|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
College education has undergone a significant transition during the past 40 years or so. Forty years ago, with the exception of the G.I. Bill, there was no such thing as "financial aid." There were no remedial courses. There were no "student recreation facilities." There were no "offices for student services." There were no "student evaluations of instruction." In fact, it was the advent of student evaluations during the 1960s that brought on a lot of what we see on college campuses today. Back then, students were trying to become more inclusive in the educational process. Higher education was in the process of opening up to people from a variety of socio-economic backgrounds, ethic groups, and regional settings.
Prior to the 1960s a college education was reserved primarily for a relatively privileged class of Americans. Some would argue that it still is with only about one in four citizens holding college degrees. But much has indeed changed since the 1950s when, according to the U.S. Census, the average educational attainment was eighth grade. Financial aid, the G.I. Bill and the Civil Rights Movement brought new voices to college campuses. The post World War II economic boom opened up opportunities for a larger cohort of the middle class. There are now close to 14 million people attending college in the U.S. More than at any time in history.
Despite having the obvious mission of improving their economic quality of life by attaining a college education, students during the 1960s and early 1970s had at the core of their experience a want to broaden their horizons, learn new things, and encounter diverse cultures. It was about more than just "the Benjamins." However, as we look at today's college student, the "experiential growth" attitude has waned to a great degree. Today's college students are focused much more upon gaining credentials, and then translating their degrees into economic opportunity and financial security.
However, and much to the chagrin of many students, while students' attitudes have changed, the mission of higher education has not. Colleges are not technical schools. Colleges are in the business of "educating," not "training." There is a difference between education and training. A person can train a dog to do a number of tricks - jump through a hoop, walk on a wire, fetch a stick, etc - for a reward of a biscuit. But that training has nothing to do with that dog's ability to feed itself. Once the dog show closes down, the dog will find nobody handing out free biscuits in the "real world." It will have to fend for itself. And without having been taught the skills essential for survival (education), it will likely starve.
Yet, many students today arrive at college campuses expecting to be trained. They don't want to take any courses other than those that "count" toward their chosen field of study. The student wants customized service, after all, he/she paid all that tuition, right? So, in some ways, the attitude of many of today's students is that of a "customer." But you cannot be a customer, because "the customer is always right." If you were always right, there would be no reason for you to be here trying to "learn." Paying tuition only grants you the opportunity to be exposed to higher learning. You're not paying to be educated to taste. In fact, a big part of learning is taking on subjects with which you may not at first feel comfortable. In short, college is not Burger King. You can't always "have it your way."
OK, not all students come in "customer" mode, but many see the professor-student relationship as an agent-client relationship. If I as a professor treat you as my client, then we must assume that my welfare will be directly impacted by your success or failure. Under such an assumption, higher student grades should translate into higher professor salaries. Think about it. Let's say you are a professional football player (client) and I am your agent. This year we negotiate for you a $100,000 contract. My take is ten percent, $10,000. Let's say this season you do very well, so next fall we re-negotiate your contract up to $1,000,000. My take would be $100,000. Thus, my welfare is directly impacted by your success. I am now much better able to take care of my needs and that of my family thanks to your success. That's a client-agent relationship. Now, we both know, or should know, that it doesn't work that way in the classroom. If you get an "A," I get my paycheck. If you get a "C," I still get the same check. If you fail, I still get paid the same amount. So my welfare as a professor is in no way tied to your success or failure. Therefore, the person most affected by your success or failure is YOU, not me. That may sound a bit harsh, but it's real. Nobody should be more concerned about your success or failure in a course than you are. Expecting for a professor to be more concerned about your education than you are is gravely misguided thinking. In today's world, the student is much more responsible for his/her educational growth than at any time in history.
In the end, our mission as professors is to
shape students into scholars.
A scholar is one who is capable of
independent and original thought. One who is able to develop new ideas
and perspectives, not just memorize old ones and repeat them.
During the past 25 years we have leapt into
the information age. The advent of computerized word processing and now
the internet allows for information to be produced at a rate much faster
than anyone can absorb it all. Today, ANYBODY, given the tools, can produce
and publish information, and then send it AROUND THE WORLD!!! Therefore,
looking to the professor as a bastion of knowledge on any topic is not
wise. We surely know more than you do about our given areas of expertise,
but we CANNOT POSSIBLY KNOW EVERYTHING!!! The onus is now much more upon
the student to seek out and use information. In fact, some say that information
is the new currency. The world's "richest man," Bill Gates, built his entire
fortune on machines that manage INFORMATION.
No longer is the flow of knowledge one-way from professor to student. It's circular now. We are all learning together. A professor's lack of knowledge about a specific fact is not a sign of incompetence; it is a sign of the reality that no single human being can possibly be held responsible for obtaining, and then passing along, all useful information to students. In fact, I would argue that the professor's role has changed from a simple indoctrinator, to a facilitor who guides students to pertinent disciplinary information sources, and instructs them in how to properly analyze and apply it. The root of the word "educate" is "educe" which means "to draw out." Our mission today is to draw out of the student his/her maximum potential for scholarly thought and practice. The sooner you recognize this, the more successful you will be academically.
Good Luck.
David A. Padgett
Assistant Professor of Geography
Tennessee State University