= Premium Content

  • Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

Alumni of Liberal-Arts Colleges See Value in Their Degrees

November 16, 2011, 12:05 am

By Eric Hoover

Washington—When you’ve got a target on your back, you can run and hide—or you can commission a study. A group of liberal-arts colleges chose to do the latter, and now their leaders are trumpeting the results.

On Tuesday, the Annapolis Group, which represents 130 private liberal-arts colleges, released the findings of a national survey of college graduates. Alumni of Annapolis Group colleges, the survey found, reported the highest level of satisfaction with their undergraduate experience. Seventy-seven percent rated it as “excellent,” compared with 59 percent of graduates of private colleges and 56 percent of graduates of top-ranked public universities.

Alumni of Annapolis Group colleges were more likely than graduates of other institutions to say that their alma mater had prepared them for their first job, as well as for life after college. They were also more likely to say that they had found a mentor in college, been challenged by a professor, and experienced a sense of community among students.

Philip A. Glotzbach, president of Skidmore College and chairman of the Annapolis Group’s executive committee, described the survey as an attempt to define value at a time when pundits and parents alike are questioning the usefulness of a college degree, especially one that comes from a liberal-arts college with a hefty price tag. ”We feel the need to make the case for our sector,” he said, “because it’s so easy for others to paint us with this broad brush.”

Mr. Glotzbach’s remarks came during a discussion with education reporters here on Tuesday. He was joined by the presidents of Kenyon and Washington & Jefferson Colleges, and of the College of Saint Benedict. Each described the report as an antidote to skepticism about the benefits of the residential model in an age of online learning. Moreover, they hoped the findings would affirm that not all colleges are the same, a point that is often lost in debates about the usefulness of a college degree.

“There’s been a conflation of the notion of ‘college’ that obscures for the public the ability to see differences among different kinds of colleges,” said Tori Haring-Smith, president of Washington & Jefferson.

The survey, conducted by Hardwick Day, a higher-education consulting firm, was based on telephone interviews of 2,700 college graduates who earned degrees from one of four groups of four-year institutions: private residential liberal-arts colleges, represented by the Annapolis Group; private colleges; “top 50″ public universities (as rated by U.S. News & World Report); and national public flagship universities. Respondents graduated between 1995 and 2006, and were interviewed in 2002 and again in 2011.

On Tuesday, I asked James H. Day, a principal at Hardwick Day and director of the survey, if there were specific characteristics of students who choose to attend liberal-arts colleges that might explain some of the survey’s results, such as the fact that 87 percent of Annapolis Group alumni graduated in four years, compared with 51 percent of alumni of flagship public institutions. In other words, might some findings say more about students at liberal-arts colleges—which enroll a small fraction of the nation’s students—than about the colleges themselves?

While some students are a better fit for liberal-arts colleges than others, Mr. Day said, “inputs” alone did not explain the survey’s results. He described the findings as proof that liberal-arts colleges do something to students (“transform them,” said one president) after they enroll.

As critics continue to question the future of residential liberal-arts colleges, it’s only fair to consider what graduates of those institutions see when they look back at their own experiences. ”Do they think this is all in vain?” Mr. Day said. “Do they think this is just silliness and an erosion of their time? The answer is no.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • seannotkelly

    I stand (sit, actually) before you, an administrator who emerged out of the professoriate, who emerged out of professional practice, who emerged out of a young man with hair past his shoulders,  riding a skateboard, having emerged from a boy who wanted to be an artist (especially dinosaurs and girls).

    ‘How did I ever get here?’ is a question many of us need to occasionally look around and ask.  Especially as the new school term approaches.

  • mycantarella

    I recently moderated a panel discussion at my own alma mater, Bryn Mawr College. The panelists were alumni of varied eras ranging from my own (’68) to a recent graduate within the past 6 years. They also ranged in major from English to Political Science to the Classics. None of us is doing anything related to our majors and that was our goal … to share with anxious students our reality that the major is a vehicle for transmitting skills and not an end in itself. Finding one that fits you and where you can excell becomes the sugar helping the medicine go down (for those who remember Mary Poppins). What all of us found was that the reading, research and writing skills we gained in our liberal arts degrees were the most important skills that have carried us all through diverse careers (law, corporate, government.) In addition we have skills that I term cultural literacy– a familiarity with the arts and culture that permeate our society and create the basis for shared experience that becomes part of the social lubricant for personal interaction in the workplace that is often as important as the work itself. It is the basis for fitting in. I have never spoken to a liberal arts graduate from any of the schools where I have worked (NYU, Princeton, Hunter) who has regretted the degree or its usefulness.
    Marcia Y. Cantarella, PhD Author, I CAN Finish College: The Overcome Any Obstacle and Get Your Degree Guide

  • Unemployed_Northeastern

    I am so sick of these cheerleading articles.  Let me give a counterpoint.  I went to a NESCAC.  Not Williams or Amherst.  Graduated unemployed.  Stayed unemployed for almost two years.  Horrible sales job.  Law school.  Passed the bar.  Great Recession.  Still unemployed.

