Realizing General Education E-Book

Cynthia A. Wells

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Serie: J-B ASHE-ERIC Report Series (AEHE)
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 173

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2015

Beschreibung

General education is widely touted as an enduring distinctive of higher education, but what do we actually mean by general education? Differing perspectives not only make it challenging to consider its significance, but also open it up to a wide range of determinations regarding its effectiveness. This volume aims to sharpen understanding of the complex picture of general education by: * describing how various conceptions of general education evolved historically, * identifying various functions expected of general education in the contemporary context, and * pointing out the educational practices that fulfill general education's aims in the current context. The conceptions of, and aspirations for, general education are consequential. This volume disentangles the divergent conceptions that hinder its renewal and considers the range of avenues for realizing its effectiveness. This is the second issue of the 42nd volume of the Jossey-Bass series ASHE Higher Education Report. Each monograph is the definitive analysis of a tough higher education issue, based on thorough research of pertinent literature and institutional experiences. Topics are identified by a national survey. Noted practitioners and scholars are then commissioned to write the reports, with experts providing critical reviews of each manuscript before publication.

Leseprobe

ASHE Higher Education Report: Volume 42, Number 2

Kelly Ward, Lisa E. Wolf-Wendel, Series Editors

Realizing General Education: Reconsidering Conceptions and Renewing Practice

Cynthia A. Wells

Realizing General Education: Reconsidering Conceptions and Renewing PracticeCynthia A. Wells ASHE Higher Education Report: Volume 42, Number 2 Kelly Ward, Lisa E. Wolf‐Wendel, Series Editors

Copyright © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company. All rights reserved. Reproduction or translation of any part of this work beyond that permitted by Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act without permission of the copyright owner is unlawful. Requests for permission or further information should be addressed to the Permissions Department, c/o John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River St., Hoboken, NJ 07030; (201) 748‐8789, fax (201) 748‐6326, www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Cover image by © iStock.com/rusm

ISSN 1551‐6970 electronic ISSN 1554‐6306 ISBN 978‐1‐119‐24465‐3

The ASHE Higher Education Report is part of the Jossey‐Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and is published six times a year by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company, at Jossey‐Bass, One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, California 94104‐4594.

Individual subscription rate (in USD): $174 per year US/Can/Mex, $210 rest of world; institutional subscription rate: $352 US, $412 Can/Mex, $463 rest of world. Single copy rate: $29. Electronic only–all regions: $174 individual, $352 institutional; Print & Electronic–US: $192 individual, $423 institutional; Print & Electronic–Canada/Mexico: $192 individual, $483 institutional; Print & Electronic–Rest of World: $228 individual, $534 institutional.

CALL FOR PROPOSALS: Prospective authors are strongly encouraged to contact Kelly Ward ([email protected]) or Lisa E. Wolf‐Wendel ([email protected]).

Visit the Jossey‐Bass Web site at www.josseybass.com.

The ASHE Higher Education Report is indexed in CIJE: Current Index to Journals in Education (ERIC), Education Index/Abstracts (H.W. Wilson), ERIC Database (Education Resources Information Center), Higher Education Abstracts (Claremont Graduate University), IBR & IBZ: International Bibliographies of Periodical Literature (K.G. Saur), and Resources in Education (ERIC).

Advisory Board

The ASHE Higher Education Report Series is sponsored by the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), which provides an editorial advisory board of ASHE members.

Amy Bergerson

University of Utah

Bryan Brayboy

Arizona State University

Ryan Gildersleeve

University of Denver

Michael Harris

Southern Methodist University

Elizabeth Jones

Holy Family University

Adrianna Kezar

University of Southern California

Kevin Kinser

SUNY – Albany

Peter Magolda

Miami University of Ohio

Dina C. Maramba

SUNY – Binghamton

Susan Marine

Merrimack College

Christopher Morphew

University of Iowa

Robert Palmer

SUNY – Binghamton

Michael Paulsen

University of Iowa

Todd Ream

Taylor University

Barbara Tobolowsky

University of Texas at Arlington

Carolyn Thompson

University of Missouri, Kansas City

Diane Wright

Florida Atlantic University

CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Our Varied Conceptions of General Education

Renewing General Education Practice

Realizing General Education

Foreword

Acknowledgments

The Contextual Significance of General Education in Higher Education

General Education's Interconnection With Higher Education's Purpose

General Education and the Current Context

General Education: Many Meanings, Multiple Functions

Purpose and Organization of Monograph

Notes

History Matters: Tracing the Development of General Education

Foundations (1636–1783)

