Intellectual Diversity In Liberal Arts

It is made clear that college students are quick to form an opinion which doesn’t expand knowledge and can show unintelligence. Many people, more specifically protesters, believe one side and won’t open up and listen to the other side. Frank Bruni, an Op-Ed Columnist for the New York Times and the author of 3 New York Times best sellers in 2015, 2009, and 2002, tells us that the college protesters are wrong. His argument states that the college students need to be educated more on the whole subject because lacking education can essentially lead to being biased or sticking with the one side you believe in. The students were protesting a guest speaker, Charles Murray, who is identified as anti-gay, racist, and sexist. Although the guest speaker’s beliefs are terrible, the students should hear what he has to say. Frank Bruni’s “The Dangerous Saftey of College” presents an effective logical appeal; however, it lacks clear and concise evidence along with not presenting an emotional appeal to connect with the audience.

In recent discussion of the purpose of a liberal arts education, a controversial issue has been whether it is “just filling you up with knowledge”. On one hand, some argue that it is just a good prerequisite to have. From this perspective, the point of earning a degree is to get a better career. On the other hand, however, others argue that a degree “has actual human value”. In the words of David Foster Wallace, one of this view’s main proponents, “a liberal arts education is not so much filling you up with knowledge as it is about ‘teaching you how to think’”. According to this view, having a degree affects how you think. In sum, then, the issue is whether a liberal arts education teaches you how to think positively or not through your banal “adult life”

In the article “The Coddling of the American Mind,” writers Greg Lukianoff and Jonathon Haidt address today’s college campus culture of oversensitivity and how targeting microaggressions by shielding sensitive topics from students may be modeling cognitive distortions. Cognitive distortion is a way our mind twists words to convince us of something that isn’t true to reinforce negative thinking. Since college administrators changed ways to try and block out microaggressions on campus it is actually teaching students to think in distorted ways. As a result, students are learning lessons that are bad for themselves and their mental health. However, Lukianoff and Haidt believe that cognitive behavioral therapy is the next big thing to teach good

In an essay from the 1998 Chronicle of Higher Education titled, “The Liberal Arts in the Age of Info-Glut,” written by Todd Gitlin, the author targets College and University faculty members and administrators when advocating for a greater presence of liberal art classes as he directly states, “when information piles up-higgledy piggledy--when information becomes the noise of our culture--the need to teach the lessons of the liberal arts is urgent. Students need ‘chaff detectors.’’’ The author develops this argument by first identifying the toxic relationship that students have with the mass media followed by a description of the positive effects that an increase in liberal art classes would have on students.

Published in Harper's Magazine’s September 1997 issue, Mark Edmundson’s essay, “On the Uses of Liberal Education: As Lite Entertainment for Bored College Students,” presents a very personal argument for an apparent crisis in liberal education–the lack of passion in students. According to Edmundson, a professor at the University of Virginia, “liberal-arts education is as ineffective as it is now…[because] university culture, like American culture writ large, is, to put it crudely, ever more devoted to consumption and entertainment, to the using and using up of goods and images” (723). He believes that consumer culture is responsible for students’ dispassionate attitude towards his class because they view liberal education as a paid service or product that should cater to their wishes. Further, he writes that universities feed into consumer culture, maintaining a “relationship with students [that] has a solicitous, nearly servile tone” (725). In this way, Edmundson lays out the reasons for why he thinks liberal education is failing.

Cantor used a quote from AAC&U that states in its Statement on Liberal Learning: “Liberal learning is society’s best investment in our shared future.” She agreed with this statement and added that the best way for society to fulfill dreams of shared, productive, and harmonious future is to maintain the universities as a public good. In college, Cantor stated, that instructors should be able to educate citizens that will not be complacent when faced with social norms, but instead will take the initiative in shaping our diverse democracy. The college should make the students believe that it is a safe haven for those who come from different backgrounds, races, and ethnic groups.

If these students were practicing the art, they would not fall prey to emotional reasoning, or believing their emotions toward subjects trumps all logic. Instead, students are being coddled and treated as though their negative feelings toward something justifies changes and protection. On page seven of the article, Lukianoff and Haidt pondered, “What are we doing to our students if we encourage them to develop extra-thin skin just before they leave the cocoon of adult protection?” We are honestly preparing them to think their emotions and complaints will cause real life struggles and offenses to disappear, but this is not true. There are going to be times in everyone’s lives where they feel uncomfortable in a situation, and nothing will be done about it. College students need to be taught to deal with their emotions and accept discomfort by using critical-thinking skills learned through cognitive behavioral therapy.

