Roaring Twenties. 

            A chapter on “The Crisis of the Old Order” looks at Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and the challenge to Roosevelt’s vision led by Huey Long, as Fascism grew in Europe.  Meacham goes on to describe the anti-communist McCarthy movement reaction to Truman’s Civil Rights initiatives in fifties, and the ultimate successes of Civil Rights brought about by Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson.

            Meacham concludes with some thoughts on how the lessons of the past can help the nation survive crises that arose during the Trump administration but that are still with us today.  “How then,” he wrote in 2018, “in an hour of anxiety about the future of the country, at a time when a president of the United States appears determined to undermine the rule of law, a free, press, and the sense of hope essential to American life, can those with deep concerns about the nation’s future enlist on the side of the angels?” (p. 266).  He suggests five steps that all citizens can take:

·      ENTER THE ARENA – He urges all citizens to become politically engaged, noting, “. . . the paying of attention, the expressing of opinion, and the casting of ballots are foundational to living up to the obligations of citizenship in a republic” (p. 266).

·      RESIST TRIBALISM – Meacham quotes Jane Addams: “We know instinctively that if we grow contemptuous of our fellows and consciously limit our intercourse to certain kinds of people who we have previously decided to respect, we not only tremendously circumscribe our range of life, but limit the scope of our ethics” (p. 267).  Meacham adds, “Don’t let any single cable network or twitter feed tell you what to think” (p. 268).

·      RESPECT FACTS AND DEPLOY REASON—Meacham quotes Truman: “The dictators of the world say that if you tell a lie often enough, why, people will believe it.  Well if you tell the truth often enough, they’ll believe it and go along with you” (p. 268).

·       FIND A CRITICAL BALANCE – He notes that, “Being informed is more than knowing details and arguments.  It also entails being humble enough to recognize that only on the rarest of occasions does any single camp have a monopoly on virtue or on wisdom” (p.269).  This is one of the values of a free press.

·      KEEP HISTORY IN MIND – He argues that it is good to look back, as this book does, to see how other generations have responded to similar issues.  “To remember Joe McCarthy,” he notes, “. . . gives us a way to gauge demagoguery” (p.270).  The past also teaches us “that demagogues can only thrive when a substantial portion of the demos—the people—want him to” (p. 271).

The Soul of America brings important, but often little discussed, issues in our history to bear to help us understand where we are today as a nation and as a culture.   A great read.

----

Meacham, John. The Soul of America: The Battle for our Better Angels.  New York: Random House, 2018.

 

"These Truths"

 

I have found my pandemic "read"--These Truths by Jill Lepore.  It is a history of the United States from 1492 to 2016 in one very large volume--789 pages of text, plus another 200+ pages of notes, index, and acknowledgements.  A good long read for these very quiet days and nights. What makes it special, though, is its focus.  Lepore tells the American story in terms of how we have responded, over the past five centuries to “these truths”—to the promise of America—that the Founders stated in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness--that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed . . .

It is the story of the United States told by looking at the ongoing struggle for both equality and independence as we—as individuals and communities—pursue our unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That it has been a long struggle, Lepore makes clear by showing how the major events in our history are tied to our understanding of “these truths.”  That it is a continuing struggle, our times make abundantly clear.  As Andrew Sullivan noted in his  New York Times review, it is also a story of contradictions:

This is not an account of relentless progress. It’s much subtler and darker than that. It reminds us of some simple facts so much in the foreground that we must revisit them: “Between 1500 and 1800, roughly two and a half million Europeans moved to the Americas; they carried 12 million Africans there by force; and as many as 50 million Native Americans died, chiefly of disease. … Taking possession of the Americas gave Europeans a surplus of land; it ended famine and led to four centuries of economic growth.” Nothing like this had ever happened in world history; and nothing like it is possible again. The land was instantly a refuge for religious dissenters, a new adventure in what we now understand as liberalism and a brutal exercise in slave labor and tyranny. It was a vast, exhilarating frontier and a giant, torturing gulag at the same time. Over the centuries, in Lepore’s insightful telling, it represented a giant leap in productivity for humankind: “Slavery was one kind of experiment, designed to save the cost of labor by turning human beings into machines. Another kind of experiment was the invention of machines powered by steam.” It was an experiment in the pursuit of happiness, but it was in effect the pursuit of previously unimaginable affluence.

