Liberal Education and Social Responsibility in a Global Community
OPENING REMARKS
President Lewis M. Duncan
One
hundred years ago, higher education in America was without direction
and in general disarray. The rigid, constrained studies of classical
European languages and literature had been replaced by a new
educational model, one that proclaimed unrestrained equity of thought
across the full extension of human interest and intelligence. Yet, when
students merely chose courses of their liking, without systematic
structure or purposeful reason, this redefinition of liberal education
resulted in an education that was manifestly without definition,
without commonality of purpose or shared learning experience. In 1907,
Jacob Schurman, president of Cornell decried that the American college
experience was “without clear-cut notions of what a liberal education
is and how it is to be secured.”
In answer, John Dewey, the predominant educational philosopher of the early 20th century, brought forth a more purposeful, yet still modern model, a model of pragmatic liberal education. Founded on the Jeffersonian ideal that a strong democracy requires an informed and an engaged citizenry, Dewey charged that the principle of democracy should serve as the unifying framework for American higher education.
A landmark national colloquy called “The Curriculum for the
Liberal Arts College” was convened in 1931 here at Rollins College by
our president, Hamilton Holt, and chaired by John Dewey. The call went
forth for a radically different form of practical liberal education:
learning still based upon the traditional liberal arts and sciences,
but calling also for an education put into practice in our lives, a
call to active citizenship and civic service. Rollins has historically
embraced this special mission: to graduate students who are not merely
reflective, but also reflexive, prepared to act upon their beliefs in
service to human needs. This educational model stands in contrast both
to the static great books curriculum looking backwards at our Western
heritage and traditions, and to the undisciplined egalitarianism of a
curriculum structured only by curiosity. We assert that the purpose of
our liberal education is to liberate the minds of our students so that
they can become not just informed spectators, but also engaged
participants in some of the great issues, debates, and challenges that
will define their times.
Ten years ago, President Rita Bornstein convened here at Rollins another educational colloquy, this entitled “Toward a Pragmatic Liberal Education: The Curriculum of the Twenty-First Century.” The educational philosophers and pedagogical experts who attended and debated curricular ideals spoke passionately for the need for a new pragmatism, of a progressive education moving from discipline-based to problem-centered styles of learning. Over the past several decades, we have incrementally altered our curriculum in accordance with these principles.
However, today at
Rollins we are in the formative stages of a much more substantive
curricular review. And so, in celebration of the 75th anniversary of
the colloquy convened at Rollins by Hamilton Holt and John Dewey, we
convene a new educational
colloquy, motivated by our own ongoing curricular reform, but inspired
by an entirely different unifying purpose for curricular design. While
Dewey spoke of democracy as the basis for a uniquely American
indigenous education, today we experience a much faster-changing and
interconnected world. This is reflected in our new vision statement,
“educating for global citizenship and responsible leadership.” The
organizing principles of a 21st-century American liberal education can
no longer be satisfied within a myopically American perspective of the
world around us. As we step across the threshold of this new
millennium, if our goal is to prepare our students to truly become
informed participants in some of the great debates, issues and
challenges of the 21st century, before we become entirely overwhelmed
by the practical realities of course selections and delivery, and
subtle complexities of academic disciplinary expectations, should we
not invest some time … some essential time … in exploring the
fundamental concerns facing the world today, and giving thought to the
great issues challenging the human condition? Should we not invest some
essential time in discussing our fundamental human values, our
historical lessons, our cultures and beliefs, and the collective
wisdoms of human experience? To do so allows us then to better define
the needs and renewed purposes of a modern liberating education, and to
better inform our curricular planning choices for the future.
This colloquy is explicitly part of that deeper exploration of need and purpose.
Photos by Judy Watson Tracy
