by John Tierney
It may be that, like me, you don't quite know what to make of articles that have appeared recently about the state of contemporary secondary and post-secondary education. But maybe you can! If so, help me sort through it. I've spent my entire professional life as a teacher -- for over twenty years at the college level, and for the last nine years at a high school. Despite all that, I still don't know what to make of all this.
So, I'm just going to call your attention here to some disparate things I've read in recent months, without trying to weave them together in a coherent essay. If you have thoughts, please let me hear them.
- An article in Thursday's New
York Times reported on a survey showing that large numbers of
college freshmen consider themselves depressed and thoroughly
stressed-out; many are already using, or are in need of, psychiatric
It's easy to understand how this could be true: college life can be stressful, especially for freshmen who are making all sorts of life adjustments. And as Tamar Lewin, the article's author, notes, "The economy has only added to the stress, not just because of financial pressures on their parents but also because the students are worried about their own college debt and job prospects when they graduate." (Anecdotal evidence -- and some of the reporting noted below -- certainly suggests that there are lots of college students who aren't stressed-out at all. Strung-out, maybe, but not stressed. Or maybe their stress comes from being strung-out. Who knows?)
The same article notes that while many students give a thumbs-down about their emotional health, they think they're pretty swell in other ways. Lewin writes: "While first-year students' assessments of their emotional health were declining [from the results in earlier surveys], their ratings of their own drive to achieve, and academic ability, have been going up, and reached a record high in 2010, with about three-quarters saying they were above average." (That's America for you: we all think we're above-average drivers, too. We all think we're residents of Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegon, where "all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average." But I digress.) Many of us don't really know ourselves well. To wit:
week, an Associated Press article by Eric
Gorski reported: "A study of more than 2,300 undergraduates found 45
percent of students show no significant improvement in the key measures
of critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing by the end of their
sophomore years." Gorski's article reported on findings of a new book by
Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa titled Academically
Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. Apparently, Arum
and Roksa spread the blame, pointing to (1) students who don't study
much and seek easy courses, and (2) a culture at colleges and
universities that values research over good teaching. Doesn't sound good, does it? Keep reading. It gets worse.
- Last August, I saw this review in the Wall Street Journal of a new book by Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus, Higher Education? How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids -- And What We Can Do About It. That subtitle really sticks it to the colleges. I haven't read the book, but according to the revealing review, Hacker and Dreifus skewer higher education. The reviewer, MarK Bauerlein, who teaches at Emory University, summarizes their argument this way: "[C]olleges and universities serve the people who work there more than the parents and taxpayers who pay for 'higher education' or the students who so desperately need it." On the point above, about colleges "valuing research over teaching," Bauerlein writes (from a position of experience): "A glance at scholarly journals or university-press catalogs might make one wonder how much of this 'research' is advancing knowledge and how much is part of a guild's need to credentialize its members. In any case, time spent for research is time taken away from students. The remoteness of professors may help explain why about 30% of enrolling students drop out of college only a few months after arriving."
- Related to each of
the previous two items is this this
article that I saw in the New York Times last July, reporting
that American colleges and universities are spending a diminishing share
of their budgets on instruction and more on administration and
recreational facilities for students.
This is easy to believe. Have you taken a look lately at a directory of administration (or an organization chart) for a college or university? There are multiple associate provosts, deputy associates, dozens of deans for this and that, associate deans, etc. It's quite remarkable, and a far cry from what it was like a mere 25 years ago. It's ridiculously expensive, duplicative, and (I suspect) sclerotic. It reminds me of what happened in the federal executive branch (and in many states) over the past half century, with the proliferation there of under secretaries, assistant secretaries, etc., leading to diluted accountability and slower governmental processes. [See, on this topic, the terrific book by Paul C. LIght and Paul A. Volcker, A Government Ill-Executed, and Light's earlier book, Thickening Government.]
As for the expenditures on fancy recreational facilities for students: I understand the need colleges have to compete for students. But this rec-race is contributing to what Richard K. Vedder, a professor at Ohio University who studies the economics of higher education, has properly called "the country-clubization of the American university." Maybe that development also has something to do with the following revelations.
the Boston Globe reported on the results of a study by two
University of California economists who found that "over the past five
decades, the number of hours that the average college
student studies each week has been steadily dropping." The study found
this to be true not just of a particular demographic, but across the
board: "No matter the student's major,
gender, or race, no matter the size of the school or the quality of the
SAT scores of the people enrolled there,
the results are the same: Students of all ability levels are studying
less." Are they working out at the rec-plex or doing other things?
- According to one observer, the decline in studying probably comes less from kids spending too much time on fancy fitness equipment than from their exuberant pursuit of drugs, sex, and rock-'n-roll -- and alcohol. A book by Craig Brandon, titled The Five-Year Party: How Colleges Have Given Up on Educating Your Child and What You Can Do About It describes America's "alcohol-soaked, sex-saturated, drug-infested campuses" as education-free zones. Let's repeat that: EDUCATION-FREE ZONES. Admittedly, I haven't read Brandon's book, and the Wall Street Journal, where I read this review of it, may not be the most reliable source for information having to do with higher education, such is the antipathy of many conservatives to contemporary college life. Still, the book, though obviously somewhat sensationalistic, comes to the same conclusion as the scholarly work of Hacker and Dreifus (above) and confirms the scary view of college life that Tom Wolfe painted in his 2004 novel, I Am Charlotte Simmons.