Discussion Manual for the History of Higher Education

Document Sample
Discussion Manual for the History of Higher Education Powered By Docstoc
					          Edward G. Rozycki, Ed. D.

Discussion Manual
for the




History of
Higher EducationFALL 2009 ELECTRONIC VERSION




                 P.O. Box 94, Oreland PA, 19075
                    www.newfoundations.com
Discussion Manual: History of Higher Education

Edward G. Rozycki
Widener University




                      NewFoundations Press
                          P.O. Box 94
                       Oreland, PA 19075
                     www.newfoundations.com




                                              Page 2
Fall Release 2009

ISBN 1-929463-09-X
©2003 Gary K. Clabaugh & Edward G. Rozycki

All rights reserved. No part of this publication can be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owners.




                                                                                     Page 3
CONTENTS
YOUR IMAGE OF UNIVERSITY LIFE: A COURSE PREQUIZ ............................................................ 6
REASONING ABOUT HISTORICAL MATTERS ................................................................................ 8
CAUSAL EXPLANATION IN HISTORIOGRAPHY ........................................................................... 11
CAUSAL ANALYSIS: AN EXERCISE WITH HISTORICAL EXAMPLES ............................................. 13
ANALYZING CONTROVERSY: AN OVERVIEW OF A PROCEDURE .............................................. 14
  Basic Approaches In Analyzing Disagreements .......................................................... 14
  Is the Dispute Fundamental? ........................................................................................ 15
  Are the Apparent Parties to the Dispute Really in Disagreement?............................... 15
  Are There Problems of Understanding? ....................................................................... 16
  Is There Factual Agreement?........................................................................................ 17
  Is There Agreement on Values? ................................................................................... 17
  Are There Meta-Problems? .......................................................................................... 18
  Important Points to Hold in Mind................................................................................. 18
HISTORY & CONTROVERSY IN HIGHER EDUCATION ................................................................ 19
THE FINAL PAPER ....................................................................................................................... 20
THE CATHEDRAL OF LEARNING ................................................................................................. 21
COLLEGE PRIORITIES MATRIX .................................................................................................. 22
COLLEGE COLORS ...................................................................................................................... 23
COLLINS ON CURRICULUM GOALS THROUGH HISTORY ........................................................... 24
COMPARING COLLEGES THROUGH TIME .................................................................................. 25
  An organizing table ...................................................................................................... 25
COMPARING CAMPUS CULTURES THROUGH TIME ................................................................... 26
WHAT ARE THE CONNECTIONS? ................................................................................................ 27
CONTRASTING MODELS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE INSTITUTION ........................................ 28
ELEMENTS OF CURRICULAR RATIONALE IN HISTORICAL CURRICULUM TYPES .................... 29
THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM CIRCA 1800................................................................................. 30
KNUTE ROCKNE FILM ANALYSIS SHEET ................................................................................... 31
STUDENT PRINCE FILM ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 32
GAUDEAMUS IGITUR ................................................................................................................... 33
HISTORICAL RESEARCH EXERCISE ............................................................................................ 34
HYPOTHESIZING EXERCISE A .................................................................................................... 35
HYPOTHESIZING EXERCISE B..................................................................................................... 36
HOW TO HYPOTHESIZE ............................................................................................................... 37
KNOWLEDGE - GOOD OR EVIL, OR …?...................................................................................... 38
MISSION VS. FUNCTION: CONSTRAINING ASPIRATION .............................................................. 40
MISSION STATEMENT EXERCISES 1 ........................................................................................... 44
  Mission Statement Samples.......................................................................................... 44
  Identify the Source Set 1 .............................................................................................. 47
MISSION STATEMENT EXERCISES 2 ........................................................................................... 48
  Mission Statement Samples.......................................................................................... 48
  Identify the Source Set 2 .............................................................................................. 50
MISSION STATEMENT EXERCISES 3 ........................................................................................... 51

