Life is not always easy and people start at different places with inequitable resources. The rich and the average live in fundamentally different worlds. The next generation won't be as rich as their parents and they are unlikely to afford as many luxuries or opportunities. They are a generation without trust funds who must rely on their own wits and grit to create opportunities for themselves. A debate rages in higher education between elitism and improving access to education for the average person so as to further the nation's interests. Criticisms of elitist oriented policies that fall short in improving the lives of the average citizen have arisen in recent times. Some feel the status short changes the middle class ability to innovate their environment for the health of the whole country. Decisions of the past impact the present in a way that may have forced Millennials and Gen Z to lower their expectations of the American Dream. Millennials American Dream and Gen Z American Dream.
Elitism Lowers Trust in Schools: The general population has begun to embrace a level of distrust of higher education as an institution. Elitism has made it difficult for students to get in school because of miscued entrance restrictions that disparately impact students who come from middle class and blue collar backgrounds who are unlikely to obtain due to the nature of middle class existence. Such students and their achievements are often dismissed by elitist advocating professors (Elitism Definition). Average students did not go to private high schools, afford all the extracurricular activities, are not indoctrinated into academic language, are unaccustomed to test taking strategies, and don't have as many resources as the wealthy. Middle class, blue collar and minority students more often then not have to work full time while attending college and raising families to continue along their educational journey. When they are restricted unnecessarily it costs trust in the entire institution and its alignment to the purpose of bettering lives and opportunities for a broader sector of society. American Crisis of Faith in Higher Ed Leaders.
Two Schools as a Hypothetical:
We will call the University of Wealthy Elite (restricted) and the other the University of Middle Class Average (open).
The School of Wealthy Elite serves a smaller group of stakeholders and struggles financially to maintain the preeminence of the past. They selectively focus on students with elite academic credentials and financial resources that are most likely to thrive in an elite academic environment. Higher cost to students and higher prestige that comes with that cost. Declining enrollment and rising expenses on an unsustainable path (A problem faced by many universities but not corrected). May have used Affirmative Action to encourage diversity because entrance requirements seemed to block out underserved populations (Some argue by design). Faculty are relatively homogeneous and teach to a relatively homogeneous student body. Faculty are hired primarily from prestigious schools and are generally considered academic scholars. An academic scholar is a person trained as an academic and works in academia as an expert in a field of study but less likely to have worked in industry (Some have and some haven't but less likely.). More theoretical and less applied (Pure theory is beneficial as well but can be slow sometimes in sharing that knowledge with industry. Something that concerns economists.) Student learning within the University of Wealthy Elite is not compared or assessed as a benchmark in relation to students at other universities (Objective measurements are often absent where subjective values abound.).
The School of Middle Class Average are more open and seek to minimize entrance restrictions in order to maximize access to higher education from a broader set of society. Growing enrollment and financially stable in a way they can perpetuate their mission into the future. No need for Affirmative Action as applicants are already diverse and perform well based on multiple internal and external assessments of learning. Diverse faculty that seeks to reflect a highly diverse student body (that also reflects the diversity of America). Faculty come from less prestigious schools but may have more practitioner-scholar applied knowledge of how things work in real working world. A practitioner-scholar is a person who earned academic credentials while employed in industry. Practitioner-scholars can balance the practical with the theoretical. i.e. applied theory. Practitioner-Scholar Definition. Student learning assessments are significantly higher when compared to the same assessments at other schools; even those that cater to the elite.
The Purpose of Higher Education:
The School of Wealthy Elite University look negatively upon the University of Middle Class Average. They view faculty from the University of Middle Class Average as less qualified because many did not go to the same prestigious schools (some did) and had to work like their students while reaching their educational goals (i.e. empathy over the sacrifices made willingly by students to better themselves under non-ideal circumstances.), the students are seen as of lower academic value because they couldn't buy the credentials required for elite education with its inequitable societal resource demands. Exceptional performance by middle class students are intentionally minimized to support the perceived value of elite branding. They use disconfirming terminology like low, low value, bottom of barrel, costly, poor quality, waste, unemployable, etc. when discussing the common person's school, its professors, and its diverse student body. None are based in fact but more reflection of the distortion of some members in Higher Education. Support for abandoning and dismantling pathways to inclusive educational access is relatively high among the elite faculty who make their opinions known as self-qualifying entitled representatives of the Higher Education Institution (i.e. assumptions of value).