    Bottom Line: nearly a decade after graduation from my NESCAC – allegedly one of the top liberal arts colleges in the country – I am buried under mountains of student loans and have yet to get my first full-time job with a living wage and health insurance, and I have little hope of obtaining such a chimera in the future.

  • arcusprotus

    you know what I’m sick of? people like unemployed northeastern whining about the state of things and not taking any personal repsonsibility for it.  So you went to Wesleyan (or whatever) and then went to law school and passed the bar, and that should have been good enough to land a job?  And if not, its because the lib arts degree you got isn’t valuable?  Grow up.

    I also went to a NESCAC school (not Amherst or Williams), and was scheduled to graduate in 2003, but dropped out after 2.5 years.  I then busted my ass for years waiting tables, bartending, etc. and learned that not everything in life is handed to me.  With that newfound revelation I went back to school, earned good grades and good recs, clawed my way into a T14 law school, and then pounded the pavement until April of my 3L year (2011) until I landed a job.  Now I use what I learned at my lib arts schools everyday – how to interact with others, think progressively, communicate effectively, and service clients of many different backgrounds – writers, businessmen, doctors, etc.  My lib arts degree helps me be the rounded person I need to be a good attorney.

    That your lib arts degree hasn’t helped a job fall into your lap is not the fault of the degree, its the fault of the holder.  I know its tough out there for most people, but – and I see your comments on ATL and other places – I get the impression you don’t want to do the things necessary to make use of the skill you should have gained along the way, including those acquired at your prestigous liberal college.  It took me 3 years of hard crappy jobs, 2 years at a less crappy job, and 3 years of constant applying and interviewing for a law job to EARN the opportunity I have now.  Can you say the same?

    If in fact you have been busting your butt all this time trying to get a job and were still unsuccesful, maybe you should consider that your attitude is getting in the way of your success.  I know that if I were hiring, and somebody walked into my office with the attitude you display in your comments all over the web, I’d probably find someone else who sounds grateful for the opportunities they’ve had and not resentful that they haven’t amounted to more.

  • Unemployed_Northeastern

    It would be hard for my attitude to get in the way when I have barely been able to land one interview per year since law school, in any profession.  I’m glad that your lib arts degree and vaunted T14 law degree (I am ever so impressed) got you a job.  To paraphrase your post, your employment is not a result of your degrees or awesome work ethic, it is a result of LUCK.  Blind, stupid luck.  Lots of people with resumes similar to our own have been unemployed – not underemployed – for years, despite their best efforts to become otherwise.  You can smear people like myself all you want, but know that you can fall back into the pit overnight.  As you infer yourself, you have no idea how much/long/earnestly I have been looking for work, yet assume the worst because I don’t match whatever half-delusional Horatio Alger standard you seem to have applied to yourself.  Honestly, do you think my cover letters look like my posts?  That I harangue and demagogue the educational system in my once-in-a-blue-moon interviews?  Come, now.  That’s as specious and hollow an argument as if I lambasted you for dropping out of undergrad, which would just be rude and unfounded. Under your standard of understanding and empathy, though, perhaps I should.

    I often acknowledge that I have failed, many times.  I went to an incredibly overrated college.  Didn’t have a marketable or vocationally-oriented major.  Certainly didn’t go to a law school that anyone respects, yourself included.  Graduated headlong into two different recessions.  Interned, between undergrad and law school, for at least four different organizations that have gone the way of the passenger pigeon.  Have a work history gap that may as well be a listing of infectious diseases for all the good it does me.  I seem to agitate people like yourself who want to put blinders on and pretend that thousands of college/advanced degree holders aren’t drowning in hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt while hoping to become a bartender at the Olive Garden or a customer service associate at Target.  By the way, if you don’t like my posts, DON’T READ THEM.  I am far, far from being the most prolific poster here, on Above the Law, or anywhere else.  I have never, ever said I was entitled to a job, or anything like it, and if you have read my posts, you know that.

