Renascentes Musae

Your puns are priceless...

2010-12-12T20:23:40.251-06:00

Your puns are priceless...

Jon, this is a thoughtful reflection on Lutheranis...

2010-11-14T19:58:42.991-06:00

Jon, this is a thoughtful reflection on Lutheranism and liberal arts, and certainly underscores your point that the exclusivity of teaching the liberal arts is every bit as important as the fact they get taught at all. I think, however, you may have misunderstood my comments and questions. You re-frame my take as: “Why not accept the status quo in contemporary confessional Lutheran higher education and, by implication, work with and within it?” This both begs the question, in the classical sense, and recasts my question as the conclusion.

I think more accurately, my question is: how do you most effectively transcend the status quo? How—not what. That, of course, leads to the question, what is the goal? Is it Lutheran liberal arts in any way it can be achieved or is it Lutheran liberal arts, in an institution devoted solely to that pursuit and in the absence of any interference from professional programs and other tangents? If the latter, as you propose, what examples can we look at to determine how we get there?

You say: “[G]iven the reality on the street, even approaching an institution that presently exists in order to create something like a Wittenberg curriculum would require showing up money in hand. In other words, it is not the case that present institutions will simply divert funds from what they are already doing to develop a Wittenberg curriculum.” I should think so, as long as everything they are told that they and their students are unworthy of any participation in your project. On the other hand, the reality on the street that I see is a higher education system in our country that hasn’t yet found room for an institution truly and purely dedicated to a confessional Lutheran liberal arts program.
Again, my question is not whether, but how. So, how does it get done if not standing on the foundation (however shaky) of already existing institutions? And how do you persuade others to support an all-or-nothing, black-and-white, no-middle-ground project?
I yield back the remainder of my time to let the pros talk.

Ray

Amberg - I'm unclear as to what the resistance...

2010-11-13T19:47:48.869-06:00

Amberg - I'm unclear as to what the resistance you refer to is, or in what sense professional students are marginalized relative to classical students. As a result I can offer no response to your question. Can you explain?

"My greatest admiration is reserved for profe...

2010-11-13T19:19:00.942-06:00

"My greatest admiration is reserved for professors who can motivate students to work hard to learn a subject they didn't initially think they were interested in. "

And how can we have such teachers unless they have the conviction that what they are teaching is more important than what everybody else is teaching? But an orthodox Lutheran classics or theology teacher who goes to a public University or a Concordia with this frame of mind will meet with more resistance than we would like to admit.

In fact it is this resistance which has marginalized the professional students from the classical students.

How do we over come the resistance?

A short comment from someone who teaches in profes...

2010-11-13T14:24:46.421-06:00

A short comment from someone who teaches in professional programs: Wouldn't/couldn't/shouldn't an educational institution open the eyes of the 'hoop jumpers' to the more fundamental questions raised here? Couldn't a Wittenberg education lay the foundation for a high quality professional education?

I understand that students who don't want to learn can't be taught. But inspiring students to want to learn is part of a teacher's job. It's also the hardest thing to do, much harder than figuring out to convey the course material effectively. My greatest admiration is reserved for professors who can motivate students to work hard to learn a subject they didn't initially think they were interested in.

I do find it necessary to have some outstanding, highly motivated students in a program to bring up the overall quality of the education. Students do tend to work to peer level and need some role models among their peers of what is possible to achieve and the effort required to reach it.

Speaking as someone from a supposedly liberal arts...

2010-11-13T11:07:20.831-06:00

Speaking as someone from a supposedly liberal arts Catholic college that is currently drowning in pre-professional programs: Amen!
"Not only that, but as mentioned above, this places serious students of, say, theology or history or chemistry in a class with students who regard all of those courses as hoops to jump through (Desperate Housewives fans in a conversation with Trekkies about Star Trek). Again, the impact is corrosive on the student body": Double Amen!

Bethany Kilcrease

I think Ray's point is that there's a big ...

