Topic 27: Academic Snobbishness

Carol:

Education: A Profitable Idea

Yesterday morning I sat down at the dining-room table to enjoy my favorite breakfast, the New York Times. I admit I spend more time on the Arts section than I do on the Opinion page, but I always skim Section A first. I stopped the skimming at A17. No, it wasn’t an editorial or an expose; it was an open letter from “The Coalition for Educational Success,” which says that it represents the nation’s leading “proprietary colleges.” Now, I had to look that term up on the internet and it means “for-profit” colleges, such as University of Phoenix, Capella University, DeVry,  and ITT Technical Institute, all of which advertise heavily on television and the internet.

The letter itself was addressed to President Obama, beginning, “Mr. President, include all colleges in your education initiative,” referring to the “Skills for America’s Future” initiative announced by the White House on October 4, 2010.    The letter included a list of figures showing that community colleges have lower graduation rates, cost taxpayers more, and less success in job placement that  “career colleges,” which I assume is another term for proprietary colleges. As I read on, I found myself getting really riled up. Really riled up. Why? Was it personal, defensiveness because I taught at a community college for 24 years? Philosophical, a kind of academic snobbery against the idea of for-profit, career-oriented higher education?

My first reaction was to the tactics employed in the letter. In education, as in politics, I have never been swayed by arguments based on building oneself up (or one’s party, or one’s organization) by tearing down someone else.  My second reaction was that in education, as in politics, it’s pretty easy to twist numbers, to take them out of context, or to omit factors that account for those statistics. What was omitted from the letter from the Coalition for Educational Success?  Mission.

The mission of an institution is its reason for being—what service does it provide, why, and for whom? A large research university with an impressive list of Nobel Laureate faculty has a different mission than a beauty college. An exclusive Ivy-league college with a large endowment has a different mission than a church-affilated college. A community college has a different mission than a proprietary college. Statistics about graduation rates, cost per student, job placement, etc. are really only meaningful when framed around institutional mission.

The city of Los Angeles has an incredible variety of colleges and universities. Google “Los Angeles City College,” and the first entry is “LAC,” Los Angeles College, a for-profit career college. Their mission is “A Better Career. A Better Life.” with emphasis on degrees in business, criminal justice and health care. Look up LA City College, and you will see the much broader mission of a school  that calls itself “an urban oasis of learning that educates minds, opens hearts, and celebrates community.” (Source: LACC website). 

People attend proprietary colleges to achieve a clear goal which is easy to track and verify through statistics. Do they complete the career-training programs, do they get the jobs? Not so easy at a community college where a student may only want one class, or who transfers to a university after one semester, or has no idea what educational or career paths to pursue?

 Well, this wasn’t an easy essay to write, it wasn’t fun, and it wasn’t funny. And I don’t have a catchy ending. I love learning, and I like to think that learning something new everyday makes people happier, wiser, healthier, and… kinder. How they get that learning—the local library, a walk in the woods, or a $40,000 a year tuition bill—doesn’t matter so much. So, I AM a snob, an education snob.
                                                                  

Listen to Alexander Pope: "A little learning is a dangerous thing.")

                                          

 Sources :
  Los Angeles College
  Los Angeles City College
 “Skills for America’s Future”:

New York Times National: Section Wednesday, Oct. 6 2010, A17

Painting of Alexander Pope: Sir Godfrey Kneller (1646–1723)

Megan:

Anti-Academic Snobbishness

I used to get into arguments with my friend Sean all the time, and he would automatically disregard anything I said because he thought it came from books. Our most common argument:

    Him: “Sadam Hussein was behind the September 11 attacks.”  
    Me: “No he wasn’t!”
    Him: “You don’t know anything. You only read books. I was there!”
    Me: “No you weren’t!”
    Him:“I was in the army, I know what the army is like. Books can say  anything, but I actually lived.”
    ME: “No you didn’t.”

I didn’t say it was an articulate argument; after all, it usually took place in the pub. But his attitude towards “book learning” was actually very typical in the town where we both lived. I’d never before encountered such a contempt of education.

This was compounded by the fact that people generally don’t know that librarians need a Master’s degree to be qualified. They assume the job just involves sitting around and reading novels. And if I mentioned my academic qualifications I was treated as if I had been bragging – so, I was treated with contempt. “Well… la di dah” someone would say, with his finger pushing up his nose. 

Not all of my friends from high school went to college, but no one ever questioned that I would. And of course, once I was in college I was insulated by similar-minded people. So, it wasn’t until I moved to March, in England, that I discovered people who actively resented higher education.

 It took me awhile to realize it was a class issue. In the UK, about 33% percent of 18 year olds go on to higher education (in the US, it is 40%), however that is a recent development.  In the town of March, only 30 miles from Cambridge, only 9% had a higher education qualification,  according to the 2001 census (the most recent).  This is a working class town, where most people are educated on the job through apprenticeship and experience, and some view a university education, with the assumed increased earning potential, as “taking the easy way.” 

[In the prison, an officer could advance to a rank of Senior Officer after years (or decades) of hard work, but if he had a university degree, he could "fast-track" and become a Governor (the highest rank) in only 3 years.]

Perhaps this attitude comes from hundreds of years of oppression by the higher classes. Oxford was founded in 1096 and Cambridge in 1209. No other universities were established in England until the 19th Century, with the majority of the 89 universities in England being founded after WWII.  The most recent expansion of the university system was in 1992, when 35 polytechnic (trade) schools were given university status.  Now more people are attending university than ever before, but in the country towns and villages haven’t quite caught onto that trend.

I have more I could say on this, and say it more clearly too, but when I blew my nose just now, the room started spinning. I'm not quite coherent yet, so I'll try again tomorrow.

http://www.britishcouncil.org/usa-education-uk-system-k-12-education.htm
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/hefce/2010/trends.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_university
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Universities