 

            In the process, Lepore creates a very different reading of American history than most of us got in school.  Instead of focusing on battles and personalities, it focuses on how Americans defined “these truths” over the years and fought about their definitions.  It is a very fresh look at our history and one that can open our eyes to the truths we are dealing with today. 

            The book has four parts:  “The Idea” (1492-1799), “The People” (1800-1865), “The State” (1866-1945), and “The Machine” (1946-2016).  I am about half-way through at this point and am learning a lot, getting a fresh perspective on our path to today.

            I also just picked up Let Me Tell You What I Mean, a collection of early Joan Didion essays dating from 1968 to 2000—another unique insight into our culture and times.

            Happy reading!

             

Here's Hoping History Does Not Repeat Itself

 

I am reading These Truths, Jill Lepore’s insightful history of the United States from 1492 to 2016.   Her description (on page 244) of Congress during the war with Mexico in the 1840s rang a warning bell:

Nearly as soon as the war with Mexico began, members of Congress began debating what to do when it ended.  They spat venom.  They pulled guns.  They unsheathed knives.  Divisions of party were abandoned; the splinter in Congress was sectional.  Before heading to the Capitol every morning, southern congressmen strapped bowie knives to their belts and tucked pistols into their pockets.  Northerners, on principle, came unarmed.”

 

            Charles Dickens was in the U.S. at the time and wrote, “It is the game of these men, and of their profligate organs, to make the strife of politics so fierce and brutal, and so destructive of all self-respect in worthy men, that sensitive and delicate-minded persons shall be kept aloof, and they and such as they be left to battle out their selfish views unchecked.”  Meetings of the House of Representatives, he observed, were “the meanest perversion of virtuous Political Machinery that the worst tools ever wrought.”

            The struggle, of course, was over whether new territories acquired from Mexico would be slave states or free states.  In two decades, the Civil War would give an answer.

            As 2021 began, we saw a deadly insurrection in the U.S. Capitol, spurred on by a President who lost the election and wanted to reverse the will of the electorate.  We saw many Republican Congress members support the President as other members called for impeachment.  We saw metal detectors installed in the entries to the House chamber and at least one Representative vowing to bring her gun to her desk. 

            Let us hope that, as the impeachment trial looms, Congress can maintain discipline and respect for the oaths that its members have taken—and respect for the citizens they serve.

Looking Ahead: The New Elections Environment

 We have just come through one of the ugliest post-election periods in American history.  Donald Trump, who spent the past four years of his Presidency courting the far-right wing of the Republican Party, lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.  Instead of accepting his loss, he spent the next two months complaining that he had won in a landslide, that the election had been rigged against him, and that multiple states had committed election fraud to keep him from a second term.  He went to court multiple times to challenge state elections and lost every time.  Then, when the House of Representatives met to confirm the election results, he instigated an attack on the U.S. Capitol that took five lives and brought into sharp focus the deep racial and class animosities that had helped put him into office.

            Joe Biden will soon be inaugurated and will have the threat of insurgency as yet another concern that will likely distract the nation from ending the corona virus pandemic and from responding to the growing economic and social crises that the pandemic has generated.  Mistruths about the election—which have activated a national network of right-wing extremists—will make it difficult to find common ground.

            For the record, I do not believe that the 2020 presidential election was rigged in any way.  That said, I do think that, in recent years, the election process has adapted, in part, to the availability of new technologies and, in part, to social changes as the Information Society has matured.  The pandemic spurred on those changes as States sought to ensure effective voter access in a time of social distancing.  In response, States provided greater mail-in balloting, early voting, and use of newer voting machines as examples. 

These changes are valid, to be sure.  However, the misinformation around the 2020 election have created voter distrust in the system, which continues to fuel a backlash.  Looking ahead, we need to build public confidence in both the social value and the operational validity of this new voting model that reflects social and technological changes that will be with us for many years to come.

