ON HIGHER EDUCATION: THE ACADEMIC ENTERPRISE IN AN ERA OF RISING STUDENT CONSUMERISM
BY DAVID RIESMAN TRANSACTION PUBLISHERS 1998 NEW BRUNSWICK, U.S.A 421 PAGES SOFT COVER
The topic of policy is comprehensive and complex. Policy in higher education implies formality and consensus. In this, his third volume for the Carnegie Council’s series of policy studies on higher education, author David Riesman examines microcosms of, detail in higher education policy, offering very specific examples, while weaving in commentary about such broad topics as ethnic groups and social forces.
On Higher Education does not leave the reader with a sense of formality and consensus. While it is possible to make comparisons among similar institutions using variables such as public/private, community/ “traditional,” and liberal/conservative, integrating this work is very difficult. Nonetheless, the breadth of content is what makes this volume worth reading.
The book covers about a twenty-year period from the sixties to the eighties. Aside from the changing demographics of the student body and the various responses from the higher education community, Riesman looks at the evolution of student power and discusses the challenge of sustaining group commitment to a revolution as opposed to acting in one’s own self interests.
According to Riesman, students missed opportunities to wield power, and institutions missed opportunities to enhance the quality of education. The author surmises that in order to maintain the veneer of liberalism and retain students of varied backgrounds, many institutions lowered standards and inflated grades. However, efforts made to counter these trends are not clearly documented.
Riesman seems to place little value on factors that contribute to a person’s college choice. He also implies that college must be central in the student’s life. However, we know that for some non-traditional students, family and job responsibilities often dictate that choice.
And the value of the community college could have been explored in greater depth. Instead, that value seems to be relegated to a lower status. The author says that community colleges foster a “false intellectual confidence” and set students up for failure at four-year schools. His reference to “social penalties attached” to a fear of success by transfer students suggests a preference for limited opportunities.
In addition, an integrated discussion of diminished expectations was missing, as was mention of the positive role community colleges play in serving students who pursue terminal two-year degrees as well as those who continue their education at four-year institutions. These are all examples of what seems to be an underlying focus on student inadequacies. And one is left wishing for more depth of discussion.
Noting that Blacks are not a single ethnic entity, but are separated into subsets of African American, Caribbean, and African students, the author then says that a critical mass of “authentic” Blacks is needed to attest to the liberalism of an institution.
Further, he states that in the sixties, there were well-prepared, qualified Black students who felt that they “suffered” because their degrees were devalued as a result of the grade inflation and degree inflation. Diploma inflation was reportedly the result of pressure to give course credit for remedial work, “first demanded by and on behalf of underprepared Blacks and then by other non-Whites similarly handicapped by family background and the inadequacies of previous schooling.” It, therefore, follows that “unscholarly” Black studies programs were created in otherwise scholarly institutions.
At many institutions, according to the author, Black faculty and staff members were too few to protect themselves from the “pressures of being thought of as go-betweens or representatives or tokens.” And some currently enrolled minority students refused to recruit other minorities because they themselves feel “disoriented” and isolated.
Riesman argues that “the expectation that the whole mindset of a culture would be changed in more than minor ways seems displaced.” While he alludes to a perception of minorities as less capable and therefore limited in their capacity to learn and achieve, he also references examples of what he considers to be true commitments to change — such as “Harvard’s practically zero attrition” and efforts to create a minority university in California.
There are relevant discussions of standardized testing, institutional backlash against faculty, the roles of credentialing organizations, federal government programs, and student/institution fit. In fact, the author seems to hope that his work will be used to predict “fit” and thus maximize the impact of college on the life of the student.
By suggesting that students have power in the marketplace, Riesman also implies that the individual is more influential than the institution. The organization of this book reflects a multifaceted picture of educational policies that impact on student choice.
COPYRIGHT 1998 Cox, Matthews & Associates
© Copyright 2005 by DiverseEducation.com
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment
Name *
Email *
Website
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.