Additions and Tensions (1784–1869)

Industrialization and Mediation (1870–1939)

Rapid Growth and New Expectations (1940–1976)

Overgrowth and Struggle (1977–2005)

Historical Reflections and Insights

Notes

Contemporary Perspectives and Models

Inherited Functions

Models of General Education

Contemporary Insights

Notes

Effective General Education in the Current Context

Characteristics of Good Practice on the Whole

Innovations in General Education

Effective General Education Course Design

Effective Practices to Support and Sustain General Education

Institutional Assessment and General Education

Sustaining and Renewing General Education

Closing Reflections and Recommendations

General Education: A Term of Endurance

Recommendations

References

Recent Titles

Name Index

Subject Index

About the Author

About the ASHE Higher Education Report Series

Call for Proposals

End User License Agreement

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

1

Pages

vi

vii

viii

ix

x

xi

xii

xiii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

Executive Summary

General education is frequently heralded as distinctive to U.S. higher education. Colleges and universities tout the value of a general education in their mission statements and catalogues. The importance placed on a general education in the context of U.S. higher education bears out in that approximately one third of the typically 120 credits for the bachelor's degree in the United States consist of general education requirements (Lattuca & Stark, 2014). General education also has a long and contested history; moreover, it has experienced multiple periods of renewal over the course of that history (Boyer & Levine, 1981; Trowbridge, 1958). Greater comprehension of this muddled history and its imprint on varied philosophical and programmatic ideals in the present are vital to realizing the aims of general education.

Our Varied Conceptions of General Education

In spite of seeming reverence for general education, there is little consensus as to what we actually mean by general education. Some argue that general education is about introducing specific subjects, whereas others point out that college graduates should share certain fundamental skills. Still another viewpoint is that essential texts are requisite to a general education. Differing perspectives not only make it challenging to consider the significance of general education but also open it up to a wide range of determinations regarding its effectiveness.

Beyond disagreement, general education is both resisted and resented in the current context. Questions are frequently raised about the point of general education, particularly but not exclusively among parents and students. General education is often considered something to “get out of the way” rather than a worthy end in and of itself or even a means to enriching the experience of earning the undergraduate degree.

General education is also implicated in much of the broader criticism facing higher education. Critique revolves around the lack of attention to questions of meaning (Kronman, 2007). General education is at the center of critique regarding the quality of student learning (Arum & Roksa, 2011; Donoghue, 2008; Keeling & Hersh, 2012). Concerns have also been voiced about fragmentation within the educational experience as well as disconnect between the academy and the societal context (Taylor, 2010). Revitalizing general education is often positioned as a means to addressing these concerns.

Our conceptions of and aspirations for general education are consequential in advancing the effective preparation of college and university graduates in the twenty‐first century. General education raises important queries of individual and social significance and influences how we respond to appeals for accountability, including the affordability and value of higher education.

This monograph is grounded in the premise that general education indeed matters but that divergent and largely implicit conceptions limit our ability to effectively navigate general education. While achieving consensus on the ideals of a general education is too lofty a goal, disentangling the divergent conceptions that hinder renewal and advancing a broader frame for comprehension are vital steps toward realizing the aims of a general education.

My contention is that general education represents a way of framing the notion that there is something valuable about an education that empowers individuals and gets at something larger than any single academic discipline. This conception is intentionally expansive, reflecting the fact that general education involves a variety of outcomes that can be achieved in different contexts and through a number of educational strategies. General education prescribes particular lenses for curriculum and educational practice while simultaneously encompassing a wide number of ideals, models, and programs.

Various conceptions of general education evolved over the course of the complex history of higher education in the United States. This monograph surveys this history, emphasizing the connection between general education and broader social and educational dynamics. By understanding the wide range of ideals espoused for general education and how they emerged over the past three hundred years, educational leaders will be better prepared to navigate the complexity of the present.

Our complex history has bequeathed a wide variety of functions for general education, which can be categorized broadly as student learning, societal well‐being, and institutional outcomes. Further, general education is achieved through a wide variety of curricular models. The most prominent theoretical models are core, distribution, and competency, but these prototypes have spawned a variety of adaptations. Recent renewal efforts and related initiatives have focused on general education as a venue for advancing educational integration and fulfilling essential learning outcomes (American Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2015).

Renewing General Education Practice

Effective general education requires a network of interconnected strategies. Curriculum design, educator development, and assessment initiatives must interweave in order to fulfill the aims of general education in a particular college or university. A sense of coherence is advanced by intentional alignment between program design, social context, and institutional mission.

