“Historians remind us that higher-education institutions initially were created largely to achieve moral ends. A renewed commitment to improving undergraduate education is unlikely to occur without changes to the organizational cultures of colleges and universities that re-establish the institutional primacy of these functions – instilling in the next generation of young adults a lifelong love of learning, an ability to think critically and communicate effectively, and a willingness to embrace and assume adult responsibilities.”
For many, education is the silver bullet that can fix society’s ills, resolving inequality, safeguarding democracy, and inspiring the next generation of leaders. Given the expectations laid on it, it is hardly surprising that it is a fiery issue, subject to significant controversies on method, motivation, and goals.
For me, the most difficult aspect is that we do not have a single way to measure what education produces, or even agree what it should be producing. Some things correlate with increasing income later in life, others with increased self-confidence or improved results on standardized tests. In Academically Adrift, Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa try to summarize the quantitative literature on undergraduate education, attempting to draw lessons from what research exists.
In brief, they draw four lessons. First, that modern universities place a low premium on learning, leading to students who feel academically adrift. Faculty, administrators, policy makers, and parents, all tacitly acquiesce to a collegiate culture with a low premium on learning and an absence of moral guidance, forcing students to attempt to find meaning in other activities. Second, that the gains in student performance from attending university are disturbingly low; students do little better at the end of their education than at the beginning on various critical thinking and writing exercises. Third, that individual learning is characterized by persistent and/or growing inequality of outcomes. Finally, that while overall learning is low, there is significant variation within and between institutions, suggesting that improved results are possible.
These are useful and important lessons. Unfortunately, I found none of them particularly surprising; though I don’t have mental numbers in mind for size of most effects they cite, the direction of the effects comes as no surprise. I didn’t know hours per week spent studying had declined from 25 hours in 1961 to 13 in 2003, for example, but I had assumed the direction. For me, therefore, the book is useful as a reference work but is dry for general reading. I have Michelle Rhee’s Radical further down my list (the hugely controversial ex-chancellor of the D.C. public schools), which though I suspect will be less informative, I hope may be more interesting.
Want to keep reading? You can get Academically Adrift here (or in the UK or Canada). Or, just join the Subtle Illumination email list to your right!