Depending on one's demographic and their background there could be a debate on the purpose of higher education and whom it ultimately serves. Some feel higher education should be restricted to the wealthy elite and some feel it should be more open to middle class, blue collar and a diverse America. Where you sit on that spectrum of elite to average is defining for how one sees oneself. If you feel that students of Middle Class Average should be the primary beneficiary of higher education you are likely to think a little different when compared to those who feel that higher education should be restricted to those with elite wealthy backgrounds (Attribution Theory).
You may be be interested in reading a Pew Center Poll on Partisan Views of Higher Education and Gen Z Views of Higher Ed.
Human Capital Development, Education and National Innovation:
The world needs education to raise the plight of many as well as maintain the engines of an economy. There is a growing need to help the masses connect to higher education in a technology driven environment. Based on history of access to education the University of Middle Class Average would likely be more open and appealing to a national and global population that seeks updated skills. It is more diverse and offers practical applied knowledge that can be used anywhere by average people doing the work on a daily basis. Consider World Bank Importance of Higher Education.
When we foster technology and human capital we improve the fundamentals for growth of advanced nations. Access to higher education and applied practitioner-scholar knowledge can increase Higher Ed to industry innovation transference as well as improve access to human capital. Societies need fresh talent with new ideas that can be applied practically to their industries to make positive economic adaptations. See Education, Human Capital, Economic Growth Macro Study
Human capital comes from education, health and innovation/technology according to the study Developing Human Capital to Support U.S. Innovation Capacity. Restricting access to education as well as the practical application of such knowledge transference to industry limits the whole nation and doesn't maximize the value of higher education to society. Using middle class ingenuity to support broad based innovation is often better fostered through practitioner-scholar faculty that can think both theoretically and practically when compared to their theorist cousins alone.
The goal should be to improve innovative transference between scholars with practical knowledge and the industries that employ people with that knowledge (i.e. the working student). Bridge Between Academia and Industry. While both the University of Wealthy Elite and the University of Middle Class Average can contribute to national innovation and economic development it is often the benefit to the individual that can make the biggest difference to the systems of society. On this front, it is the graduates from the University of Middle Class Average that are more likely to make the broadest contributions to society through their deeper understanding of the environment and world in which they must compete (Management Innovation).
Innovation often comes from students who engage in the process of first innovating themselves to master the unfair lessons learned by those who build barriers in our society. Our nation needs actual performance to be globally competitive and would be wise to forego the subjective nature of elite perception when judging students from the middle and working classes. Unfair, unjust, and irrelevant to the long term success of everyone. (Perhaps the students can teach the faculty how to reinvent themselves.)
Perhaps we need to innovate The University of Wealthy Elite to ensure it is maximizing its contributions to society and can do so in a financially stable manner? Unless we have an alternative understanding of the purpose of higher education I suspect it should work on the behalf of its ultimate stakeholders, "The People" (Some call them "The Little People". You know, the one's who earned their spot.). I don't know what your values are but when wealthy elitist professors bash middle class students just to protect their pompous perceptions not based in performance, I think that is a detriment to our society. It also shows what values those who receive an unfair proportion of our nations resource's think about the rest of us (We are ultimately the people who pay to maintain perceptions of elitism and restrictions of education to block those who can best put it to good use. I believe in giving people an opportunity and watching them flourish. Without a more enlightened view of our fellow Americans we will continue to pay financially and pay morally.).
Infrastructure + Human Capital (merit based fairness) + Policies Designed to Increase Innovation could = Economic Synergy.
No comments:
Post a Comment