Topics
Page Two
Masthead
|
Topics |
Page Two |
Masthead |
|
|
| ||
| ||
Opinion: Missing the Point: Why Failing Could Be Worse By Rajesh Jaganath Last month, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI), a Delaware-based non-profit, published a study conducted in 2006 showing that the average college freshman could not pass a basic American civic literacy exam. A college education seemed to do little to help these scores with seniors still falling short of a passing mark. At some of the nations most elite institutions, including Cornell, Duke, Princeton, Yale, and UC Berkeley, seniors actually performed worse than freshmen. To conduct this study, ISI administered a civic literacy test composed of 60 multiple choice questions to over 14,000 college freshman and seniors in 50 campuses across the nation. Questions spanned across American history, politics, and economics. The mean for freshman fell to 50.4 percent while seniors performed slightly better at 54.2 percent. In a released statement, ISI cited the results to point to the failings of American universities. Their main point was that colleges inadequately educate students on the foundations of American society. According to ISI, “either America’s elite colleges place little value on teaching about America, or they do a bad job of it.” On first glance, it is easy to empathize with ISI’s commentary. There is a clear social benefit in an educated and politically engaged population, and it is not unreasonable to expect students to graduate from college with a basic level of competency. However, is it the duty of the university to impart this general knowledge? Many universities would claim that one the primary missions of the undergraduate education is to train students to think critically. Students are given the option to guide their own course of study but are expected to master a specific subject, whatever that may be, in enough depth to really engage and question reigning current thought and opinion. In this sense, universities bridge secondary schools which reward mastery of general knowledge and the graduate years and workforce that place a premium on specialization. Institutions aim to transition students from being simple receptacles of others’ ideas to harnessing the courage and drive to develop their own innovative viewpoints. Now, whether universities do this well is another question. The educational system of many other countries bypass the equivalent of America’s undergraduate. Perhaps, the time and cost associated with four years of exploration is not worth the utility gained. Also, some might even argue that academia focuses more on recruiting professors with long resumes than those with any real desire to teach. Yet, regardless of whether a person views the undergraduate experience as essential or a waste, it should not be the goal of a university education to teach general knowledge. Try asking the average student how much material is retained a year after an exam, or even a week. The real test comes when students are presented with an unknown problem; a college graduate should be more adept than a non-graduate at finding a solution. As the information age has made accessing vast amounts of knowledge relatively quick and simple, it has become more important to have the ability to synthesize new information than to recall it. It is important for the American educational system to provide a basic foundation across various disciplines. It is important to encourage members of society to be intellectually curious beyond their primary disciplines. However, if that process becomes reduced to students being able to rattle off a series of memorized facts on a basic multiple choice exam, then the educational system will truly have failed its students. The exam and the results of the study can be viewed at http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/ Rajesh Jaganath is a second-year medical student.
|
Thank you to DCGLA for helping to make Synapse programs possible. | |
Synapse is part of the Office of Student Life and Student Academic Affairs. | ||