2010-11-13T10:11:27.845-06:00

I think Ray's point is that there's a big difference between public and private institutions and their respective purposes. I think. And further that the virtuous mooch of Fish's article is something you might countenance in public education, but not in a Lutheran or private college (?).

But your far more important point is that there MUST be something different about Lutheran colleges, otherwise they simply should not exist (this purely on good stewardship grounds, right?). Further, that if there is no difference between a Lutheran college and a secular/public college, Lutherans ought to be in the business of divesting their higher-ed holdings and using the profits from the sale thereof to put top-notch Lutheran chapels staffed by top-notch theologians/pastors on or around campuses where there are Lutheran students.

Agreed 100%!

"There is a big difference between public and...

2010-11-12T23:22:36.259-06:00

"There is a big difference between public and Lutheran institutions."

I'm wondering what is this difference? I have an appointment in a school of pharmacy at a public university, but what would be different if this appointment was in a Lutheran school, either for me as a faculty member or for a student? Jon has described some ways in which it could/should be. Whether starting a new institution from scratch is feasible is a separate question (I agree that the obstacles to that are great).

However, if there is nothing distinctiveIy Lutheran about the education being offered by the school, I don't understand the point of replicating educational models of public universities within historically Lutheran schools.

Right, but.... My argument is not that there is n...

2010-11-09T09:43:40.547-06:00

Right, but.... My argument is not that there is nothing distinctive about Lutheran liberal arts college, nor that there is any (good) reason to get your pharmacology or business degree from a Lutheran school. But these schools already exist. Why not use them?

The Fish article does consider the virtuous mooch, but only in the context of public schools which exist, under political pressure, for purposes other than those that would inform a Lutheran liberal arts college. There is a big difference between public and Lutheran institutions. If you want to fund the humanities, it seems to me that using the revenue from a business or pharmacy school is every bit as good as other money, but with the advantage that it already exists. You are absolutely right there is something more foundational at stake than just paying the institution's bills. But try having an institution without paying the bills.

Ultimately, the point is you should not allow perfection to defeat the good. If you really, really want a purist institution, you face two very real risks: 1) you'll be teaching Plato to five students in a trailer park in Nowhere, Minnesota or 2) you'll just end up just talking about the project and bemoaning all the obstacles that keep it from happening. Sure, you could get lucky and find out that Warren Buffett is a closet Wittenbergian just waiting for the opportunity to fund a Lutheran liberal arts college. A surer strategy, however, will involve concessions to reality. The fact is, right now there is nothing. Nothing won't become something if everything is an obstacle.

I would suggest that if there is nothing distincti...

2010-11-06T00:11:39.701-05:00

I would suggest that if there is nothing distinctive educationally about a Lutheran university, then there is no reason to support one. Why go to a Lutheran school to major in pharmacy or business when there are plenty of established secular schools already offering such educations? Why not focus efforts on developing and supporting high quality Lutheran campus ministries associated with such secular schools instead, if the only educational difference between a secular school and a Lutheran one is a more pious social scene and a few courses on religion? The Fish article considers the fallacies of trying to support the liberal arts by mooching off the 'cash cow' majors.

However, I think Jon is arguing that in fact Lutheranism DOES have something distinctive to offer higher education via the humanities that secular schools cannot (because they wind up in Fish's cul de sac).

I did find your post thoughtful and helpful. It actually is basically the way I tend to think about these problems also, but over time Jon has gotten me thinking that there IS something more foundational at stake than just figuring out how to pay the bills of an institution and credentialing students to become employable (as necessary as those things are).

Speaking of facts and numbers, it would be interes...

2010-11-05T14:51:24.017-05:00

Speaking of facts and numbers, it would be interesting to hear your take on incrementalism in instituting liberal education. I get an all-or-nothing sense when I read this blog—i.e., that it must be Wittenberg or nothing at all. But pausing to look at some facts and numbers, that may be unworkable. First, because so much support for your way of thinking comes not from those who would or could provide financial support, but from people who think about these issues for a living. Second, because some already existing aspects of non-liberal education—let’s say a pharmacy education, a business department, pre-law—may actually provide revenue to a school seeking to beef up its liberal arts. Third, and perhaps most importantly, because many people have a lot invested—in time, treasure, and reputation—in the non-liberal programs and are likely to put up a good fight if support for their programs is pulled in favor of the liberal arts.