                                                                                                                      Page 4
  Mission Statement Samples.......................................................................................... 51
  Identify the Source Set 3 .............................................................................................. 53
MISSION STATEMENT EXERCISES 4 ........................................................................................... 54
  Mission Statement Samples.......................................................................................... 54
  Identify the Source Set 4 .............................................................................................. 56
PRACTICE COMPREHENSIVE QUESTION .................................................................................... 57
PRESENTATION EVALUATION SHEET ......................................................................................... 58
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND GROUPS ......................................................................................... 59
NOTES ON SCHOLARLY WRITING............................................................................................... 60
  I. Plagiarism.................................................................................................................. 60
  II. Justification and Authority....................................................................................... 60
  III. “Chaining” is not narrative ..................................................................................... 60
  IV. Editing and Revising .............................................................................................. 60
EDUCATION & IMMIGRATION TIMELINE: LECTURE NOTES .................................................... 61
PARALLEL TIME LINES & INTERACTIONS ................................................................................. 64
PARALLEL TIME LINES & INTERACTIONS EXAMPLE ................................................................ 65
HISTORY OF COLLEGE X (CX) ASSIGNMENT GUIDE SHEET .................................................... 66
VESEY ON THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: AN EXERCISE................................ 67
WIDENER UNIVERSITY MISSION STATEMENT ........................................................................... 68
INDEX ........................................................................................................................................... 69




                                                                                                                               Page 5
YOUR IMAGE OF UNIVERSITY LIFE: A COURSE
PREQUIZ
Use the following scale to evaluate the statements below.:
                 True: 1; Probably True: 2; Don't Know: 3; Probably False: 4; False: 5.
Statement                                      T        PT          ?          PF           F
                                               1         2        3          4          5
1. American Universities to a great
extent carry on traditions begun in
Medieval European universities.                1         2        3         4          5

2. University study has generally meant
theoretical pursuit.
                                               1         2        3         4          5
3. Universities are sheltered, quiet
places.
                                               1         2        3         4          5
4. By and large, colleges and universities
have assumed the seriousness of their
students, even if there is some “youthful
playing around.”                               1         2        3         4          5

5. Higher education has traditionally
pursued the expansion of knowledge.
                                               1         2        3         4          5
6. Religion has almost always played an
important role in the structure of
curriculum in higher education.                1         2        3         4          5
7. The British were the strongest
influence on the structure and
governance of American higher
education.                                     1         2        3         4          5

8. The height of violence on American
college campuses was reached during the
years of the Vietnam War.                      1         2        3         4          5
9. Fraternities have been part-and-parcel
of college and university life for
centuries.                                     1         2        3         4          5

10. Early American colleges were White,
all male bastions.
                                               1         2        3         4          5
11. Throughout American history
colleges have generally viewed as
playgrounds for the idle rich.                 1         2        3         4          5




                                                                                  Page 6
12. School colors is a tradition that
reaches back into early American
history, if not earlier.                   1   2   3   4       5
13. Sports have always been an
important part of American college life.
                                           1   2   3   4       5
14. Leadership and study of the
humanities have long been associated in
American colleges.                         1   2   3   4       5

15. Only recently colleges and
universities have had to provide special
preparatory training to underprepared
students.                                  1   2   3   4       5

16. American colleges and universities
have always been preoccupied with
financial problems.                        1   2   3   4       5
17. The physical punishment of students
has been rigorously excluded from
higher education.                          1   2   3   4       5

18. Private universities, unlike public
universities, could not rely on
governmental funds for support, except
for defense contracting.                   1   2   3   4       5

19. Research, rather than teaching, is
what faculty in most colleges and
universities are judged by for promotion
and tenure.                                1   2   3   4       5

20. Football has undermined the
academic pursuits of most colleges and
lowered their esteem in the eyes of the
general public.                            1   2   3   4       5




                                                           Page 7
REASONING ABOUT HISTORICAL MATTERS
Edward G. Rozycki, Ed. D.


THE ARGUMENT.
Reasoning has both a general and a particular aspect. Reasoning about historical events, rather than,
say, economics, can be understood to be not so much a matter of form as of content. To illustrate the
general form of a reasoning interaction we will use the model developed by Stephen Toulmin. It
specifies the parts of an argument in a dialogic encounter. These are:


        a. The Claim (Proposal) Statement
                                                         E+                                     (Q) C
                (with Qualifiers): C, Q.
        b. Evidence (Data) supporting Claim,                           W+
                E.
        c. Warrant(s) connecting evidence to             B+                                       R-
               claim, W.
        d. Backing (if needed) for warrants,
               B.
        e. Rebuttal(s), R.

