“What would the United States look like if we really gave up on liberal education and opted only for specialized or vocational schools? Would that really be such a bad thing?”
The interviewer was trying to be provocative, since I’ve just written a book entitled Beyond The University: Why Liberal Education Matters. What exactly would be the problem, he went on, if we suddenly had a job market filled with people who were really good at finance, or engineering, or real estate development?
Apart from being relieved that he hadn’t included expertise in derivatives training in his list of specializations, I did find his thought experiment interesting. Would there be real advantages to getting students to hunker down early into more specific tracks of learning? In that way they would be “job ready” sooner, contributing more quickly to the enterprises of which they are a part, and acquiring financial independence at the same time. Would that really be such a bad thing?
The debate between those who want students to specialize quickly and those who advocate for a broad, contextual education is as old as America itself. The health of a republic, Thomas Jefferson argued, depends on the education of its citizens. Against those arguing for more technical training, he founded the University of Virginia, emphasizing the freedom that students and faculty would exercise there. Unlike Harvard University and its many imitators, devoted to predetermined itineraries through traditional fields, he said, Virginia would not prescribe a course of study to direct graduates to “the particular vocations to which they are destined.”
At Mr. Jefferson’s university, “every branch of science, useful at this day, may be taught in its highest degree.” But who would determine which pursuits of knowledge would prove useful?
Jefferson, a man of the Enlightenment, had faith that the diverse forms of learning would improve public and private life. Of course, his personal prejudices limited his interest in the improvement of life for so many. However, his conception of “useful knowledge” was capacious and open-ended – and this was reflected in his design for the campus in Charlottesville. He believed that the habits of mind and methods of inquiry characteristic of the modern sciences lent themselves to lifelong learning that would serve one well whether one went on to manage a farm or pursue a professional career. It is here we see the dynamic and open-ended nature of Jefferson’s understanding of educational “usefulness.”
His approach to knowledge and experimentation kept open the possibility that any form of inquiry might prove useful. The sciences and mathematics made up about half of the curriculum at Virginia, but Jefferson was convinced that the broad study of all fields that promoted inquiry, such as history, zoology, anatomy and even ideology would help prepare young minds. The utility was generally not something that could be determined in advance, but would be realized through what individuals made of their learning once outside the confines of the campus. The free inquiry cultivated at the university would help build a citizenry of independent thinkers who took responsibility for their actions in the contexts of their communities and the new Republic.
Jefferson would have well-understood what many business leaders, educators and researchers recognize today: that given the intense interconnection of problems and opportunities in a globalized culture and economy, we require thinkers who are comfortable with ambiguity and can manage complexity. Joshua Boger, founder of Vertex Pharmaceuticals (and chair of the board at Wesleyan University), has pointed out how much creative and constructive work gets done before clarity arrives, and that people who seek clarity too quickly might actually wind up missing a good deal that really matters. Boger preaches a high tolerance for ambiguity because the contemporary world is so messy, so complex.
Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, one of the most innovative design firms in the world, has lamented that many designers “are stuck with an approach that seems to be incapable of facing the complexity of the challenges being posed today.” He calls for a flexible framework that leaves behind static blueprint preparation for “open-ended, emergent, evolutionary approaches to the design of complex systems can result in more robust and useful outcomes.” Like many CEOs across the country, Brown recognizes that more robust and useful outcomes will come from learning that is capacious and open-ended — from liberal education.
At the Drucker Forum last year, Helga Nowotny, president of the European Research Council, described what she called the “embarrassment of complexity” – efforts based in data analysis to dissolve ambiguity that lead to more conformity and less creativity. She called for an ethos among business and government leaders that would instead “be based on the acknowledgement that complexity requires integrative thinking, the ability to see the world, a problem or a challenge from different perspectives.” That’s a call for integrative thinking based in liberal learning.
In America, liberal education has long been animated by the tension between broad, open-ended learning and the desire to be useful in a changing world. Calls for dissolving this tension in favor of narrow utilitarian training would likely produce just the opposite: specialists unprepared for change who will be skilled in areas that may quickly become obsolete.
