In February of 1869, Charles Eliot began the final overthrow of old Harvard. That was the month he published the first of a two-part rallying cry in the pages of The Atlantic. It was the culmination of years of work, including a tour across Europe’s most prestigious educational institutions, a venture on which he had staked his inheritance. In his articles, Eliot laid out the battle plan to transform America’s elite universities from custodians of a traditional curriculum steeped in the classical languages to institutions ready to create the next generation of American scientists, industrialists, and professionals...
The triumph of Eliot’s ideas was only possible because of the much broader, societal revolution that had already begun to change the values and goals of America’s national elites. What gets taught at universities and schools will directly impact a society’s power structure. Because of this, elites who participate in governance tend to favor the intellectual fashions that preserve the interests of those in power. These ideas in turn come to dominate and shape institutions of higher education. In other words, there is always a feedback loop connecting power and education, in both good and bad regimes.We aren’t yet in the period of great reforms. The feedback loop still holds: applied history will only inform higher education when it also informs a new regime. But now is the time for private networks and seed institutions. Under these circumstances, it is Petrarch’s impulse that should inspire those who exit the universities and look for a different regimen by which to cultivate their souls.
This creates something of a paradox. While there are valid critiques of America’s elite educational institutions, the feedback loop between power and education means these institutions can never lead any useful reforms of education. After all, who would implement the reforms?
It is well worth reading the whole piece. It left this reader with a degree of optimism in spite of our current swamp of woke insanity. Perhaps it is worth plugging away at the absurdities. Perhaps it does plant seeds.
We aren’t yet in the period of great reforms. The feedback loop still holds: applied history will only inform higher education when it also informs a new regime. But now is the time for private networks and seed institutions. Under these circumstances, it is Petrarch’s impulse that should inspire those who exit the universities and look for a different regimen by which to cultivate their souls.
3 comments:
There are times I regret having sold my rifle.
Blimey! That's quite a read. I'll need to go back to that article later, as there is so much in there.
Overall, it got me wondering what my university education was actually for. It must be quite easy answering that question if you are a scientist. But what were people actually intending, when they gave me a grant and several years in which to feel grateful that I didn't have to work at Vauxhall Motors like my Dad? I suppose the more practical question is what use can I put it to now, nearly 50 years on...
dearieme - there are times when I wish I had even a small one.
Sam - it isn't all that easy to answer the question if you are a scientist. Careers ladders in science generally seem to lead towards management and the politics of the organisation. Very early in my career I was warned about becoming labelled as a boffin because it would turn out to be a disadvantage. It was good advice.
Post a Comment