Historical reasoning uses what historians recognize as the appropriate kind of evidence, warrant and
backing and is subject to the appropriate kind of rebuttal. Consider the following dialogue between
John and Sam -- the parts are labeled in brackets:
        John: Most (Q) university presidents during the 19th Century were independently
               wealthy. [C]
        Sam: Why do you think that?
        John: In between presidential positions, most [Q] of them did not practice other
                occupations [E]. Either you are independently wealthy or you work for a
                living [W].
        And their style of living was far beyond that of the average college professor [B].
        Sam: Maybe they lived off their savings from earlier appointments as president [R].

Now, each item might be questioned as to whether or not it is true. A false component will undermine
an argument. However, it may not make the form of reasoning less valid. It is very important to
distinguish between whether an argument is
        a. valid; or
        b. sound.
Valid arguments have the appropriate form. Sound arguments are valid arguments that contain no
falsehoods. An argument may be valid and unsound; or, valid and sound; or, invalid. We will see that
if the argument is invalid, it does not matter that it is composed of truths.




                                                                                   Page 8
THE SYLLOGISM.
This distinction is easiest to see if we strip Toulmin’s model down to its more classical form, called a
syllogism.A syllogism strips the inner argument out of context and reduces it to


                  1. A major premise (served by the Warrant)
                  2. A minor premise (served by the Evidence) and
                  3. A conclusion (served by the Claim)
John’s argument when converted into the form of a syllogism is thus:
         Major Premise: In the 19th Century a person was either independently wealthy, or
                worked for a living.
         Minor Premise: Most ex-college presidents did not work for a living. Therefore,
         Conclusion: Most ex-college presidents were independently wealthy.
A clearly unsound argument that is valid is this:
         1) Most university presidents in the 20th Century were part-time circus clowns, (C),
                 since they all liked to eat corned beef (E). Only circus clowns liked to eat
                 corned beef in those years (W).

Another valid but unsound argument is this:


         2) 17th Century American college students either belonged to a fraternity, or they
                 were members of the laboring classes. Samuel Adams was not a member of
                 the laboring classes, so he must have belonged to a fraternity.
But the other side of this is that an argument may be composed entirely of facts (or what is accepted
as fact) and still be invalid. Consider this example:


         3) George Washington was elected the first American president since he had never
                visited China. No one who had visited China during the 18th Century was
                ever elected President of the United States.

Another example is this:


         4) Pineapples were not eaten in colonial British frontier settlements. We have no
                 evidence that Iroquois tribespeople during the 18th Century ate pineapples.
                 Consequently, we can deduce that Iroquois tribespeople did not live in
                 British frontier settlements.

The Enthymeme.
One last distinction. Sometimes a premise goes unspoken. A truncated syllogism is called an
enthymeme. So we might find argument 4 above stated merely as:


         Iroquois tribespeople did not live in British frontier settlements, since we have no
                 evidence that they ate pineapples.



                                                                                     Page 9
What is left out is the connection between (the warrant or major premise) living in British frontier
settlements, and being a member of the Iroquois.

Exercises: for each of the discussions or paragraphs below, identify 1) the parts of the argument using
Toulmin’s model and 2) the syllogism (or enthymeme) embedded in it.

1. ___
         Sam: Early American colleges must have lived perpetually on the verge of
                bankruptcy.
         Sharon: Some were well endowed.
         Sam: Yes, but most couldn’t get either enough students or tuitions.

2. In an atmosphere of unbridled hope for the future and a public committed to the belief in progress,
college founding committees would not restrain their ambitions within considerations of finance and
risk. So it was that hundreds of ill-fated colleges were established in antebellum 19th Century
America.

3. ___
         Sam: Early American colleges were violent places. Just consider the Harvard food
                riots.
         Sharon: Yes, particularly since such things didn’t make the newspapers.
         Sam: What can you expect when the students were not permitted to have electives?