So, what would America look like if we abandoned this grand tradition of liberal education? Without an education that cultivates an ability to learn from the past while stimulating a resistance to authority, without an education that empowers students for lifelong learning and inquiry, we would become a cultural and economic backwater, competing with various regions for the privilege of operationalizing somebody else’s new ideas. In an effort at manic monetization without critical thinking, we would become adept at producing conformity rather than innovation.
The free inquiry and experimentation of a pragmatic liberal education open to ambiguity and complexity help us to think for ourselves, take responsibility for our beliefs and actions, seize opportunities and solve problems. Liberal education matters far beyond the university because it increases our capacity to shape a complex world.
Jiwe Marekani ingekuwaje ikiwa kwa kweli tungeacha elimu ya uhuru na kuchagua tu shule maalumu au za ufundi? Je, hiyo itakuwa kweli jambo mbaya? <unk> Mhojiwa alikuwa kujaribu kuwa provocative, tangu mimi tu imeandikwa kitabu yenye jina Zaidi ya Chuo Kikuu: Kwa nini Liberal Elimu Mambo. "Akaendelea kusema, ""Ni nini hasa ambacho kingeweza kuwa tatizo ikiwa kwa ghafula tungekuwa na soko la kazi lililojaa watu ambao ni wazuri sana katika fedha, uhandisi, au maendeleo ya mali isiyohamishika?""" Mbali na kuwa na furaha kwamba hakuwa na pamoja na utaalam katika derivatives mafunzo katika orodha yake ya utaalam, mimi alifanya kupata majaribio yake mawazo ya kuvutia. Je, kuna faida halisi ya kuwafanya wanafunzi wajiwekee mapema katika njia hususa za kujifunza? Kwa njia hiyo wangekuwa "wenye kazi tayari" mapema, wakichangia haraka zaidi kwa biashara ambazo wao ni sehemu yake, na kupata uhuru wa kifedha wakati huo huo. Je, hilo lingekuwa jambo baya sana? Mjadala kati ya wale wanaotaka wanafunzi kuhitimu haraka na wale wanaotetea elimu pana, ya muktadha ni ya zamani kama Amerika yenyewe. Thomas Jefferson alisisitiza kwamba afya ya jamhuri inategemea elimu ya raia wake. Kwa kuwa wanafunzi wake walipinga mafunzo ya kiufundi, alianzisha Chuo Kikuu cha Virginia, akisisitiza uhuru ambao wanafunzi na walimu wangeweza kuitumia. "Kulingana na Chuo Kikuu cha Harvard na waigaji wake wengi, waliojitolea kwa njia zilizopangwa mapema kupitia nyanja za jadi, alisema, Virginia haingetoa kozi ya masomo kuelekeza wahitimu kwa ""maarufu maalum ambayo wamekusudiwa."" ""Katika chuo kikuu cha Bwana Jefferson, kila tawi la sayansi, muhimu leo, linaweza kufundishwa kwa kiwango cha juu zaidi." Jefferson, mtu wa Enlightenment, alikuwa na imani kwamba aina mbalimbali za kujifunza zingeboresha maisha ya umma na ya kibinafsi. Bila shaka, ubaguzi wake wa kibinafsi ulipunguza upendezi wake katika kuboresha maisha ya watu wengi. Hata hivyo, dhana yake ya "ujuzi muhimu" ilikuwa na uwezo na wazi-mwisho <unk> na hii ilionyeshwa katika kubuni yake kwa ajili ya chuo katika Charlottesville. Aliamini kwamba tabia za akili na mbinu za uchunguzi za kisasa zilikuwa na uwezo wa kujifunza maisha yote, na kwamba hizo zingeweza kumsaidia mtu, iwe angekuwa na shamba au angekuwa na kazi. "Hapa ndipo tunapoona asili ya nguvu na ya wazi ya uelewa wa Jefferson wa ""usaidizi"" wa elimu: mbinu