next »

[Forums Moderator]

College graduates are ill prepared for the workplace, and colleges are partly responsible, argues Mel Levine, a professor of pediatrics at the University of North Carolina Medical School, in an essay in this week's Chronicle Review. We live at a time when the body may be the mind's No. 1 rival, he says, and higher education must take steps to counteract the surrounding culture. Is that true? Are his proposals plausible solutions? Or does he misdiagnose the problem? Read more...

[Unknown]

Of course, to get students accustomed to a world in which they are not the centre of attention, universities must focus more on classes which teach students about themselves! The logic of this piece is a bit odd. What we most need is the reverse -- courses in which the
subject matter and the discipline-specific conventions of various fields are taught -- and students must learn to adapt (and receive bad grades if they don't) That would be excellent preparation for managers who are not particularly interested in students "methods of cognition" and "learning styles" but care only about the bottom line.

[Albert Matheny, Assoc Dean UF]

This is the best short article I have ever read on the current campus situation because it addresses the irony of having overachieving students who end up, in many cases, not achieving anything in the end, or at least being clueless about their future.  I have circulated it widely on my campus and hope that we can adopt the book, when it comes out, as a campus reading experience.  The key is that students need to think about their lives and faculty need to think about whom they are teaching, since students are fundamentally so different than they were when faculty were students.

[%sig%]

[Ed Woodyard]

Colgate's "Career Development in the New Economy" Program was cited as among the best ideas of the year on page 66 of the New York Times Sunday Times Magazine Section on 12 December 2004.  It was effectively acknowledged as the best idea in American education last year.  I suggest that Mr. Levine take a look at the article to see that much of what he proposes has been successfuly implemented on at least one college campus -- and then investigate what is being done at Colgate and how it might serve as a national model for what he is endorsing.

[%sig%]

[Dwyer,Psy, Baldwin-Wallace Co]

After thirty-five years of teaching, due to the presence of, young professors more comfortable with transformational learning, I am just beginning to truly understand learner centered teaching.  Yet, at the age of 61, I am not sure I have sufficient energy reserves I imagine required for the transition.  
     I have been teaching Mel Levines assessment techniques to psychology and education majors, and also have developed a seminar on brain plasticity and the role of experience in the orthopsychological development of the cognitions and affect of children. As a result, while I agree with what Levine says, I am convinced we have to intervene early and with major "upfront" commitment.  And more, after taking Alan Shore's week long course, I am convinced we have to pay more attention to interpersonal and intrapersonal insights as the foundation and stimulator of intellectual achievement.
Mike Dwyer, Ph.D.
Prof of Psych
Baldwin-Wallace College

[Dr. Virginia H. Bennett UH/M]

   Many Thanks to Dr. Levine, who has pointed out a major problem facing universities today. Many misguided educators have for years been promoting making university courses "more fun"  advocating the "dumbing down" of courses,  grade inflation, and finally, the concept of letting them teach themselves. Why bother to have professors??
    Now the graduated fledglings of universities with these policies are "paying the piper." I have always contended that study at a university is the "job" of students. They should think of it as an apprenticeship for the real world. Forums Moderator wrote:

> College graduates are ill prepared for the workplace, and
> colleges are partly responsible, argues Mel Levine, a professor
> of pediatrics at the University of North Carolina Medical
> School, in an essay in this week's Chronicle Review. We
> live at a time when the body may be the mind's No. 1 rival, he
> says, and higher education must take steps to counteract the
> surrounding culture. Is that true? Are his proposals plausible
> solutions? Or does he misdiagnose the problem?
> Read
> more...

[Reality Check]

"The key is that students need to think about their lives and faculty need to think about whom they are teaching, since students are fundamentally so different than they were when faculty were students."




Why? What exactly makes students now "fundamentally so different" from students of any other age?

[RG]

I think this article hits on a lot of important points, but I feel it unfairly characterizes the student population as a group of spoiled, self-interested, glorified adults.  If our graduates are lacking in character, they only reflect the eduation they have received and, sadly, I feel faculty, themselves, are often more concerned about credentials and symbols of status rather than personal development.