4. The German model of the university, de-emphasizing teaching and exaggerating scholarship,
would eventually generate a form of highly articulated professionalism among the faculty that could
not be cost-effective in promoting teaching excellence as it would be conceived of in the later 20th
Century. It is the kiss of death at many universities in the United States for an untenured professor to
receive a MacArthur award for excellence in teaching.

5. ___
         Sam: Selling future college tuitions at present discount is a bad practice. Look at
                how many colleges lost money on the practice during the 1800’s.
         Sharon: But there weren’t so many opportunities for investment back then.
         Sam: Can investments keep up with growth of costs?




                                                                                    Page 10
CAUSAL EXPLANATION IN HISTORIOGRAPHY
Part A.
         Historiography has its aesthetic dimension. Perhaps this is the most important feature of it for
the professional historian. For practitioners in other disciplines, however, more burning issues are
“What does history teach us? What direction can it give our practice?”
          To use history as a guide, one must take care to discriminate the varieties of locution which
function as a kind of explanation from those that do not. In addition, one must take care to discern
different kinds of explanation, because they make substantial difference in what we would count as
evidence in establishing or disconfirming them as explanations.
          A useful set of distinctions was proposed by Aristotle. These distinctions are still viable
today, especially because historiography is normally done in a colloquial, rather than a constrained
“scientific” style.
            The chart below presents these distinctions.


   Aristo-    Which                      Colloquial Example                       Historiographical Examples
telean Type  means?
Final Cause Purpose, or        Why is a nail sharp? To penetrate wood     Rudolph, 3,¶2: Founding of colonial colleges
            end                which it is designed to hold together.     done intentionally, not by accident.
Formal      Essence or         Why are organizations resistant to         Rudolph 17¶2: Yale’s tenacity leads to
Cause       nature             change? They are systems which tend to     expulsion of students for attending a summer
                               equlibrium.                                revival meeting.
Material         That of       Why does a ball bounce? It’s made of       Rudolph 20¶3: Costs keep students away.
Cause            which it is   rubber, which is elastic.
                 made.
Efficient        That by       How did the floor get wet? Harry spilled Rudolph 52¶2: Bowdoin founded because
Cause            which it      his drink.                               Cambridge too far away.
                 comes into    (Scientific example: Manipulation of
                 being         variable X is followed by correlative
                               changes in variable Y.)


Note that the same explanation might invoke several categories of cause. For example,

Why is the floor wet?
Harry dropped an ice cube on it.            Harry’s action is (part of) an efficient cause.
                                            The material cause is mentioned, i.e. the cube is made of ice.
So what?
The room is 70 degrees.                     Another factor contributing to efficient cause.
So what?
Ice melts above 32 degrees.                 Formal cause, i.e. it is the nature of ice to behave in certain ways under
                                            certain conditions.

Part B:
         Try to identify the varieties of causal explanation embedded in the following quote from
Frederick Ruldolph’s The American College and University 49¶1:




                                                                                      Page 11
           In the founding of colleges, reason could not combat the romantic belief in endless
             progress.

Part C:
Evalute these paragraphs from Frederick Rudolph’s The American College & University. Write out
the causal claim as it is presented there. Identify what kind of causal model is involved.

6¶3 (page 6, paragraph 3): And so it was that “the two cardinal principles of English Puritanism which
most profoundly affected the social development of New England and the United States were not
religious tenets, but educational ideals: a learned clergy, and a lettered people.”




59¶3: The notion that a college should serve society through the lives of dedicated graduates was not
new. … As Americans lost their sense of society and substituted for it a reckless individualism, there
was less a demand on the colleges to produce dedicated leaders…




24¶2: …if the immediate ancestor of the American colonial college was the English university, the
lineage was ancient. The American college was also conceived as a descendant of the schools of
Hebrew prophets. Not until the administration of President John Leverett, in the first quarter of the
eighteenth century, did a narrowing view of the world dictate that graduates of Harvard be known as
“sons of Harvard.” Until then, the antecedents had been stressed , and the Sons of Harvard had been
known as the Sons of the Prophets. And while there may in fact be no important distinction, the more
provincial appellation did have the effect of beclouding the ancient heritage.