You can protest that my head is buried in expediency, which is likely the disease that got higher education into this mess to begin with. At the risk of being practical, however, isn’t there a more successful strategy that uses the existing framework at Lutheran schools even as it undermines that framework? Can’t a revenue generating pharmacy program, as an example, help fund the humanities while that program is being slowly phased out? Or even this: is there a place for a school dedicated to liberal education within an institution of the current Lutheran higher educational system, one that would take advantage of the institution’s physical facilities but pursue pure liberal arts?

In one of your replies to a response to “World-Class Liberal Arts for Lutherans,” you suggest possible reasons why college presidents don’t engage with you about your project. Roadblocks, all of them, but I assume that a group of academics educated in and committed to liberal arts have the requisite creativity to meet these roadblocks and figure out ways around, over, or through. Perhaps—and I know this lack of purism may be painful to consider—you would even find those other non-liberal programs necessary or useful to the ongoing success of liberal arts studies.

In short, are liberal arts important only if they definitively put non-liberal education in the grave, or are they so important that one must find a way to pursue them and transmit them to future generations even in the midst of philistinism? To put it more crassly, if there were $100, would you rather risk the high odds of getting $0 while reaching for the whole pile of cash, or would you be willing to take $75? While purity in the liberal arts may be a virture, my own liberal arts education has taught me that purity is seldom attainable and the quest for it often leads to places we shouldn’t want to go.

The main thing the top 15 (I didn't check all ...

2010-10-25T20:32:43.503-05:00

The main thing the top 15 (I didn't check all 50) on the list shared was the characteristics of their student population. An admissions officer can't know which individual student will go on to seek a Ph.D. in science or engineering, but he does know what pool of candidates he will come from. So it seems largely a matter of advertising to and recruiting highly prepared students.

Carleton students, 13% majored in physical sciences, math not listed separately*
2000 undergrads*
525 S&E Ph.D's within 9 years***

University of Chicago had 7% in physical science and 7% in math**
5000 undergrads**
873 S&E Ph.D's within 9 years***

So, no apparent disadvantage for those individuals choosing a smaller but still high quality liberal arts college who would then wish to pursue graduate study.

*http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?match=true&collegeId=509&searchType=college&type=qfs&word=carleton#

**http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=1713&profileId=0#

***http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08311/#tab2

University Business reported in 2007 that small colleges were successfully attracting science majors.

http://www.universitybusiness.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=732

A college with a Wittenberg view, I assume, would be a small liberal arts college and would offer programs that students interested in various fields including sciences could feel confident would prepare them for whatever they would pursue after graduation. If Carleton can do it, then it can be done. The college would really need to attract the students and faculty who want to do it. There would have to be a commitment to recruit at least the students if not also some faculty. The program would have to be communicated to those prospective students, many of whom are sitting in the pews Sundays. They can't choose what doesn't exist, or if it does and they are unaware of it. Just pure supposition but perhaps the faculty at some particular Lutheran campus already want to move in that direction. It seems that if they can have a meeting of the minds within their departments they could be able to steer in that direction. That would take some confidence, but seems within possibility. In fact, it may be more effective than a university president trying to make it happen. I don't know how strong the current leaders are. If they are not very strong, they may depend on the faculty for direction or worse, fear change.

Looking at the horizon for my own children, it would be nice for them to have a great Lutheran college to attend. It would be great to be assured the colleges and congregations are really walking together in providing the most appropriate education for their capable college aged church members.

BTW, the example of being in technical compliance ...

2010-10-23T20:16:05.789-05:00

BTW, the example of being in technical compliance with environmental regulations while clearly being out of compliance with the intent of the regulation (i.e. dead fish being observed where effluent runs into the river although assays of the effluent meet the EPA requirements) is a real example.