As a result, professors often fail to teach students in ways that encourage character building--failing to foster courage and humility rather than mere coverage and recitation.  It is, then, no surprise that employers find recent graduates unable to indoctrinate themselves into new work environments that require them to be more independent and self-reliant.

These are not the failings of our students, these are the failings of our faculty and administrators--many of which, for much of their careers, have focused their efforts at publishing quantity over quality, directing their studies toward fads and fashion without, themselves, considering the traditional goals of collegiate education and character development.

I believe the dominant question confronting us is: whither academia?  In my opinion, a college education is not designed to train students how to work a job but rather to prepare them for a particular way of life--one of good citizenship, independence, courage, and social commitment.

RG

[%sig%]

[Recent Graduate]

I agree with Professor Levine that as an undergraduate I was not prepared for the workplace, though my reasons differ somewhat from his.  

I graduated one year ago from a highly-ranked public institution.  I would like to think that I have many of the positive attributes suggested by Professor Levine; strong communicative and organizational skills, knowledge of the necessity of delaying gratification, and personal relationships with adults in a variety of fields.

I left undergraduate work knowing that I hoped to continue with graduate work in the future (as I will do next fall), but that I also wanted to experience life in this so-called "real world" before I went on to continue my education.  I have had quite an experience.

Yes, I was unprepared.  Part of it was my own naivete.  The naivete, however, had to do with my unknowing belief that these skills I had acquired through education -- communication, critical analysis, research and original thought -- would be used daily in the workplace.  

The college education, as a mark on a resume, is necessary for workplace survival.  The byproduct of a successful college education -- i.e. the maturation into a thinking person -- seems strangely less important.  My creative, high-achieving classmates and I are now working as salespeople in department stores, as data-entry clerks for credit-card companies, and as telemarketers.  I am currently working as an "envelope stuffer" for a large corporation.  

It can be said that we have to pay our dues, and we understand that; but to what end?  To become a retail supervisor or a telemarketing manager?  (My work is entry-level, to be sure; but I have been quietly observing my superiors, trying to understand the day-to-day tasks of their job and to imagine how I would undertake them.)  There is a greater disconnect here.  Levine describes college students as being unprepared for the "hard cognitive" and "mind toil" demands of the workplace.  Would that I were in a job that required such demands.  

I spent the last weekend chaperoning/mentoring a group of high school students as we went through a social justice retreat.  At the retreat, we learned that 75% of all newly-created jobs in the past year paid less than $12 per hour, and the majority paid only $7.  While a discussion about living wages could certainly be the subject of a forum of its own, the unspoken concern should also be about the nature of these newly-created jobs.  Is a job that pays only $7 or $10 per hour going to be a job that relies heavily on critical thinking or intellect?  Are these new jobs going to build into careers, with opportunities for responsibility and contribution, or are they going to remain simply "jobs?"  As college graduates are undoubtedly going to be holding many of these newly-created positions, do universities have a responsibility to address this issue and "prepare" us for this work?

There are two disillusioning implications within Levine's essay.  The first is that college should become a career training center.  The second is that college should become a career training center but still retain the fundamentals of liberal education (via promoting the debate club and other "intellectual" pursuits).  Meanwhile, the American workplace is relying more and more upon assembly-line methods of work which increase productivity while decreasing the need for thought or critical analysis.  Skills gleaned from the debate club or the literary magazine seem as useless as any other skills, unless they can be used somehow to move the product or assist the customer.  Thinking critically about the product one is selling may ruin one's ability to sell it.

(Even with all this disconnect, however, I still believe that liberal education is important and necessary -- for reasons that have nothing to do with jobs.)  

I am sure I will ultimately be sat upon for writing this, as I have said nothing new and have perhaps missed the point entirely.  However, as a recent college graduate (with many of the good qualities suggested by Levine) seeking her place in the adult world and in the world of work, my experience should also be considered.