General education must reflect institutional mission. General education should be designed around each institution's purpose, educational aims, the culture of its faculty, and the specific character of its students (Gaston & Gaff, 2009; Handstet, 2012; Rountree, Tolbert, & Zerwas, 2010). Any general education program that is implemented on a particular campus without being carefully aligned with the institution's mission and educational objectives will likely fail to achieve its intended aims.

Advancing general education today is not limited to the so‐called general education curriculum but extends to how general education outcomes are achieved in the major disciplines as well as in cocurricular contexts. Moreover, a variety of programmatic elements may serve as structural elements within a general education program; the literature illustrates that common text programs, a common curriculum, electronic portfolios, learning communities, and capstone experiences have been used in some contexts to advance general education aims. While the elements necessarily vary, the point is to think broadly about what programmatic structures potentially contribute to the aims of a general education program while also remaining faithful to the mission and culture of a particular institution.

Across institutional contexts, the aims of general education must be attended to within and beyond the structures for enhancing learning. General education course design and faculty development must intentionally align. It is also crucial that faculty rewards systems align with the aims of general education. Cocurricular educators must be equipped to advance general education learning outcomes in out‐of‐class contexts.

Communicating a shared general education mission and related student learning outcomes to all constituencies, including students, parents, faculty, cocurricular educators, administrative leaders and board members is widely championed (Allen, 2006; Banta, Jones, & Black, 2009; Ewell, 2004). Communication and shared vision are indeed critical. However, general education faces unique challenges in meeting these expectations given the divergent assumptions that surround general education. This is particularly complicated by the shadows cast by these various ideals in the current context of heightened accountability and concern regarding the value of a college education.

Accountability for student learning is a driving force behind much of general education renewal in the current context (Allen, 2006; Bastedo, 2011; Ewell, 2004; U.S. Department of Education, 2006). Moreover, attention to assessment in general education specifically has proliferated (Allen, 2006; Banta, 2007; Ewell, 2004; Finley, 2012; Hanson & Mohn, 2011). Assessment in general education is an expectation of each of the regional accrediting bodies. General education assessment ensures that all academic and cocurricular departments understand how they contribute to the student learning outcomes attributed to general education (Bresciani, 2007). The assessment of general education is an avenue to greater clarity of purpose and ultimately achievement of intended outcomes.

Realizing General Education

Some might argue that the term general education is no longer adequate given the confusion that plagues use of the term. Despite its disputes, general education remains the most appropriate phrase for the type of education that reflects both our ideals as to what's held in common for undergraduates in the United States (Bowen, 2014); the term also best fits the increasingly cross‐institutional context in which general education is achieved (Penn, 2011b). Sharpening understanding of the complex picture of general education can help higher education leaders effectively navigate this complex landscape. Attending to both the conceptual and pragmatic concerns that undergird general education will illuminate avenues for truly realizing the aims of general education.

Foreword

What do students need to know? What does it mean to be an educated citizen? What's at the core of higher education? What's the balance between major, core, and elective credits? These and other questions often guide conversations that take place in faculty meetings, curriculum committees, and faculty senates when topics related to general education and curriculum surface. At the heart of these conversations is debate about what constitutes a general education experience for students. As with all issues related to curriculum, topics associated with general education are often heated and contested because, as a common educational experience, matters associated with general education bring together faculty from across the higher education community (both within a particular institutional context and also across different higher education settings).

General education topics bring up the “messy” part of higher education, for they cut across disciplinary boundaries and question knowledge claims and core constructs of the teaching and learning process. Most faculty value autonomy and disciplinary expertise, and the majority of what faculty do in higher education relies on specialization. Decision making in higher education tends to value local knowledge, largely relies on disciplinary background, and takes place within a particular disciplinary context. In contrast, general education topics, by definition, cut across all disciplines and departments and involve all academic areas of an institution. While specialization and disciplinary expertise are valued in terms of what faculty perspectives bring to a conversation related to general education, finding common ground and agreeing on requirements that all students will encounter as part of a general education experience can be a bit more challenging and even divisive.