  • arcusprotus

    To be fair, that was a great response. Horatian Alger. Nailed it. I concede I don’t know why you haven’t been able to land a job. No doubt a stroke of bad luck has played a part – just as a stroke of good luck certainly helped me. I’m not above admitting that. I’m sure you haven’t been sitting on your ass, and I’m sorry you haven’t found anything yet.

    I stand by my sentiment, however, that I’m tired of the large contingent of posters I read (or friends i listen to) who just want to rail on the education system they believe failed them. “Nobody told me not to be a philosophy major.” “Nobody told me getting a high paying job in a competitive field was gonna be difficult.” Gimme a break. I probably grouped your post in with that group in a moment of particular annoyance, and it came out sharper than I meant, perhaps like your posts can sometimes.

    You sound like a smart guy, and I expect something will come along that you’ll be happy about soon enough. When it does, though, remember that it will have nothing to do with what degree you got at what undergrad institution. Just like that has nothing to do with why you don’t have a job yet.

  • Unemployed_Northeastern

    Hey, don’t worry about it. What are Internet comment boards for if not overinflamed sentiments, trolling, pour grammer, and the rapid and inevitable invocation of Godwin’s Law whenever politics is involved? We are all guilty of these sins from time to time, though hopefully not for Godwin’s.

  • http://profiles.google.com/greatcollegeplanning Susie Watts

    As a private college counselor, I am a believer in the liberal arts.  I have talked with many employers who have been very candid about their willingness to hire an individual with a liberal arts major.  Their point is that liberal arts majors have learned how to think critically, communicate verbally and in writing, and have the potential to be very successful in any business.  They have gone on to say that they can teach a liberal arts major about a business, but they can’t always teach a business major the skills they need to succeed in that business. 

    College Direction
    http://www.collegedirection.org

  • manoflamancha

    Two of the lowest academically ranked major universities are the top ranked in football coaches salaries. Marvelous, just marvelous.

  • 22280998

    If these incoming athletes can not read and write, what were those in K-12 doing?

    As many of the very expensive and very good athletic support programs demonstrate, these students are nor dumb. They have just been denied an education.

    Simply publishing the remedial courses that athlete and non-athlete students from various school systems must take would, at least, tell parents and taxpayers something. Actually billing them for this remedial work would be even better.  

  • kgodwin

    Did I miss something?  How is forcing students to redshirt going to help anything?  They’re still putting in all the same time practicing.  They’ll probably get left home on road trips, but that’s about it.  They’re still going to have to put in pretty much all of the same time they’d have to put in if they weren’t redshirting.  This makes absolutely no sense to me…

  • jrtucker

    Firstly, most universities are changing their admissions policies by evaluating the academic rigor high schools and not looking at ACT or SAT test scores as much for good reason.  These high-stakes tests are merely predictors of success, but do not determine success.  Like any other high-stakes test, it only measures a student’s ability in one exam, greatly reducing the reliability of the test scores.  Additionally, these scores pose multiple validity issues, not with the content, but with the “issues” students bring into the testing environment.  Relying solely on these scores does not paint a clear picture of a student’s academic ability, rather how well they can perform on one test on one day.  Looking at the high school GPA allows a review of academic success over a period of time, including different modalities of learning, which ultimately shows the persistence and success of our diverse learners. Therefore, this system is actually in favor of our students, allowing them to demonstrate varying abilities.  This generally perpetuates success, which is what educators should want.
     
    Although the statistics provided hold a negative connotation towards student-athletes, this subgroup generally holds a higher GPA than a “normal” student. However, I do agree that student-athletes need to be held to a high standard and raising the minimum GPA requirements will make them put more efforts into their career path, rather than focusing on sports alone.
     
     
    I truly have a problem with this statement:
    “The bottom line is, the lower you go in test scores, the worse students are in basic reading skills,” says Gurney. “Is it the role of four-year institutions to teach students how to read?”
     