49¶2: It was no accident that two state colleges of Ohio were placed in towns named Oxford and
Athens, for from both the New World had taken the torch of learning.




                                                                                  Page 12
CAUSAL ANALYSIS: AN EXERCISE WITH
HISTORICAL EXAMPLES
         One problem with informal analyses of cause is that what we might in one situation
designate as “the” cause of an outcome of interest may have more to do with our interest than with a
demonstrable regularity between two variables.
          We might, for example, explain our car’s difficulty starting as being caused by our
negligence in leaving the lights on while the engine wasn’t running. But just as useful -- and less
embarrasing -- might be the explanation, “the car won’t start easily because the battery’s weak.”
However, even this explanation assumes that certain other “background” conditions obtain, e.g. the
battery connections are not corroded, the fuses are good, etc. Note that these “background” conditions
are just as directly related to the ease with which our car starts as the strength of the battery. It is the
focus of our attention that decides what is a “primary cause” and what is a “background condition.”
Exercise: For the causal hypothesis given below, identify other “background conditions” that are
assumed “normal.” Identify variables. Which are most linearly related to the “effect” under
discussion?

                                                                                              Variables (from
                 Hypothesis                          “Background” Conditions
                                                                                                hypothesis)
                                                a. no shorted or broken circuits
                                                b. power is coming into house?
                                                                                        a. condition of bulb
1. The hall light won’t go on because the       c. switch functions
                                                                                        b. illumination from bulb
bulb is blown.                                  d. bulb properly screwed into
                                                socket, etc.

2. In some cases no apparent disability set
off the college rebel. He was simply an
outsider who wanted to be inside. To
become a rebel required ambition.
(Horowitz, 155:2)


3. The words and deeds of some college
presidents engaged in the debate over
college life reshaped the attitudes of some
undergraduates. (H, 114:3)



4. Strategies for wresting high marks from
their professors determined how
undergraduates acted in class and how they
approached study. (H, 221:2)

5. As many young people in college began
to respond to new messages that encouraged
them to reject the suppression of their
impulses and desires, style became the
symbolic code that identified changes in
consciousness. (H, 228:2)


                                                                                      Page 13
ANALYZING CONTROVERSY: AN OVERVIEW OF A
PROCEDURE
Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray, “Oh Lord, help him so that truth may flow from
his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if it be on his side,
I may follow him.
                                                                                     ----- al-Shafi’i (767-
                                                                                 820)
                                                                                     Founder of Sufi
                                                                                 school of law

               Is affirmative action racism, or not? Do women have a right to an abortion, or
          don’t they? Such controversies often pressure us to make a simple choice: taking
          one side or the other. This should not be done hastily. It is too easy to fall into a
          conflict, rather than to look for points of reconciliation. Disagreement may rest on
          misunderstandings that can be reconciled. People who appear to be disagreeing may
          just be focusing on different aspects of an issue. But there are other disputes that
          may never be settled. And it is important to know which is which.


          We live in a storm of disagreement. On TV, in the newspapers, at public meetings, in private
bull sessions, contrary opinions clash incessantly.
          • Should physicians assist a terminally ill person's suicide?
          • Are schools appropriate distribution points for condoms?
          • Is homosexuality incompatible with military service?
          • Should marijuana be legalized?
          • Should immigration be restricted?
What are we to make of the controversy that surrounds us? How much of it involves real disputes?
Which arguments can be settled? Whose authority should we accept? Which expert is trustworthy?
Does one side make more sense than the other? Of course, everyone has the “right” to an opinion, so
we say. But what about developing informed opinion worthy of an educated person? That is what this
book is about.

BASIC APPROACHES IN ANALYZING DISAGREEMENTS
This text contains a range of specific techniques for analyzing controversies. Sometimes, however,
overviews are essential. Here is a way of developing such an overview of a controversy that works
well for us.
         • First, state what you think the dispute is. (The most fundamental disputes are based on a
              contradiction. Such contradictions can always be formulated as a yes or no question.)
         • Second, ask are there really parties to such a yes-no disagreement? Without such
              opposition there is no dispute.)
         • Third, ask is the dispute is clouded by problems of understanding? If disputants don't
              share common understandings they are talking past each other. Their dispute may be a
              “mere” matter of words.
         • Fourth, ask do the opponents agree on what the facts are.? If not, then they are not going
              to agree on what counts as a solution.