Is ignoring the presence of the dead fish ethical? What about turning off costly pollution-prevention equipment except when the EPA announces a pending compliance visit? (another real example) Engineering equations can't answer this. What say the humanists? What says Luther/Lutheran theologians?

Jon, Yes, your latter point is exactly mine. But...

2010-10-23T09:32:25.049-05:00

Jon,

Yes, your latter point is exactly mine. But of course scientists and engineers are also human, and technology in particular is driven by human wants and desires, and thus scientists and engineers also need the humanities. They are just fortunate that their higher education does reinforce a general insistence that true and false are real and exist independently of culture. Thus the idea of ultimate truth claims in Christianity sound familiar, not naive.

Their weak spot is that they are also instinctively drawn to utilitarian ethical arguments, and the idea that one should not do something even though it is possible is hard to accept. Engineering accreditation requires that we teach ethics, but I don't think we are very effective - as we then wander off into the realm of the humanities and "you have your truth and I have mine." Absent regulations, why is it bad to pollute a river and kill off the wildlife if that maximizes corporate profits? In the presence of regulations, if you can find a way to be in technical compliance with the regulations even though you still kill of all the wildlife in the river, again why is this bad? Why build something beautiful if it is easier and cheaper to build something ugly that accomplishes the same purposes? And etc., etc.

Steve

No unsportsmanlike conduct, gleeful laughing inclu...

2010-10-22T23:02:46.381-05:00

No unsportsmanlike conduct, gleeful laughing included. It's a great shame of the humanities that they hold nothing as true, even while what they purport to devote their attention to DOES.

In all fairness, however, it's my impression, having hung around humanities types for a number of years, that there are a great many who do hold some things true--and often just those things that should be held true--but that it's inconvenient to talk in those terms. The problem, alas, is that bugaboo of empiricism. It's one thing to say that it's a fact that a bridge built across the SF bay of gum and wire won't do the job it needs to; it's quite another to assert metaphysical truths or to argue from "the law of nature" on moral conduct. That's the mire the humanities find themselves in. And this conversation now enters into the whole sphere of metaphysical grounding, epistemology, etc., something that becomes complicated very quickly.

jon

Jon, I suggested (and then discarded) the idea th...

2010-10-22T22:20:09.878-05:00

Jon,
I suggested (and then discarded) the idea that the reasons for the differences could be historical rather than disciplinary, among other reasons. For example, the differences could also be associated with the different types of people attracted to different fields - engineers aren't generally rebellious or confrontational people, so that may explain a some of the differences between the schools. I think the only concept inherent to the disciplines that IS different is that in the hard sciences and engineering the idea that some things are true and some things are false is foundational. In contrast, what things in the humanities are considered non-negotiable truths (has Pilate's question been answered)?

However, the main point I wanted to make was simply an empirical observation about where hostility toward religion lies in higher education, and to note the contrast identified by First Things between a school like Caltech and its liberal arts counterparts. I'm sure the reason for the contrast is multifaceted and not strictly defined by the disciplinary subject matter. So you may penalize me 15 yards for my unsportsmanlike touchdown dance!

Steve, where to start? Perhaps with the most provo...

2010-10-22T20:32:23.566-05:00

Steve, where to start? Perhaps with the most provocative of the statements. I don't know whether it's the intellectual disciplines that are particularly hostile to Christianity, but it certainly is the humanities. On the basis "science" the humanities ridicule those who believe in such things as the resurrection of the dead. I put "science" in scare quotes only because it's a silly appropriation of science to claim knowledge about something out of one's ken. ("Do the dead rise?" "Dunno. But I ain't ever seen it. So it must not happen. And science says dead is dead.") Scientists are, it seems to me, much more humble about these kinds of claims.

Second, it doesn't help that Christianity is associated with conservativism in the U.S. Generally, because Christians espouse things like smaller gov't, are pro-life, pro-family, and so on, they become a convenient whipping boy for those who don't buy it. The question why there are so few conservatives in the academy is another altogether. But it is most especially true in the humanities and social sciences.

