<p>
[Quote]
The presidents took turns mapping out the new landscape of higher education — runaway costs, skyrocketing tuition, low graduation rates, the promise and burden of technology, crushing student debt, the effects of globalization — while at the same time expressing intermittent nostalgia for an older one. “Whatever happened to the idyllic liberal arts model?” asked Scott. The answer was, first, that no one could afford it (no more specialized courses with two or three students, said Spar) and, second, that many students don’t seem to want it in an age when the value of courses and degrees is measured by the likelihood of future career earnings.
<p>"we should regard them as yet-to-be-formed intellects " - it has been the practice…very unfortunately, brainwash has been a huge part of college education, I wish it was not…</p>
<p>Miami- you have alluded to the brainwashing of college students on another thread,too, but I don’t think I’ve seen your explanation of what that is exactly. Are you referring to political thought? I’m curious what you mean, as you obviously feel strongly enough to mention this more than once.</p>
<p>skrlvr- as regards the future of higher education, my feelings are that the colleges that can please both constituencies will continue to thrive. There are many universities that embody both the Socratic and market model well. Most of the top universities fit into this dual model, imo. The important part of the discussion is how to contain costs. Everything else is a matter of how each institution sees its mission, for which there is room for a lot of variability and diversity.</p>