yake ya maarifa na majaribio iliweka wazi uwezekano kwamba aina yoyote ya uchunguzi inaweza kuthibitika kuwa muhimu." Sayansi na hisabati zilikuwa karibu nusu ya mtaala wa Virginia, lakini Jefferson alikuwa na hakika kwamba utafiti wa kina wa nyanja zote zilizotangaza uchunguzi, kama vile historia, zoolojia, anatomia na hata itikadi, ingesaidia kuandaa akili za vijana. Kwa ujumla, faida haikuwa kitu ambacho kingeweza kuamuliwa mapema, lakini ingefahamika kupitia kile watu walichofanya na kujifunza kwao mara moja nje ya mipaka ya chuo kikuu. Utafiti wa bure uliopandwa katika chuo kikuu ungeisaidia kujenga raia wa wasomi huru ambao walichukua jukumu la vitendo vyao katika muktadha wa jamii zao na Jamhuri mpya. "Jefferson angekuwa na kuelewa vizuri kile viongozi wengi wa biashara, walimu na watafiti kutambua leo: kwamba kutokana na uhusiano mkubwa wa matatizo na fursa katika utamaduni wa kimataifa na uchumi, tunahitaji wasomi ambao ni starehe na ambiguity na inaweza kusimamia utata. """ Joshua Bogart, mwanzilishi wa Vertex Pharmaceuticals na mwenyekiti wa bodi ya Wesleyan University, ameelezea jinsi kazi nyingi za ubunifu na za ujenzi zinavyofanywa kabla ya uwazi kufika, na kwamba watu wanaotafuta uwazi haraka sana wanaweza kuishia kukosa mpango mzuri ambao una maana. Boger anahubiri uvumilivu wa juu kwa utata kwa sababu ulimwengu wa kisasa ni fujo sana, tata sana. Tim Brown, Mkurugenzi Mtendaji wa IDEO, moja ya kampuni za ubunifu zaidi ulimwenguni, amesikitika kuwa wabunifu wengi "wanashikilia mbinu ambayo inaonekana haiwezi kukabiliana na utata wa changamoto zinazowekwa leo." "Helga Nowotny, rais wa Baraza la Utafiti la Ulaya, alielezea ""aibu ya utata"" katika mkutano wa Drucker Forum mwaka jana, akisema ""jitihada za kuondoa utata wa data zinazosababisha kufuata zaidi na ubunifu kidogo.""" "Alichagua kuwa ""maadili kati ya wafanyabiashara na viongozi wa serikali ambayo badala yake itakuwa msingi wa utambuzi kwamba utata unahitaji kufikiri kwa ushirikiano, uwezo wa kuona ulimwengu, tatizo au changamoto kutoka kwa mtazamo tofauti,"" alisema." Katika Marekani, elimu ya uhuru kwa muda mrefu imekuwa animated na mvutano kati ya pana, wazi-mwisho kujifunza na hamu ya kuwa na manufaa katika dunia kubadilika. Maombi ya kuondoa mvutano huu kwa ajili ya mafunzo ya matumizi madogo yaweza kutokeza kinyume chake: wataalamu wasio tayari kwa mabadiliko ambao watakuwa na ujuzi katika maeneo ambayo yanaweza kuwa ya zamani haraka. Kwa hiyo, Marekani ingekuwaje ikiwa tungeacha utamaduni huu mkubwa wa elimu huria? Bila elimu ambayo huendeleza uwezo wa kujifunza kutoka kwa zamani wakati wa kuchochea upinzani kwa mamlaka, bila elimu ambayo inawapa wanafunzi uwezo wa kujifunza na kuhoji maisha yote, tutakuwa nyuma ya utamaduni na kiuchumi, tukishindana na mikoa mbalimbali kwa upendeleo wa kutekeleza mawazo mapya ya mtu mwingine. Katika juhudi ya manic monetization bila kufikiri muhimu, tungekuwa mtaalamu katika kuzalisha kufuata badala ya ubunifu. Utafiti huru na majaribio ya elimu ya pragmatic ya uhuru wazi kwa utata na utata hutusaidia kufikiria kwa wenyewe, kuchukua jukumu la imani zetu na vitendo, kukamata fursa na kutatua matatizo. Elimu ya uhuru ni muhimu zaidi ya chuo kikuu kwa sababu inaongeza uwezo wetu wa kuunda ulimwengu tata.