Gentlemen:
I’m updating my Working Personnel Action File (WPAF), and I find myself revisiting my Statement of Teaching Philosophy. If you’ll pardon the random musing, I thought I’d throw a few things out there. I know I’ve broached this issue before, but I am interested in feedback.
I think we all recognize a certain amount of tension surrounding various related questions: What is the proper mission of a university? What role should a liberal education play in that mission? How do the Humanities fit into this mission? And, finally, what role does language education play?
I used to bemoan the “trade school” mentality of the modern university, believing instead that the value of a university education lies not in the marketable skills learned, but in other, less quantifiable areas. I really do believe that, more than marketable skills, a university ought to help students acquire habits of mind that will enable them to be better, more reflective, citizens.
Nevertheless, there are problems with that idealized view. Regardless of the ideal, the reality is that many, if not most, students think of a university education as a commodity. They are buying a product that promises them a) career preparation, b) a piece of paper that certifies that they have acquired career preparation and c) the enhanced stature that having that piece of paper (sometimes) brings with it. Our society has fetishized college to the point that many, many people who have no need for, nor business being in, college, find themselves paying for a product (the piece of paper) that gives them a certain amount of distinction or social capital, but that in the end has little value in terms of career preparation. Meanwhile, there are so many consumers of this product, that the weight once associated with it is diminishing.
So what does this mean in terms of a Teaching Philosophy? It is very hard to sell the Humanities as career preparation, but there still is a need for areas of study that will produce well-rounded citizens. I think my philosophy needs to recognize that students seek marketable skills, but that they may not recognize the marketability of the sorts of skills that the humanities provides. Language skills have particular “real world” applicability, but literature is less quantifiable. I used to say that the study of literature is not its own reward, but it might be more useful, from a marketing standpoint, to say that it provides students with critical thinking and analytical skills that are applicable beyond the realm of literature.
I recognize that these are not new ideas, but every time our department is asked to come up with a mission statement, or do an internal review of our programs, the reaction is whining and moaning. The attitude of many people is that the benefits of our programs are self-evident, so we shouldn’t have to go through the effort of “selling” them. I wonder, though, is that attitude is about to be overtaken by reality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I see no contradiction in the fact that a quality education can both provide good habits of mind and "marketable skills," nor in publicizing that idea. We just can't fool ourselves into thinking that we can "market" our discipline based on the idea that it is going to get you a job. I think the great thing about the humanities is that they remind you that we work to live, not live to work.
Agreed. But what do you say when an undergrad comes to you for advice, asking "what can I do with a BA in Spanish?"
I think the first premise is that students should major in what they are most interested in, not what they naively think will get him a job out of the gate, nor what we want them to major in. That said, they should understand that being fluent in another language is an invaluable resource and puts you in another category with respect to your peers at any stage of your life. For my business Spanish class I had a couple of successful executives come talk to the students about the importance of being bilingual in today's globalized world, etc. If you could invite someone like that to give a talk in the department, that might be interesting for students and give you some ammunition.
I think the reality is that most of us don't chose the jobs we actually end up doing. A student may think he wants to be a doctor but ends up doing something entirely different. A minority of students know from their freshman year what they want to do. I tell my students that college is just as much being or becoming--finding out who they are--as much as it is finding a profession.
I think the whole notion of the 'humanities' is in a slow process of decomposition and recomposition around different core ideas or axes. It very well may be that a trade-school approach will dominate language instruction in the future. Our profession is being pulled in two opposite directions in a way, I think. However, the 'literary experience' and the related analysis of culture is of enduring value, and will remain in demand (though redefined). IMHO, it is important to defend and even showcase a commitment to the literary experience in a teaching credential, as well as to the kinds of analysis that literary and cultural studies engage in. But at the same time, I think it is important to give a nod to the changing nature of the profession, to show that one is willing to ride the wave, so to speak.
Post a Comment