            While there is no need to analyze the voting processes in each state to look for widespread fraud, I do think that the public interest would be well-served if President Biden would appoint a commission to look at the new election environment and identify best practices that States can use to ensure effective access to voting for all and allow the public to have full trust in the election process.  The goal is not to reject these innovations, but to educate the public and give voters in all states confidence that the process is valid and to protect the rights of all voters.  Some items to consider:

·      The issue of “gerrymandering.”  The Commission should look at how states determine their electoral districts and identify ways to best organize districts that avoid gerrymandering, ensure that all citizens have equal opportunity to have their voices heard, and ensure that districts are not gerrymandered to artificially create an advantage for any one party.  Gerrymandering remains an important issue; the public needs shared guidelines for how to define a voting district in a way that promotes fair access by citizens.

·      Mail-in Ballots.  This voting method was especially popular in 2020 due to the corona virus pandemic, which made people reluctant to stand in long lines to vote. The dramatic acceptance of this voting method caused many to be suspicious of the process.  The Commission should look at how different States organized mail-in balloting and recommend to the States models that proved to be most successful in the 2020 election.  The result would be standards that would build confidence among voters.

·      Early Voting.  This is the other major change in how citizens had access to voting this past year.  The Commission should compare how different States handled early voting and then identify some best practices that States could follow in future elections.  One challenge is to identify practices that will ensure that all voters—regardless of age, race, employment, etc.—have equal and effective access.

·      Record Keeping.  With multiple opportunities for voting—mail-in, early, and on the traditional election day—people will want to be sure that their votes are always counted but also that the process is protected from the idea that people would try to vote more than once.

·      Counting the Vote.  When should mail-in ballots be officially counted?  When should early voting be tabulated and recorded?  How can states best ensure that all votes are recorded and that there are no duplicate or inappropriate votes counted? 

It is essential to ensure that all voters have confidence in the election process—the most sacred of our Constitutional rights—so that they do not fall victim to lies in future elections. 

Educating for Democracy

 

When I was in high school in the first half of the 1960s, the idea of democracy was integral to the curriculum. We were still in the midst of the Cold War—a situation made more dramatic by the space race.  But the country was also facing a Civil Rights battle, the early stages of the War in Vietnam, and the beginning of the youth rebellion, as early Baby Boomers reached their teen years inspired by the achievements of role models who had come of age in the late fifties.  Many of our teachers were WWII veterans or had family who fought in that war or in Korea. 

The post-war goal of creating citizens who could protect democracy and solve social problems was built into the social studies curriculum.  Ninth grade social studies devoted one semester to Pennsylvania history and another to the structure of government.  Tenth grade was western civilization.  Eleventh was U.S. history.  Twelfth grade was Problems of Democracy, a year-long focus on the Constitution and historical and current Constitutional issues. 

We graduated into the chaos of Vietnam, youth rebellion, the civil rights movement, rock and roll, and the technology revolution.  Interesting times, for sure.  That high school curriculum helped us steer our way through the social changes that surrounded us.

When I look around at the world today, I worry whether young adults in the 2020s are being prepared by their high school curriculum to respond to the social challenges of a multicultural, global society in a global information-based economy.  I checked out the social studies curriculum at my high school alma mater.  It looks like this:

            Ninth Grade:               Western Civilization

            Tenth Grade:               U.S. History

            Eleventh Grade:          Civics and Government, plus an Elective

            Twelfth Grade:            Electives

Elective choices include:  Western Civilization, Advanced Western Civilization, U.S. History, Advanced U.S. History, Civics and Government, World Cultures, Human Geography, Social Issues, and Psychology, along with some dual enrollment opportunities.

            I use my own alma mater as an example, confident that it is not too far from the norm. The curriculum potentially covers a lot of ground when you include electives.  The question, though, is whether everyone gets the basics needed for a graduating senior to successfully participate in the social, political, and civic environments of today’s global information society.  That is:  Are we educating our students to be effective citizens?

It is a question that came home to roost yesterday, when a large number of extremists invaded the U.S. Congress in a insurrection prompted by the sitting U.S. President that took four lives and embarrassed our nation internationally.  How do we, as a nation, educate ourselves out of this situation?  After January 20, the educational community should come together to ask what we can do to better educate our citizens—all of our citizens—to succeed in their role as citizens of a constitutional democracy.