“A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense” (Lukianoff and Haidt 44). Colleges are sheltering their students from words and ideas that students do not like or are found to be offensive. Affecting their education and cognitive skills, scientists are warning colleges to refrain from coddling the students and allowing other viewpoints to be spoken. People are speaking their minds, saying their own views; however, some people are over sensitive and take these viewpoints offensively. In the article “The Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt successfully argues using rhetorical questions, specific examples, and affective visuals that protecting college students from words and ideas deteriorates their education and mental health.

Mark Edmundson, the author of “On the Uses of a Liberal Education”, is an English teacher at the University of Virginia who expresses his concerns about the trajectory of the universities and colleges in America. Edmundson depicts how college students today have “little fire, little passion to be found,” towards their classes (4). In an effort to find the source of this lack of passion, Edmundson describes contacting other professors about this issue while refining his own ideas. Ultimately, Edmundson comes to a conclusion. He believes that the consumer mindset of college students has hindered American universities as a whole. My target audience is my professor, Professor Chezik. Looking closely at his wording, formation of sentences, and idea structure, one can see a recurring theme throughout Edmundson’s essay. Edmundson uses fragments, specifically at the beginning of his paragraphs, to start his point, pose counter arguments, and to have a poetic refrain.

While the term liberal education is heard from the most prestigious university to an inner city community college, the phrase itself has a hazy definition at best. While educators across America struggle with the definition of the phrase, William Cronon uses purpose, structure, and appeals in his essay "Only Connect: The Goals of Liberal education," to define a liberally educated being and the characteristics that such an education should impart. Cronon capitalizes on inductive structuring to lead the reader along, gently building each new statement upon a foundation of previous ideas. This effectively leads the reader to a strange

In the Martin’s article, Jerry Martin discussed the “The degree to which professors feel compelled to refrain from saying in public things they say (to their best friends) in private is extraordinary. It can only be compared to how intellectuals behave in dictatorships.” Politically right discourse approaches don't permit teachers to express disputable assessments on touchy and essential parties, confining understudies from empowering and facilitating uninhibited talk inside of the classroom environment and eventually vitiating scholarly opportunity. By undermining the vocations of teachers, with or without residency, who don't consent to the politically remedy philosophy, college organizations warrant a title generally connected with tyrannies.

In his editorial, “The Year of the Imaginary College Student,” Hua Hsu asserts that “alarm about offense-seeking college students say[s] more about critics than the actual state of affairs.” Hsu begins his article by discussing James O’Keefe’s attempt at Vassar College to depict that college students are as politically sensitive as they appear. He goes on to demonstrate that college students are getting increasingly more “hypersensitive.” Hsu then questions the “surge of interest in campus life,” wondering why people who are not in college are questioning the behavior of those in college. Next, Hsu states that this panic about “offense-seeking college students” says more about the people criticizing rather than the system. Elucidating, he

In an article, The Neoliberal Arts, a former liberal-arts professor claims “the purpose of education in a neoliberal age is to produce producers” (26). Throughout his article he questions what really happens at college and picks apart the students who attend. Deresiewicz fails to explain the reason neoliberalism evolved in high education by blaming students for focusing too much on their future. Neoliberalism was not caused by student’s choosing a popular major or an expensive college, it is how society is portraying higher education. Deresiewicz believes there’s nothing else we can do, belittles the power of leadership skills, and thinks free college will solve the problem. He encourages the students to conduct a “sense of meaning” for him

Recent debates about freedom of speech have become more common across the United States. Social media has now made it much easier to see videos or pictures of how students react to certain speakers, all of which have led to a whole separate discussion about fragility of students.

In today 's world where the population, especially of the United States, is growing gloriously diverse, institutions of higher education must also reflect this aspect in their student body. The purpose of colleges and universities is to provide students with the education and experience they need to succeed after graduating as well as expand their thoughts and perspectives. Thus, they must create and maintain a similar environment in which students will live and work in the future. Although diversity has been emphasized as a priority for many schools, socioeconomic diversity is often disregarded. However, socioeconomic diversity plays an important role in developing the perspectives and minds of students. Thus, it is essential for the admission offices, especially of prestigious universities like the University of Pennsylvania, to recruit and admit more economically disadvantaged students as well as for the schools to meet the needs of and maintain those students.