According to a recent article in The New York Times, three states (Indiana, Utah and Minnesota) are starting a pilot program known as the Lumina project to make sure that degrees offered by certain universities and colleges in the state "reflect a consensus about what specific knowledge and skills should be taught" ("Colleges in 3 States to Set Basics for Degrees," April 8). The basic idea is to ensure that earning a particular degree will entail acquiring certain skills, such that degrees would be awarded based on comparable standards around the world. Among the degrees being targeted are education, history, chemistry, physics and graphic design.
The proponents of this program emphasize that they are striving not for conformity of academic experience, but rather just for comparability. To be fair, this is only a pilot program right now, and is by no means a nationwide standard. However, while the program maintains that it will work to sustain academic freedom, it still represents a danger to the pure liberal arts education, and takes a threatening step towards the commoditization of a diploma.
The Lumina Project is based on the principles of the Bologna Process, a European program that ensures that degrees certify comparable standards. According to The Times, "the goal is to give universities, students and employers in a global economy enough quality assurance and comparability that wherever a student obtains a degree, it would stand for the same thing and be widely accepted."
I find this statement very troubling. What this goal implies is that a degree must be not an end, but rather a means. It also implies that a course of study is selected not for intellectual enjoyment, but rather for the acquisition of a set of skills to be used later in life. Instead of dictating whether a degree is a means or an end, colleges and universities should give their students the opportunity to choose. By giving students this choice, schools can help them consider the implications of their own education.
Degrees can obviously be valuable as commodities; this is why vocational schools and programs exist. A student should have the right to seek education with a profession in mind, and we should certainly have the right to use our education as a springboard to what we do later in life. Vocational programs such as the Teacher Education Program at Dartmouth offer this opportunity. A student who knows that he or she wants to become a teacher can learn the specific skills necessary to become certified. However, this paradigm should not be imposed on unwilling students.
Especially at a liberal arts college, it is for the students to choose how they use their education. Yes, a liberal arts diploma can be a means for later employment. However, not every student is pursuing his or her degree for that reason; some are pursuing it as an end unto itself -- simply to learn. If these comparable skill levels were to be enacted, they would mandate that students use their education as a means, and not an end. Students should be given the opportunity to choose.
Let's look at a student with a history major and an education minor. If we view that degree as a means, then it would seem that this student is taking these courses in an attempt to be a history teacher. It would follow, then, that he should know the things that a history teacher should know, like the names of important generals in the Civil War, or the number of lanterns hung on the night of Paul Revere's midnight ride. But this student could have no intention of ever becoming a history teacher. He could be taking the classes just because he likes to study history and education -- he might plan to be a ski bum after he graduates. It seems ridiculous, then, to force him to memorize the names of Civil War generals when he could instead be focusing on some sort of fulfilling independent study, like examining the culture and rules surrounding Native American education.
By reserving the right to choose what form our education takes, we as students are also given more opportunities to reflect on what we want to do in life. Instead of ensuring that economics majors have the set of skills necessary to be I-bankers when they graduate, a college education should allow economics students to pursue that part of the discipline that interests them most, and decide for themselves why they are getting their education. If it is for employment, great. But if not, then they should not be stifled.