So could Caltech be good for Christians? One could say of a certitude that it can't harm them any more than a humanities department, and maybe and probably even less.

All of these things said, the guises worn by unbelief are many, ranging from the obvious (Foucault) to the subtle (bourgeois life). Both of the examples given CAN, certainly, prompt unbelief.

More anon.

Thanks!

jon

Steve, where to start? Perhaps with the most provo...

2010-10-22T20:32:22.573-05:00

Jon, Speaking as a former college administrator m...

2010-10-22T19:30:38.722-05:00

Jon,

Speaking as a former college administrator myself, I do think that college administrators cannot be criticized for asking "If we build it, will they come?" They do have a responsibility to their institutions to be financially responsible stewards.

I really like the Wittenberg education idea philosophically, but you do have to sell the parents and the students on the idea before you can be ready to implement such an idea. I do think the Ren Mus blog is helpful to get people thinking about whether is another way to approach higher education for Lutherans that to try to become a second- or third tier Harvard wannabe as First Things states, or even a second or third (or fourth) tier state university wannabes. I agree with the First Things editors that this approach is a dead end for a private school.

For an academic, there's nothing quite like co...

2010-10-22T19:20:49.523-05:00

For an academic, there's nothing quite like coming up with evidence to confirm a long-held hypothesis, is there? For years I've heard concerns from conservative Christians about whether it is 'safe' for their children to study science or engineering, assuming that such fields are anti-Christian because of a few noisy scientific materialists like Richard Dawkins. And I've always said that by and large the study of engineering and the applied sciences at least, will reinforce faith, not diminish it. But this has always been purely anecdotal.

Now First Things does a survey (still significantly anecdotal, but broader than just my experiences) and finds that a small, elite, highly selective secular science and engineering school like Caltech can be described as devoted to the pursuit of truth, and is absent hostility to Christianity even though it is not a church school by any means, nor designed to appeal to the religious. Rather First Things finds that it is the small, elite, highly selective secular liberal arts schools that are the institutions that are, in general, the most hostile to religion.

Question: Is that simply a historical accident, or does that reflect the nature of the intellectual disciplines? I believe the latter, though it is certainly not proven.

Nonetheless, please excuse me while I do my victory dance! (OK, so my hypothesis is far from proven, still...)

One more RenMus-relevant quote from Nov 2010 First...

2010-10-22T00:54:11.079-05:00

One more RenMus-relevant quote from Nov 2010 First Things (p.4):

"...we are increasingly coming to see that college must have an identity. The old idea of the multiversity appears more undead than we had thought, and it needs a final stake through its heart. The drift at schools without an identity is now rapid and precise: They all wind up at the same place, second- and third-tier would-be Harvards...Such schools may well be doomed. There isn't all that much point to them...But colleges with an identity and a purpose alive inside them-those are the ones to attend. The choices are almost endless. There are science schools and Great Books schools, art academies and yeshivas..."

Room for a modern Wittenberg U in the mold envisioned on this blog?

Perhaps also relevant is the comment on Valpo: "The administration and some of the faculty are trying hard to undo the school's Lutheran heritage-which is why Valparaiso is on our list of declining schools. Why rush, this late in the game, to become just like everyone else?" (they do note though that Valpo "can offer a supportive environment for their faith").

Check out the November issue of First Things, whic...

2010-10-22T00:30:53.764-05:00

Check out the November issue of First Things, which includes a survey of over 100 colleges and universities and rated by academics, social life (as in conservative moral ethic) and religious atmosphere.

Lutheran schools cited include Concordia University-Wisconsin rated as one of 5 schools "on the rise, filled with excitement" while Valparaiso listed as one of 5 schools "in decline, filled with gloom". St Olaf rates reasonably well in all three categories, though the religious atmosphere is characterized as lukewarm.

A pattern falls out fairly well that the colleges most hostile colleges to religion are the smaller elite private liberal arts schools like Reed, Carleton, Amherst, Williams, etc. Among the Ivy's, Yale is rated the most hostile to religion, Princeton the least.