As curriculum conversations take place to revamp and revise general education curriculum, it can be very helpful to have information to generate and direct conversation and guide decision making. In this monograph, Realizing General Education: Reconsidering Conceptions and Renewing Practice, author Cynthia Wells provides useful and helpful information to lead informed conversation about general education. Topics range from history to purpose, models, assessment, and recommendations for updating policy and practice of general education. Those who study topics related to general education and common educational experiences are sure to find the monograph informative to guide research and theoretical development. And, more important, the faculty, staff, and administrators who are part of general education reform or curriculum development will find the monograph useful in providing models of effective practice and forthcoming with ideas to shape curriculum development. It goes beyond the “how to” and addresses underlying topics related to the “why” of general education. We can easily imagine it being a common read for faculty working on topics related to general education and core curricular change. The monograph is a handy primer for those grappling with all aspects of general education ranging from theory to practice.

Kelly WardLisa E. Wolf‐WendelSeries Editors

Acknowledgments

I have many people to thank for their vital roles in my journey through this project. First and foremost, my son, Gabe, exhibited patience beyond his years as I completed this work; he is a rich source of inspiration and perspective in my life. I am profoundly grateful to the women in my writing group, Crystal Downing, Kate Simcox, Jenell Williams Paris, Meg Ramey, Valerie Weaver‐Zercher, and Leah Clarke. Collectively, their generative critique and warm affirmation have been instrumental in shaping not only my scholarship but also my identity as a scholar. I am especially grateful to Valerie Weaver‐Zercher for her gracious and incisive editing that improved early drafts of this work. I am thankful to wonderful colleagues and students who helped me create space for writing amidst many competing demands. Among them, I am grateful to Tina Keul for being a voice of warm encouragement alongside attending to countless details. I thank Annette Kolb who carefully reviewed drafts and tracked down resources. The Office of Faculty Development at Messiah College has my genuine gratitude for two scholarship grants that provided necessary support for this project. I am thankful for the helpful feedback of anonymous reviewers as well as the skillful blend of patience, persistence, and encouragement exhibited by Kelly Ward that enabled me to see this work to completion.

The Contextual Significance of General Education in Higher Education

General education is widely touted as an enduring distinctive of higher education in the United States (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2015; Boyer, 1987; Gaston, 2015; Zakaria, 2014). The notion that undergraduate education demands wide-ranging knowledge is a hallmark of U.S. college graduates that international educators emulate (Blumenstyk, 2015; Rhodes, 2010b; Tsui, 2012). The veracity of this distinct educational vision is supported by the fact that approximately one third of the typically 120 credits required for the bachelor's degree in the United States consist of general education courses (Lattuca & Stark, 2014). Realizing a general education has been understood to be central to achieving higher education's larger purposes, making it a particularly salient concern.

General Education's Interconnection With Higher Education's Purpose

General education's significance is evident in recent calls to reinvigorate higher education (Bok, 2005, 2013; Delbanco, 2012; DeMillo, 2011; Keeling & Hersh, 2012; Keller, 2008; Menand, 2010; Roth, 2014). General education overlaps with foundational queries as to why students attend college, including whether higher education is essentially about gaining knowledge, developing skills, or advancing democratic outcomes (De Vise, 2011; Menand, 2010). Assumptions regarding the purposes of higher education are vast and various; the point here is that general education is entangled with divergent assumptions regarding higher education's purpose. This intersection not only complicates general education but also lies at the center of why it matters.

General education is at the epicenter of a critical firestorm facing higher education. General education is implicated in critique regarding the quality of what college students learn (Arum & Roksa, 2011; Donoghue, 2008; Hacker & Dreifus, 2010; Selingo, 2013). Keeling and Hersh (2012) relate the discontent regarding college learning on the whole to general education specifically:

[C]ollege learning is advanced and strengthened by exposure to the greatest possible diversity of ideas, people, and learning experiences, inside and outside the classroom. The much-maligned general education programs required of most undergraduates might address this opportunity if they were far more carefully designed, implemented, and assessed: as it is, most general education is disconnected, unchallenging, and boring. Neither students nor institutions invest much in it. No wonder students so often hate it, and no wonder it so seldom achieves its goals (p. 47).

Keeling and Hersh (2012) illustrate just a few of the wide range of expectations for general education: General education is expected to expose students to a diverse array of ideas, incorporate curricular and cocurricular experiences, provide a space of connection, offer intellectual challenge, and be exciting to boot.

Differing interpretations open general education to various evaluative contexts. Some argue that it is about introducing “basic subjects,” such as literature, history, mathematics, and foreign languages. From this vantage point, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (2010) has voiced a strong critique giving three out of five institutions a C or worse in general education. Another standpoint is that college graduates should hold in common certain “fundamental skills.” Related to this perspective, Arum and Roksa (2011)