For many years I used to have students reflect on 3 quotes that I have on my 
webpage as a first required writing assignment. One of the quotes is as 
follows: 



On the purpose of obtaining a college education: "… It isn't to make money. It 
is, or should be, to understand ourselves and our world better. Thus, educated 
people make better citizens, better parents and better workers too, and 
therefore tend to make more money. However, that money is a result, not a 
purpose. I learned that in college. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone did?" Glenn 
Cheney in a letter to the NY Times, June 2, 1997. 


Two elements of this quote always led to somewhat heated discussion. One of 
them was from students who would point out that Cheney was incorrect that 
education makes better parents, citizens, etc., because they all knew a lot of 
people, mainly their own parents or grandparents who were not educated, who 
were good hard-working people, wonderful parents, etc. That misinterpretation 
of the quote was relatively easy to deal with. The more troublesome issue was 
their notion of 'money as the main purpose of getting a college education'. 
There was so much resistance to the notion of 'learning for its own 
sake' rather than learning some obvious marketable skill that I simply got 
tired of arguing and gave up giving that assignment. 



Miguel 





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul C Bernhardt" <[email protected]> 
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
<[email protected]> 
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 6:07:28 PM 
Subject: Re: [tips] orientation to major 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul C Bernhardt" <[email protected]> 
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
<[email protected]> 
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 6:07:28 PM 
Subject: Re: [tips] orientation to major 

I agree with you completely. While I'm sure that many of us on TIPS were first 
generation college students, I'm confident that most of us had family members 
who went to college before we did, often parents. Therefore, we had some 
awareness of what is needed for college success, trusted persons to ask, and 
support for our goals.  


I see many students who show up at college and they think (and their parents 
think) they are making a transition similar to that from primary school to 
secondary school, as if freshman year of college is just the 13th grade. They 
need to be taught how to go to college. They need to be taught that courses 
will not meet 5 days a week (typically) and that what you will be tested on 
will be not necessarily be talked about in class. They need to learn that they 
are expected to do much work on their own. They need to learn how to prioritize 
their time, including their family. I have been astonished at times the degree 
of demands that some families put on their children who are away at college. I 
regularly see students whose parents are actively undermining their success, in 
some cases with not-so-secret communication that 'becoming educated is not what 
the family values, so just give up this college fantasy.' They are begged to 
come home every weekend, skip classes on Friday and Monday, etc. I've seen 
students whose parents have them come home every weekend to work in the family 
business all day Friday through Sunday. These parents (and the students) see 
only 12 credit hours scheduled as a full load and imagine that they have all 
the free time in the world, not knowing that 12 credits is expected to take up 
about 36 hours of their life when outside study is taken into account.  


I can go on and on... but it is clear to me that with the ongoing 
democratization of college access that a large proportion of our students at 
all but the elite colleges will be first generation and therefore likely to be 
poorly prepared to manage the total experience of college. Therefore, it is 
clear to me that courses which teach basic skills, management of their path 
through the curriculum, long term planning of their education for later life 
success, etc. are vital to the ultimate success of the college. If the college 
admits, but does not graduate, then they don't go on to get jobs that 
implicitly promote the school and in the most practical sense, that earn money 
to donate back to the school. It is vital to the ongoing success of the college 
that the college admit the best qualified it can, and support those it admits 
as well as it can and create systems that create higher likelihood of success 
both in college and after college. Successful graduates may enrich the college. 
Non-graduates will not. Courses that increase the yield of successful graduates 
from those who admitted should be welcomed by administrators and by faculty who 
value their careers and the future of the academy. 


Paul C Bernhardt 
Frostburg State University 
Frostburg, MD, USA 
pcbernhardt[at]frostburg[d0t]edu 





On Mar 26, 2011, at 4:25 PM, Claudia Stanny wrote: 




  For those who are making arguments for intro-to-the-major courses, you have 
my best wishes and all my sympathy. 


When the Careers course was proposed by a departmental committee as part of a 
big curriculum review and reform about 10 years ago, we had all of these 
discussions in the department and again when the course went through the campus 
curriculum review process. 


The course was criticized for being too fluffy and not having any "real" 
content.  I admit, it is almost entirely an academic skills course and this 
criticism reflects the deeply held belief that courses are all about content.  
Interestingly, some of the criticism came from individuals who argued that the 
course was too demanding and had too many learning outcomes for a 1 sh credit 
course!  Go figure.  There were similar discussions on campus about the 
Academic Foundations course (an introduction to college life, study skills, 
time management, etc. for first year students).  The university advising center 
(which controls this course) had been tracking student success and persistence 
for students who do and do not take this course.  It is an elective course that 
is strongly advised for students entering with weaker academic credentials 
(lower SAT scores, lower HS GPA, other flags for problems transitioning to 
college).  At the end of the first year, students who completed this course 
have higher GPAs (even with lower overall predictive scores on admission) than 
the students who don't take this course.  (They now offer a special section of 
this course for students in the Honors program, but this is the same course 
taught to a cohort of Honors students.) 


Yes, many students manage to learn these skills through trial and error and 
maybe the intervention of a outstanding academic advisor or mentor (as did 
those of us on this list, I would guess).  Speaking from my own experience, I 
was plenty clueless about what one needed to do to prepare for graduate school. 
 I just thought I had to be smart and have great grades.  (very clueless!)  But 
I also suspected that I maybe wasn't getting everything I needed at the first 
school I attended, even though I couldn't say what I was looking for.   Then, 
mostly by sheer dumb luck, found what I needed through the behavioral models of 
grad students at the school I transfered to.   


Far too often, academic advisors fail to give students appropriate guidance.  I 
taught research methods for many years and was astonished by the number of 
outstanding students who enrolled in that course in the term in which they 
planned to graduate.  They wanted to go to graduate school but hadn't signed up 
for the GRE and certainly had not engaged in any meaningful research 
experiences.  When I talked to them about why they had waited so long, they 
would tell me their advisor and the student grapevine advised letting the 
research course wait until they were well into the major because it was such a 
demanding course (!)  This problem carried a lot of weight in arguing for the 
creation of this course.  Students just weren't being served with a system that 
relied on luck for acquisition of these skills.   


I also disagree with the idea that letting students fend for themselves on 
these matters allows the "real cream" to rise to the top.  This smacks of the 
"talent mindset" that Dweck talks about and identifies as an obstacle to 
persistence when students hit difficult spots in their academic work.  These 
metacognitive skills are learnable (and teachable) skills of academic life.  
Many smart, capable kids hit walls they don't even know exist because someone 
thinks that if they don't already know the secret handshake, they aren't cut 
out for academia. What a waste.  





Claudia Stanny 

--- 

You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] . 

To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263003&n=T&l=tips&o=9608
 

(It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) 

or send a blank email to 
leave-9608-13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263...@fsulist.frostburg.edu 



--- 

You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] . 

To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13482.917fac06d4daae681dabfe964ca8c74e&n=T&l=tips&o=9610
 

(It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) 

or send a blank email to 
leave-9610-13482.917fac06d4daae681dabfe964ca8c...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=9612
or send a blank email to 
leave-9612-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to