I also thought the description of Caltech's religious atmosphere was interesting:

"...Cal Tech is not run by postmodern professors who criticize capitalism by day and check their retirement accounts by night. Truth is taken very seriously, and, as a result, the basic, truth-affirming thrust of religious faith is not alien.

"Cal Tech makes ample room for brilliant eccentrics, and even those who think Christianity is bunk aren't likely to hector and harass those who believe. Moreover, a pious student worried about hedonism of American college life has little to fear at Cal Tech, where lab time takes priority over party time. In all likelihood, Cal Tech provides the best undergraduate scientific education in the world, and the scientific culture of truth provides a positive environment."

Though Caltech is not a typical engineering school, the description above is pretty much what I've claimed in the past on this blog and elsewhere is what it is like to be a Christian student (or professor) in a secular engineering school. The First Things issue also seems to support my sense (with no direct experience) that aggressive atheism in higher education derives from the elite liberal arts schools and those trying to mimic them.

Cornelia's link is interesting to look at more...

2010-10-22T00:03:00.257-05:00

Cornelia's link is interesting to look at more closely. The percentages of graduates of a number of private liberal arts colleges who receive science and engineering PhD's can indeed be relatively high at certain schools. For example, ranking #6 by this measure is Carleton College, with about 12 S&E PhD's per 100 graduates. However, Carleton doesn't even make the top 50 in terms of the numbers of PhD's produced. To quote NSF: "The top 50 known U.S. baccalaureate-origin institutions of 1997–2006 S&E doctorate recipients are almost all research institutions with very high research activity, and more than half are public institutions."

So I think you can conclude it is entirely possible to get a PhD in science and (perhaps) engineering after a BS or possibly BA at a liberal arts school (I certainly know some, and have a couple in my research group now) - which I think was Cornelia's point. But I wouldn't use the term "well-represented", however, which to me implies a large fraction of the entire population of S&E PhD's.

I would guess that the numbers of engineering PhDs in this group are rather small - that most of the people in the "S&E" category are primarily in math and the basic sciences, as Jon suggests, not engineering. It is relatively difficult to get into an engineering program with a science degree. One of my friends in engineering grad school was in fact from St Olaf, so again it is possible, but he did have a rough time adjusting to the coursework. I remember on the first day of exams, he left after about using half of he allotted time. The rest of us thought he must be some kind of super genius! However, it turned out when we caught up with him, he had simply given up on the exam, not completed it early.

Dear Cornelia, thanks for this info. To draw on my...

2010-10-20T18:27:30.262-05:00

Dear Cornelia, thanks for this info. To draw on my own experience, both recent and more ancient, St. Olaf College, which for a long time has remained tenaciously "liberal-artsy," was in many individual years and certainly over decades taken as a whole, one of the two or three largest point-sources of math Ph.D.s in the States. Based upon what appears to me to be the continued strength of that dept. in terms of number of faculty, I imagine that may still be the case.

I wonder: what kind of major-depth do you think is required to pursue a legitimate scientific or engineering Ph.D.? In other words, do you think that to enter a good physics dept. at the grad level a person ought to have come from a very deep physics major, or do you think it's possible to do high-quality work in a high-quality grad department without something like specialization in physics? This is not mere idle curiosity. As you can see from a few posts back in late August and early Sept., this matter of "how much science and math" is really something I'd love to hear about.

Thanks! And thanks for your interest in RenMus.

jon

"Liz Reisberg makes a similar point in today’...

2010-10-20T17:53:42.775-05:00

"Liz Reisberg makes a similar point in today’s Inside Higher Ed in an article titled, “If not a world class research university, then perhaps world class liberal arts?” The piece hinges on two arguments. First, world-class research university is coterminous with big bucks; liberal arts education is relatively much less costly. Second, given the tortuous route of a typcial worker’s “career” these days, liberal arts education is poised today as at no other time to be useful."

Graduates of liberal arts colleges are well represented among those obtaining science and engineering Ph.D's according to the National Science Foundation.

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08311/#tab2