Finally: Professor Levine, I apologize for my critique of your writing.  I chose to respond because the experience you described seemed so dissimilar to that of my own and of my classmates.  I will seek out your book and read it in its entirety, so that I may understand your ideas more fully.

[%sig%]

[Lisa Caravacci]

In my opinion, college does not prepare all students for the work place.  The term student is too broad , and includes basically everyone who wants to attend school.  For many,  the system can give students experiences that may be similar to a work situation, but the truth is, students are not being paid so that they often do not make the most of these opportunities.  Secretly, most students resent internships because of the financial aspect, although there are some who gain connections or job offers during these times.  But like anything in life, school prepares some and doesn't prepare others.  Some people pass the driving test on the first try, others take 3 times, and some never pass.  it's a matter of practice, opportunity, past exeriences, and let's not forget culture and socio-ecomonic level.  It's complicated.
I do believe his misdiagnoses the problem.  Many college grads go into fields that are difficult.  And while the school can off curriculum about particular fields whether it be journalism, medicine, law and so on, the student must actually work to gain the experience.  Many students enter green and do not have past experiences that would prepare them for their new jobs.  I believe that colleges should take responsiblity for students while they are on campus offering them as many enriching experineces as possible.  However, once they enter the work place, it is the job of the work sight to train employees on skills that they need to acquire at work.

[Thomas Bach, Univ. of Texas]

These graduates are 22 years old.  They are adults (and have legally been so for years).  It's NOT the responsibility of professors to get them to grow up.

Its their responsibility. Its their parent's responsibility.

Its not mine.

Maybe a tour of duty in the U.S. Marine Corps would help.

[moominoid]

We've been discussing this on other threads about attendance policies (I'm against unless it is of value to the class that the student is there).

College should give students an opportunity to learn how to take initiative and see what happens if they fail to plan etc. All the things that Levine said in his article. Yes we can give the students I second chance if they don't get it right at first. There is no lesson like failing and learning from your mistakes. Going further in the direction of spoonfeeding students is not good. US programs are already a long way in that direction compared to some other countries.

I wonder what Recent Graduate studied?

Many people do get good jobs out of college.

My own experience - I studied economics and geography undergrad and then did a masters straight away. After that I had a job search period including temp work etc. and then I landed a job at a consulting firm (real estate market research) about 6 months after graduating from the masters. This was in 1989 in Britain. What I had learned as an undergrad was very useful on the job.... Later I went on to do a PhD. Well that is just anecdotes.

In my view, liberal arts (not science and not econ but traditional "arts") is not much use as a job preparation unless you went to a top school. Harvard etc.

[Walter]

Recent graduate makes mention of America becoming more assembly line. That couldn't be further from the truth. Companies now demand more experience in team and group work, not assembly line. And critical thinking and problem solving are integral to group  and team work. Integrating liberal arts into all disciplines is one way to develop critical thinking.

[Jeff Vincent / Indiana Univ]

Prof. Levine raises some interesting issues but like most analyses, his is focused squarely on a supply-side function of education. What about demand in an age of white collar instability? There is a major disconnect between what employers need and what they say they want. High productivity and a willingness to work for low pay seem to be  the predominant values. As "recent grad" noted, expectations face a harsh reality. Independent thinking and creativity are not the usual skills rewarded in a corporate culture. Take a look at the Labor Dept. occupational projection data and you'll find employer demand for narrow short-term training outweighs that for college graduates. Maybe we just need to be a bit more honest with students in our appraisal of the real world.

[%sig%]

[Recent Graduate]

Walter, thank you.  You are probably right and it is good to hear that there is more to the working world than what my friends and I have experienced.  

Moominoid, I would say more about what I studied but I hesitate before providing information that might cast a negative light on my alma mater or upon the departments in which I was involved.  I do not regret for one instant the education I received there, and the departments are very strong.  Let's just say that I studied one of those "non-career-based" fields.