                                                                                              Page 14
         •   Fifth, ask do the disputants agree on what is desirable? ? If not, the dispute will persist
             unless the disputants agree to settle their differences for the sake of something more
             important to them.
    Let's look at these steps individually.

IS THE DISPUTE FUNDAMENTAL?
A dispute is fundamental to the extent it is unavoidably based on either-or thinking. Choosing one
option undermines the possibility of choosing the other. Many disputes are not fundamental in this
sense, because both alternatives can be gotten with a little compromise and planning.
 For example, you may argue with a friend over where to go to eat. You want Italian food; your friend
wants Chinese. What makes it an either-or situation? Lack of time, lack of money? Can you do both,
say, by going to a food court in a mall? Can you agree to trade off? Could you do Italian for lunch and
Chinese for dinner? If you can work it out so that both can be satisfied, the dispute need not continue.
It is not fundamental.
The following choices generate disputes, but are not fundamental. Can you see how a compromise
could be reached so that both options are made available?:
a. Do you want the red Maserati or the blue Porsche?
b. Should we visit the New York or Paris?
c. Do you want more free time or more salary?
Remember, the most fundamental disputes can always be formulated as a yes-or-no question, that is,
as a question which can be answered yes or no. They are based on:
         • a physical impossibility or
         • logical contradiction .
You can’t both be in Paris and in New York at noon on June 3rd, 2010. This is a “physical”
impossibility. So a dispute over whether a certain individual should be in Paris or New York at that
time is fundamental. A dispute concerning whether or not Michael Jordan is the tallest player in the
NBA is based on a logical contradiction. He cannot both be the tallest, and not be the tallest.
The following questions reflect fundamental disputes. Can you tell whether they are based on
“physical” impossibility or logical contradiction (or both) ?:
d. Is the Porsche what you should buy, since you have only enough money for one car?
e. Rather than admitting applicants selectively, should colleges let in anyone with a high school
    diploma?
f. Should we give mandatory life sentences to third-time offenders, no matter what the crime?
g. Should illegal immigrants be deported?

ARE THE APPARENT PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE REALLY IN
DISAGREEMENT?
The next step in our analysis is extremely important; find out whether the parties in apparent
disagreement would actually take opposite sides if their dispute is reduced to a yes-no question. This
may require finding out more about what they have said or written. It could turn out that the persons
whose positions you are researching don’t really disagree with one another. If you do,
congratulations! Your analysis is over.
If they seem to be on opposite sides check to see whether their positions can be reconciled.
Remember, a fundamental dispute will rest on a physical or logical impossibility. If reconciliation is
possible, yet the controversy persists, the dispute may be serving some other purpose. For instance, it
may be an expression of a traditional rivalry, a pretext for aggression or a ploy to create a memorable
event. If you decide that is what is going on, your analysis of the dispute is done.

                                                                                     Page 15
!! WATCH OUT FOR THIS !!
    Expressive Disputes. Some disputes exist merely to attract attention. Such "disputes"
often turn out to be things like expressions of a traditional rivalry, media events or
advertising ploys. Consider the following examples:
    • Expression of a traditional rivalry: “Who can give the Nation the leadership it
needs? The Democratic Party!“ “No, the Republican Party!”
    • A media event: "On today's show: Should Moms make out with their daughter's
boyfriends?"
    • Advertising Ploy (for Miller Lite): “Less filling!” “No, great taste!”


Realize that detailed dispute analyses takes much time and research. But, if what you are concerned
about is whether you should stay out of it altogether, you can often find out with a short analysis. A
short analysis would look to find any of the following problems:
         1. Problems of understanding: the disputants misunderstand each other; this make their
              dispute irresolvable until these problems are settled.
         2. Problems of fact: the disputants do not share common beliefs as to what the facts are, or
              what are the authoritative sources of the facts. Again, until this problem can be resolved,
              the dispute cannot.
         3. Problems of value: the disputants do not share common values, or, if they do, they have
              different priorities. This makes their dispute irresolvable.
If you turn up any of these problems and don’t have the time for further research to see if they can be
resolved, then the wise decision is not to commit yourself to one side or the other, if you can avoid it.
The following sections give specifics on each of the problem types you may encounter during your
analysis. Other chapters further develop these dimensions.

