The Neoliberal Arts : How Colleges Have Sold Their Soul

A college education is valuable and its quality is of the highest importance to most Americans. In his essay, “On the Uses of a Liberal Education: As Lite Entertainment for Bored College Students,” Mark Edmundson utilizes ethos, pathos, and logos to effectively deliver his argument that the current educational system, especially in college, revolves around consumerism which in turn has negatively impacted students, teachers, and universities in general. However, although Edmundson presents an overall logically sound argument, there are few instances throughout the article that may hinder the reliability of his claims to the audience.

Andrew Simmons published his article for The Atlantic, “The Danger of Telling Poor Kids that College is the Key to Social Mobility” on January 16, 2014, which raises his concerns that higher education is only being promoted as an opportunity to increase their economic status, when it should be an opportunity to experience an education (Simmons). Through the use of students such as Isabella, Simmons disagrees with the way students now look at higher education and blames the educators through the students’ lives for this view. Instead, Simmons views education as an intellectual opportunity rather than a way to elevate ones economic class which is all people see when they see “higher education.” He believes that education, ambition and work ethic is how you have a satisfying life, not with how much you make. He makes the point that when economics becomes the main goal of education it’s all children begin to think about and they might not pursue something that they are truly passionate about or what they want to learn about, which then does not create an intellectually awakening experience (Simmons).

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.

In the 1997 article, “On The Uses of a Liberal Education: As a Weapon In the Hands of the Restless Poor,” published by Harper’s Magazine, the social critic Earl Shorris described how political power could be achieved by a rather non-vocational educational discipline, the humanities. He emphasizes on how the knowledge of a liberal Education can be used as a form of weapon within the lives for the poor.

College offers a wide variety of educational aspects. In “Why America’s Obsession with STEM is Dangerous,” Fareed Zakaria explains the issues involving the STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) educational system and explains the need for a liberal educational system. Zakaria says we need more creative, innovative, and critical thinkers, which can be achieved through a liberal education. He also says that we need the skills that come with a STEM education, but those can also be achieved through liberal education. A narrow study helps you receive a specific job, but a broad education allows you to explore the economical depths of work. Fareed Zakaria’s essay exemplifies rhetorical strategies and the three means of persuasion

In the twenty-first century, there is heavy competition between colleges. Unfortunately, the ideal theory of the free market economy does not exist in the real world, because no one actually values quality. Most consumers never care about quality nor do they have the time to inform themselves; they only care about convenience. In other words, they will likely prefer inferior products. As a result, colleges have been competing in a downwards spiral of education quality. In his essay, “Why Colleges Shower Their Students with A’s,” Brent Staples criticizes colleges for inflating grades through comparing and contrasting, exemplifying, analyzing cause and effect, and making an argument.

He uses strong diction as he addresses how colleges are increasingly becoming “conventional bureaucracies” because behind every college program is a need for growth (Blank 263). This need he argues is how connections between colleges and outside companies begin to formulate as colleges develop “employment favoring tactics” (263). Thus colleges build up their clientele to help advertise such well known business corporations and offices to advertise “better jobs.” Blank continues by providing the most optimistic statistical evidence which “envision a 14.8 percent slice of 1975 job market, while they bring 31 percent of 18 to 24-year old age into college” (263). This estimates to about 10,664,000 students in college, “therefore, even if every one of the so-called professional and technical jobs were indeed reserved for them (which is itself patently impossible), the number of job openings would still be inadequate” (263). These facts introduce and support the idea that receiving a college degree is not to be associated with the key to “reserving a better job”. The details and numbers build an appeal to logos and impress upon the reader that this is a problem worth discussing, the statistics prove that although there are many students in college, not everyone will receive a job as the number of job openings are

“What Is College For” by Andrew Delbanco, shows the need for both a universal college system; one which caters for all of society, and one which provides a liberal education. Delbanco gives many reasoned thoughts on how, and why the college system has become restricted, to purely those of a higher socio-economic background, rather than being exclusive to people of all backgrounds. The idea of college being a platform for people to learn, advance their skills, and become whatever they want to be has seemingly diminished over time. The ideas in favor of such an educational system are put forward, but they are foreshadowed in my opinion, by the notion that people should have the same educational opportunities in life; regardless of their economic or social background. A universal education system is needed for our society to prosper, especially if it provides a liberal education; this is not just for the individuals that make up a community, but for the community, as a whole.

Charles Murray’s essay proposes that American colleges are being flooded with individuals who are either unprepared for higher education or who are simply forced into attending college and can’t succeed because of the lack of certain innate abilities. Murray’s essay goes on to take issue with the idea that the pursuit of a traditional college education is somehow strategically creating a separation of the American class system. While Murray makes many salient points with regards to America’s obsession with college education as a standard into a class of the intellectual elite, the essay fails to take into consideration the various motivators that can lead to student success, despite

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.

To discuss the value of liberal education, there should be a mutual understanding that investing in college means to invest in oneself. Furthermore, while some consider this investment to be a critical stepping stone to success, others dismiss it, explaining that school simply cannot prepare someone for the “real world.” Sanford J. Ungar and Robert Reich explore both of these subjective values in their essays “The New Liberal Arts” and “College is a Ludicrous Waste of Money.” Ungar, the president of Goucher College in Baltimore, Maryland, discusses why a liberal education should be sought after; he does so by introducing common misconceptions about liberal arts and, using argumentative persuasion, proves their insignificance. On the other hand, Reich, the former secretary of labor, argues against the conventional belief of college being the only road to financial wellbeing; rather, he explains why a two-year education may better accommodate many college students, especially those in need of immediate work or those that simply cannot afford a four-year education. In all, although both Reich and Ungar generally discuss liberal education, their perspectives differ when it comes to its practicality in the current economy. Also, to express their different views about liberal arts, the authors use contrasting tones to present their ideas to different intended audiences.

“The New Liberal Arts” is an article written by Sanford J. Ungar, who is a president of Goucher College in Baltimore, Maryland. In the beginning of his article, Ungar wrote, “Hard economic times inevitably bring scrutiny of all accepted ideals and institutions, and this time around the liberal arts education has been especially hard hit.” In other words, Ungar means that recent economic recessions have made a huge impact on what people think of going for a liberal arts degree. In his essay, Ungar lists seven misperceptions and how he reacts to them. The most common misperception that Ungar identified is that liberal arts degrees are no longer affordable. The cost for liberal arts education is very expensive while

America’s education system has been in a state of distress for the past decade, but garnished headlines recently as the student loan debt crisis reached over a trillion dollars. In conjunction with that, tuition is no longer the only obstacle a student faces when considering their future. As generations come and go, universities have slowly, but surely, been angling their education in a way to favor profit over knowledge. Because of the new direction higher education models are taking, Magdalena Kay questions her readers, “is there a problem with students, with teachers, with administrators, or maybe

Many people of the older generation and conservative views look to dispel the ideas of free college with the use of economics. They see free college as the breeding of socialism, which they have had the opportunity to see, fail. They also believe that the younger generation is either too stupid, naïve, or inexperienced, to see the socialism of free college. Thomas Sowell example of socialism in free college is proof of these things.

Overall, Newfield’s perspective on the university’s transformative possibilities is that the university is the “institution where blue- and white-collar, children of both workers and managers, citizens of every racial background were being invited into a unified majority” (4). This majority would be economically and intellectually prepared for the “New Economy.” Newfield believes that conservatives were opposed to this change in the status quo and because of that started the culture wars. He continues that “the culture wars have coincided with the majority’s economic decline by reducing the public importance and economic claims of the American university and its graduates” (6). Thus, the attacks on the public research university university