“The New Liberal Arts” [p. 290]
Sanford J. Ungar
In “The New Liberal Arts,” Sanford J. Ungar, president of Goucher College, argues that a liberal arts education is still relevant in today’s economy. He identifies and rebuts seven misperceptions about a liberal arts degree, noting that employers are not looking for vocationally trained graduates but rather individuals who can think critically and communicate effectively. He argues that low-income and first-generation college students especially should thrive in a liberal arts setting. Ungar also says that a liberal arts education does not make U.S. graduates less competitive in a global economy. Despite the high costs of college, he says, “the net cost of attending a small liberal-arts college can be lower than that of a large public university” (¶19). He advocates for such small, residential colleges and encourages “close interaction between faculty members and students” (¶18).
Joining the Conversation
1. Summarize in a few sentences the seven misperceptions that Sanford Ungar discusses. These of course are all things that “they say”— and that he uses to launch what he wants to say. How does calling them “misperceptions” affect the way you read his argument? Would you read it any differently if he instead called them “common assumptions”?
In “The New Liberal Arts,” Sanford J. Ungar, president of Goucher College, argues that a liberal arts education is still relevant in today’s economy. He identifies and rebuts seven misperceptions about a liberal arts degree, noting that employers are not looking for vocationally trained graduates but rather individuals who can think critically and communicate effectively. He argues that low-income and first-generation college students especially should thrive in a liberal arts setting. Ungar also says that a liberal arts education does not make U.S. graduates less competitive in a global economy. Despite the high costs of college, he says, “the net cost of attending a small liberal-arts college can be lower than that of a large public university” (¶19). He advocates for such small, residential colleges and encourages “close interaction between faculty members and students” (¶18).
Joining the Conversation
1. Summarize in a few sentences the seven misperceptions that Sanford Ungar discusses. These of course are all things that “they say”— and that he uses to launch what he wants to say. How does calling them “misperceptions” affect the way you read his argument? Would you read it any differently if he instead called them “common assumptions”?
27
A sample summary: “A liberal arts education is too expensive in a troubling economy,
and students—especially low-income and first-generation students—should focus on
majors that will get them jobs. Emphasis on the liberal arts in higher education puts
the United States at a disadvantage internationally and reflects a liberal political
agenda.” Calling the points he responds to “misperceptions” explicitly marks them as
positions that he disagrees with. Students may say that the phrase “common
assumptions” might confuse some readers who would conclude that Ungar supports
those points. On a semantic level, an assumption is something taken for granted,
while a misperception is something that has been observed from a flawed perspective.
2. See paragraph 6 where Geoffrey Garin suggests that “the responsibility of higher education today is to prepare people ‘for jobs that do not yet exist.’” Thus, according to Ungar, “It may be that studying the liberal arts is actually the best form of career education.” How would you respond to this claim?
Students’ responses to this question will vary, but you may want to spend some time making sure they understand both Garin’s assertion and Ungar’s argument. Some students will agree that the critical thinking and reasoning skills fostered in a liberal arts education prepare graduates for a variety of future careers, including those positions not yet created. Others will point to growing fields such as healthcare and energy technology that require practical and scientific backgrounds. Many students may have examples of people they know who struggled to get a job after graduating from a liberal arts program or who are working in a field unrelated to their degree.
3. Misperception number 5 relates liberal education to political affiliation. What does Ungar have to say on this issue, and what do you think about his response?
Some students may resist what they see as indoctrination to a liberal political agenda in the term liberal arts. They may be unable to separate the terms liberal and conservative from their political connotations, and so it would be a good idea to look up dictionary definitions of those two terms as a class. Ungar explains that “a liberal education, as properly defined above, has nothing whatsoever to do with politics” (¶14). He points out that its continuation of classical traditions is actually a more conservative approach, and a discussion that highlights the terminology at work would benefit students.
4. On what specific points do you think Ungar would agree with Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus (pp. 178–88)? On what points would he be likely to disagree?
2. See paragraph 6 where Geoffrey Garin suggests that “the responsibility of higher education today is to prepare people ‘for jobs that do not yet exist.’” Thus, according to Ungar, “It may be that studying the liberal arts is actually the best form of career education.” How would you respond to this claim?
Students’ responses to this question will vary, but you may want to spend some time making sure they understand both Garin’s assertion and Ungar’s argument. Some students will agree that the critical thinking and reasoning skills fostered in a liberal arts education prepare graduates for a variety of future careers, including those positions not yet created. Others will point to growing fields such as healthcare and energy technology that require practical and scientific backgrounds. Many students may have examples of people they know who struggled to get a job after graduating from a liberal arts program or who are working in a field unrelated to their degree.
3. Misperception number 5 relates liberal education to political affiliation. What does Ungar have to say on this issue, and what do you think about his response?
Some students may resist what they see as indoctrination to a liberal political agenda in the term liberal arts. They may be unable to separate the terms liberal and conservative from their political connotations, and so it would be a good idea to look up dictionary definitions of those two terms as a class. Ungar explains that “a liberal education, as properly defined above, has nothing whatsoever to do with politics” (¶14). He points out that its continuation of classical traditions is actually a more conservative approach, and a discussion that highlights the terminology at work would benefit students.
4. On what specific points do you think Ungar would agree with Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus (pp. 178–88)? On what points would he be likely to disagree?
28
Ungar would likely agree with Hacker and Dreifus that a college education should be
available to everyone. He argues that we should “train the broadest possible cross
section of American society to participate in, and help shape, civil discourse” (¶ 11).
Both articles agree that the liberal arts education is valuable; in fact, Hacker / Dreifus
argue that “supposedly impractical studies are a wiser use of college and ultimately a
better investment” (¶ 6). Both Ungar and Hacker and Dreifus value a lower student-
to-faculty ratio.
The authors would disagree about the relevance of cost. Hacker and Dreifus make tuition charges their first point, whereas Ungar finds complaints about tuition and cost unfair or at best misplaced. His “Misconception No. 7, that colleges are becoming “irrelevant because they are unable to register gains in productivity or to find innovative ways of doing things” (¶17), could well describe Hacker and Dreifus’s position. Hacker and Dreifus praise many schools for the gains they have documented and for their innovation in handling costs, while Ungar argues that “the problem of costs goes beyond individual institutions” (¶17) and that the government should more fully support education.
The authors would disagree about the relevance of cost. Hacker and Dreifus make tuition charges their first point, whereas Ungar finds complaints about tuition and cost unfair or at best misplaced. His “Misconception No. 7, that colleges are becoming “irrelevant because they are unable to register gains in productivity or to find innovative ways of doing things” (¶17), could well describe Hacker and Dreifus’s position. Hacker and Dreifus praise many schools for the gains they have documented and for their innovation in handling costs, while Ungar argues that “the problem of costs goes beyond individual institutions” (¶17) and that the government should more fully support education.
No comments:
Post a Comment