The Liberal Arts Institution

Sometimes cultural attitudes shift in thought and philosophy, reshaping the way we think and the way we respond to certain events be they sociological, spiritual, or economic. I recall as a child growing up in the 60s, many young adults had an "anti-war" mentality that resulted in a type of disdain for anyone who would enlist in the military or even accept the draft. The "heroes" of the time were not those fighting for human freedom and trying to end the tyranny but rather those who evaded the draft and carried peace signs. Returning troops were sometimes booed and hissed as they disembarked from a plane upon their return from the fighting. Students talked naively and inanely about an "immoral" war and the benefits of isolationism.

Yet time marched onward, as it is wont to do, and now society holds in high regard those brave men and women who fought and currently fight for our country and for our freedoms we enjoy. We honor and elevate the military as it defends our country, fights for democracy, and wars against terrorism. We as a society have changed and will continue to do so in some way. Those not in favor of military service remain silent. Cultural shifting gives us more tolerance for differences, public concern about the environment, less dogma, awareness of global trends, more medical breakthroughs, fewer physical books, more knowledge, social connectivity, and maybe less dependence on one person. Technology provides, at least to an extent, the knowledge needed to catapult our interests to another level.

Being a hat wearer, I have noticed pictures from the first half of the twentieth century showing that most men wore hats. It is always a pleasure to walk into an old building and find a hat rack. Today students often wear caps but they leave them on in a building and there are rarely, if ever, hat racks. Society changed and the bald, hat wearing man is now discriminated against and has no place to hang his hat! But we will arise and our time will come again. With our ascension into our rightful place, we will see the return of the hat rack (actually I kind of doubt it will happen!).

The growth of the non-denominational church came partly in response to denominational restrictions and the frequent parlaying of theological ideals within each church. Growing weary of such dissension, people began to form their own churches apart from denominational association. While the loss in collective giving has been painful, for many the freedom is worth the loss. Such activity is an example of shifting cultural changes in spiritual formation.

In higher education, we are in a change of some kind with a multitude of opinions and shifting attitudes toward education and the future. Many will argue that college can no longer serve its liberal arts practices and that all training should be professional and career-oriented. Others hold steadfastly to the liberal arts concept of higher education that respects the well-rounded thinker, the graduate with knowledge in many areas, the student who contributes to society through refinement, who recognizes the heritage of our world but who possesses the skill to avoid past mistakes, the person whose mind and body have the discipline for facing the future with courage, conviction, and productivity. All these goals and more comprise the purpose of the liberal arts education.

But the flurry of professional and technical schools now threatens the core of a liberal arts education. Students, their parents, even politicians are no longer focusing on the benefits of a broad-based education that includes history, math, science, English, arts, philosophy, and physical well being. Instead, the concern seems to be gainful employment upon graduation and the skills needed for career success. In this case, the customer has moved from the faculty member to the student to the employer. Do we in traditional liberal arts institutions retain our heritage of the liberal arts that goes back to Greek philosophers and forms the core of what it means to be an educated person? Or do we discard all that liberal arts represents and simply teach the skills and knowledge required for a chosen profession? The old adage of teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime can be argued on either side of the equation. Should we give him the knowledge needed to fish, hunt, farm, cook? Should we teach him to fish so that he works to alleviate world hunger, invest resources, contribute positively to society? Does he need to understand the environment, physics, biology, business, the arts, his own health, the chemical makeup of fish, perhaps other languages in case he encounters people from foreign countries?

The question, however, is what to do? What do students need to know for their future? Specific skills or broad knowledge or both? Where will we land on this controversy? Will we abandon the educational practices that have served higher education so well or do we desperately hold on to a model that no longer is effective? Is there a balance?

The road to truth is often painful but clear and it seems to me that the answer lies in an eclectic and guided curriculum with a directed and comprehensive invoking of technology. Colleges must be nimble, holding to the ideals of what an education means but respecting employers' need for skilled employees and entrepreneurship. Obviously supply and demand will ultimately rule the day and will shape the forces of college curriculum, but meanwhile it is time for colleges and employers to recognize those areas that technology can provide and those areas where face to face learning needs to happen. Not entirely sure of the answer, I believe a reduction in broad liberal arts courses, increased choice in classes, and professional tracks toward employment are the trajectories of the colleges of the future. Thrown in the mix will be more use of technology, online courses, video, experiential learning, and interactive education.

Rather than fighting the change and insisting on the past, colleges must embrace the change if they are to survive. Schools with substantial endowments will continue the journey established by the past, but other schools must find new ways to educate students for the future. Such is the way of cultural change.

Bach, Financials, and Running

Back in the running mode, I try to hit about 20 miles per week with Saturdays being the long run day. The recent weight gain has impacted my distance and speed, and I often find myself walking in the middle of the run. Yet, risking imperiousness, I will admit to having a resting heart rate of about 60 which is supposedly good for a 54 year old man. Running continues to be euphoric and it is hard to describe the glorious feeling of the wind on my face as I pound the pavement and breathe quickly. The sounds I hear, besides my own exertion, are generally pleasant and include birds, dogs, cars, sometimes children playing, and the wind as it blows through the trees. Sound continues to be meaningful to me and I often wish I had the power to hear the ants walk, the spiders spin their webs, the birds fly, and the clouds move. Waxing poetically, however, about the world is not my intention on this fine morning. Rather I wish to address what kind of music matches what kind of book.

When running, I often listen to audio books. I generally listen to fiction followed by non-fiction with most books lasting approximately 12 hours which gives me around 2-3 weeks per book, considering a few days here and there to listen to the sounds of world instead. Adventure fiction is great for running whereas non-fiction with facts is less propelling but more interesting than fiction. After finishing "The Girl on the Train" which I found to be a dull story in spite of its popularity, I downloaded "Financial Literacy: Finding Your Way in the Financial Markets." It is an informative read (or rather listen) and I am enjoying it. What is perplexing to me however is the opening music for the book was a Brandenburg Concerto by Johann Sebastian Bach. Not that it was not thoroughly enjoyable and "hit the spot" as I started my long Saturday run. The counterpoint, textures, joyous harmony, complexity, and aesthetic satisfaction of the music was the perfect choice for me this fine morning as I ran and learned about the financial markets.

But why Bach? In what ways does the music of Bach set up or foreshadow or represent a book on finance? Is it that people who read or in my case listen to this book are generally older, more educated, sophisticated people, or maybe old fuddy duddies? That sounds as absurd as is assuming Bach is for older academics only. Is it that the complexity of Bach including his brilliant use of contrapuntal devices to add form, tension, and structure to his music match that of a book designed to explain the complexity of the financial markets? Maybe the music was picked randomly and anything would have been fine...say a Mahler symphony or something by Philip Glass. Or perhaps the opening music could have been disco or reggae or a rap on finance? Maybe this was just a legal decision, after all Bach's music is in public domain and does not require permission or ownership to perform.

Perhaps the music should have been hard rock or Jurassic Park or maybe some opera or Johnny Cash? Is the use of Bach a sign of the revitalization of "classical music" in our culture? Or maybe its rarity in popular culture sets it apart as unique and special, signifying the special qualities of the book? Frankly, I am not sure why Bach was selected as the music to begin the audio book on finance, but I did enjoy it.