    It is the responsibility of 4-year universities, or any post-secondary institution, to implement reading strategies into content areas.  Sustained-silent reading, or independent reading, is only effective if the student’s are comprehending 99% of the material.  That is, they could answer varying levels of comprehension questions and get 99% correct.  However, professors require students to read large sums of their textbook independently prior to coming into class, don’t necessarily discuss the material, assess the material directly from the textbook, and expect students to understand it.  This is seriously unfair, especially students with learning disabilities.  Good professors incorporate reading strategies, like active reading, into their lectures (even though I strongly disagree with pure lectures as well). They teach vocabulary, active prior knowledge, and differentiate instruction to meet the needs of diverse learners.  Good teachers understand how to teach reading and writing skills in conjunction and understand that good readers have the ability to be good writers and vice versa. So, the real issue is, is that professors should go through education courses to understand how to deliver material and teach it to students because at the end of the day, every teacher is a reading teacher, regardless of the discipline. These strategies MUST be taught because as students progress through education, the material becomes increasingly difficult and the learning gap widens.  We must meet the needs of our diverse populations and that means teaching reading strategies, including study strategies, that will be most beneficial for specific content areas.
     
     “When you’re having to deal face-face with these athletes who have such severe difficulties—they can’t write, they can’t read—yet they have to get eligible, it’s the only thing they care about, that’s their ticket to future,” he says. “They’re so pressured, they have to cheat. Or fail.”
     
    Good teaching ,coupled with valid and reliable assessments, prevent cheating and failing. So maybe the problem does not lie within the student-athletes; after all, they are simply using the strategies they know. The larger problems lies within the inability (not all professors of course) to differentiate instruction and incorporate important reading strategies into his/her lessons.  Professional development and effective evaluation systems need to be put into place so that we can encourage student success and properly evaluate student performance.

  • jrtucker

    Forcing student-athletes to redshirt for academic purposes might actually be a good idea. Freshman, which is the population this change would effect the most, have a hard time transitioning from high school to college.  If allowed to reshirt for academic purposes, they could gain a different understanding of the upcoming academic rigor and have a full year to learn how to balance their school work and athletics.  Additionally, some student-athletes may not be developmentally ready for the coursework.  This allows for maturity through difficult situations, without the stress of game performace.

  • 11182967

    There is still a market, I suspect, for writers willing to pen such letters for others to send, or even to speak directly on their behalf.  I got the part of Cyrano on stage as a senior in high school in part because I had been known for polishing up the sweet nothings of classmates–the Abe Burows of love notes.   But more than the words themselves, the decline of love letters has probably been a consequence of the decline of penmanship.  These days hardly anyone (myself included) can “write a good hand,” and a typed love letter, even converted to a fancy font, just won’t do.  Even in those old high school days when guys copied my suggestions in their own handwriting for authenticity they were often so struck by the disjuncture between the sentiments and penmanship that they couldn’t go through with sending the note.  I did make sure I got my dollar first.  

  • xinghua_li

    I visited AiU this March with a class of students coming from the US to learn about social responsibility in Malaysia. We were deeply impressed by AiU’s innovative pedagogical model. The students were a highly diverse (only 20% from Malaysia) and talented group.   They warmly welcomed us with a vibrant musical concert and showed us around the beautiful campus. We visited the classrooms where the students taught local orphans English and were moved by how well service learning are blended here. Vice chancellor Razak was a visionary thinker who preaches what he practices. His vision of a “humaniversity”–to give the access of higher education to the lower-income groups–strike me as a long overdue message for American university administrators to hear. 

    It is very true that the financial challenge that AiU faces is a common challenge that many higher ed institutions in developing countries encounter. As an academic once educated in China, I saw so many university administrators scramble to adapt to newly introduced Western commercial model of higher education but fail to account for the needs of the unprivileged groups. Also, it’s interesting to see that two of the three previous comments mentioned the money issue first and foremost ( as if was the rule number one to build “sustainability”). In the capitalism world, education institutions are too often treated like corporations. However, as the author mentions, it is exactly the corporatized ship–the sinking Titanic–that didn’t see saving passengers as its number one task. Maybe we need more universities like AiU who are willing to begin as a simple life raft: regardless of how far it might go, it first of all strives to keep its most passengers above water.

  • conahec4u

    Certainly, I’ll be interested in learning more about Shiv Nadar University. Please send me the information to fmarmole@email.arizona.edu 

  • conahec4u

    In response to jlowers and sanmarcos08, in the article I mentioned that the full funding is provided by the Albukhary Foundation. This foundation was established by Mr. Syed Mkhtar Albukhary. Coming from a poor and disadvantaged family, Mr. Albukhary made the promise some 20 years ago “to establish a university to provide opportunities to bright students from underprivileged and disadvantaged backgrounds to receive tertiary education and become useful, productive and caring members of society”

  • conahec4u

    Thanks for sharing your reflections on your visit to AIU.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.