Defining Academic Freedom

As I was reading this Inside Higher Ed article titled “Defining Academic Freedom”, I began to realize a critical yet unfortunate fact. I realized that the majority of my educational experience in a classroom mirrored the list of what academic freedom does not entail. Looking back to freshman year of undergrad I’ve seen professors intentionally impose their political, religious, or social ideologies on the students. I can think back to high school experiences where there were questions on tests where the “correct” answer would go against their beliefs. There are moments now in college where I feel that students who are in the minority regarding political views, feel the need to keep their ideologies to themselves with the fear of being harassed, embarrassed, or shamed by other students.

I’ve had professors who’ve flaunted their tenure with the intent to make a clear authoritative distinction between their status as tenured faculty members and us, the young and ignorant students. This dynamic is most evident on the first few days of class as it is used as a way to set the tone for how the class will be conducted. As the class progresses, the students are waist deep in information that only reinforces the strong ideologies presented by the professor.

This article clearly illustrates academic freedom and its potential to allow students to have a holistic educational experience. Have you experienced academic freedom in your college experience? Has there been an instance in college where you felt stifled in a classroom as a result of the students classroom etiquette or the professors ideologies?

 

Breaking away from the 4 year college structure into something more promising

I’m back with another blog but I just had to share this article by Selingo (not posted on this week’s Higher Ed or readings) with everyone, curtesy of professor Hainline. During our earlier class discussions, we questioned the college model and why students have to attend for four years, straight out of highschool. Well, apparently it doesn’t always have to be this way. In this article, Selingo introduces Stanford’s new “open loop university” model which basically allows for a personalized and ultimately more effective education for students. Under the model, students would be able to chose when they are ready to attend college, whether it be at age 18 or even 26. Miriam posted a blog about the three types of students  (the sprinter, wanderer and strangler) and I agreed that one of the issue is that some college students aren’t ready to go attend college straight out of high school. Though college does provide the time for them to discover their passions and interests and mature into adults, in some cases such as with the stranglers, it may not be the best idea. Going back onto the Open Loop system, students could rearrange the 6 year program time frame however they want so that they could break in between to work in Silicon Valley startup jobs for a year or so and if they want to “loop” back in and explore something new, students could do seamlessly.

The new model would also incorporate enriching changes to the traditional classroom (like we discussed in class) such as free open online courses and other outside-the-classroom skill building courses to supplement lessons taught (like how we wanted some of the general education requirements to be focused more on “useful” applications like financial literacy and developing excel/Microsoft skills etc). Students would no longer be fixated to a strict immobile structure of traditional higher education but instead be free to personalize their college experience to be just the right pace for them. The open loop university model is definitely very promising and really brightens the future of higher ed.  What do you guys think?

Article link: http://www.ecampusnews.com/mcclatchy/beyond-4-degree/

Should colleges make changes to their athletes program?

I am reacting to one of this week’s Higher Ed readings because as a former softball player in high school, I felt a compelling response towards this article, which basically argues for the “mistreatment” of college athletes. I found the college athletes’ problem to be very similar to our class discussion about students who are full time but have to manage multiple jobs and working hours. The article argues it is simply impractical and “exploitative” to have the athletes dedicate every waking hour to the team because it deprives them from their academia and other college opportunities that they have a right to participate in as students. I agree that colleges should scale back on the intensity of the athletic programs but at the same time, I don’t understand what the big issue really is… Don’t the college athletes know what they are getting themselves into when they signed up for the scholarship and the program? And by doing so, isn’t at least safe to assume that these students actually want to spend their time and full dedication to the college sport and eventually pursuing a future career in as a professional athlete player in their sport? I mean, if not, then the program isn’t really for these students, no?

Plus, I definitely don’t think it is impossible to be both a great athlete and have good grades–I know a very dedicated basketball superstar and biology major who has a 4.0 GPA, right on our campus–that’s right…go Brooklyn College! Anyways, though I agree that some schools may be expecting too much from their athlete students, I think that students also play an important part in making the decision. I feel like it ultimately boils down to the student’s motivation. If athletics are becoming unmanageable, they should consider focusing on what matters to them the most, instead of trying to juggle both academia and sports. During my time on the softball team in high school, I had the exact same dilemma. But then again, I had no one to “blame” but myself because I chose to take on the challenge. What do you guys think?

Article link: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2016/03/22/college-athletes-must-spend-unreasonable-amount-time-their-sports-essay#.Vw935yzcYmA.mailto

Are You a Sprinter, Wanderer, or Straggler?

An article in last week’s New York Times by none other than our favorite–Jeff Selingo–spoke of the three types of college graduate: the Sprinter, the Wanderer, and the Straggler. While doing so, Selingo highlighted many of the challenges facing this generation of college graduates: student debt, job hopping (as a recent post discussed), unemployment, delay of financial independence, and more. He also emphasized the failure of the “one size fits all” approach to higher education, which is something we’ve been toying with the last many weeks in our seminar.

Selingo pointed out early that the journey to adulthood is steadily increasing, and termed the age group of 18 to 25-year olds “emerging adults,” after the term coined by a psychology professor in the 90s. This age group is grappling with feeling simultaneously grown up and not so grown up at the same time, hence the “emerging.” During this age group, not only is the college degree the biggest determinant of their future professional success, but how they navigate their college years is also fundamental.

That’s where the categories come in. You’re a Sprinter if you’ve known what you wanted to major in since entering college; you’ve been lining up increasingly impressive internships summer after summer; you have a job set after college with little or no student debt. Sprinters are the most able to job-hop, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, since it allows important exploration. They can do this because of the lack of student debt weighing them down, which forces college grads to choose money over interest, happiness, location, or the like. Sprinters, therefore, are more likely to take chances with business–you’ll likely see a Sprinter working in an incubator housing fresh start-ups soon after graduation, feeling good about themselves (I assume).

As a Wanderer, you may have had great grades in high school and a stellar GPA in college, but you’re on an uncertain path. You’ve applied for countless jobs in many different fields, to no avail. You’re likely underemployed, meaning overqualified for the job you’re working at, like nearly half of all undergraduates. Or you’ve resorted to graduate school to help you “figure it out”; after all, 30 percent of college graduates are back in school within 2 years. Wanderers may have benefited from a gap year to explore interests and career options before college instead of being thrown into something they didn’t know how to navigate. The longer you wander, Selingo notes ominously, the harder it is to catch up.

If none of the above describe you, you may be a Straggler. This is you if you’re drifting through your twenties, in and out of school, putting academic performance last on your list of “important things to do in college.” You may stay at home after high school and get a job, or join the military. Maybe you’ve found your calling at age 30 while in your parents’ garage. After all, there are 12.5 million 20-somethings with some college credit but no degree out there, virtually no better off than if they’d never gone to college at all.

Point is, there’s a lot more to the “emerging adult” years than just graduating college, like navigating life outside of the classroom and building relationships. These are the things that can determine whether you become a Sprinter, Wanderer or Straggler. Which do you envision yourself as?