ARE THERE PROBLEMS OF UNDERSTANDING?
         Do not assume that because antagonists use the same words, they are talking about the same
things. Opponents may unknowingly assign different meanings to key terms. Consider people arguing
whether the law is too soft on criminals? Focusing on meaning suggests the following questions:
         What do those debating mean by “the law?” Is one disputant referring to the criminal code
             while another includes the judiciary, the police, or something else?
         What do the antagonists mean by “soft”? Does one antagonist assume that “softness”
             means agreeing to provide prisoners with special diets or weight lifting facilities? Is the
             other thinking that it is "soft" to give convicts early parole for good behavior?
         What do the opponents mean by “criminals”? Is one talking about convicted felons, while
             the other also includes persons accused, but not convicted?
         When disputants do not specifically say what they think terms mean, lack of common
agreement is more difficult to detect . We can, however, uncover this kind of disagreement by looking
carefully at how each antagonist uses the terms.
         Unless there is mutual agreement on the meaning of key terms , the dispute will probably not
be resolved. Why? Because, although they are unaware of it, opponents are not even discussing the
same issues.
         Here are some indicators that problems of understanding are crucial to the dispute:
         • Different parties to the dispute offer conflicting ways of characterizing the “same”
             thing. For example,. “The Law is too soft; police don’t even arrest panhandlers!” “No,
             the Law is too harsh; there is a mandatory six month sentence for panhandling!”


                                                                                     Page 16
         •    Disputants complain that their opponents don’t “really understand” what is at
              issue.
         •    Disputants use the term, “really” or “true” to characterize what they’re proposing.
              For example, “The true Law is found in the law books.” Or, “Law is really enforcement
              practices.”
         •    The argument remains at the theoretical level; disputants avoid giving practical
              examples.
         •    Questions of authority of the source of definitions arise. For example, “Do you think
              the Oxford English Dictionary is appropriate here?”
        Problems of understanding are fundamental impediments. If your analysis turns up such
problems, you can stop right there. The very existence of the dispute is in question. Without common
understandings of the terms, the disputants cannot even be said to be contradicting each other.
         On the other hand, if we judge that there is common understanding of the critical terms of the
dispute, we can go on, if we wish, to see if the dispute arises from problems of fact.

IS THERE FACTUAL AGREEMENT?
         We can easily imagine one person arguing that the law is too soft on criminals only to have
another say, "If you knew the facts, you wouldn't say that." Disputes often involve disagreements
about facts.
          It is not necessary to know the facts in order to argue. But it is important in order to argue
intelligently. To decide if the law is really "soft" on criminals, for instance, would require knowledge
of such facts as: the average length of sentence imposed upon those convicted of various crimes;
conditions in federal, state and local prisons; the rights guaranteed to inmates in these various prisons,
the proportion of sentences actually served; punishment for similar crimes in other societies; and so
forth.
         Fact finding takes time and effort. That is one reason some prefer to proceed without them
while others attend only to those that fit their preconceptions.
         Here are some indicators that issues of fact are crucial to the dispute:
         • Parties to the dispute make conflicting statements about the same thing. For
             example, “The getaway car was a blue Ford.” “No, it was a blue Buick.”
         • Parties to the dispute complain that their opponents are misinformed. For example,
             “He doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”
         • A secondary dispute develops about the reliability of the source of facts. For
             example, “You can’t trust that almanac; use the Encyclopedia Britannica!”
         •    Disputants call their opponents “ignorant,” “stupid” or "uninformed."
To review: even though there may be no problems of understanding, disputes can arise from problems
of fact. A dispute may remain irresolvable because we cannot settle these problems of fact. Moral
disputes, particularly, generate irresolvable controversies because they often rest on questions of
authority such as “Who or what is to determine right and wrong?”

IS THERE AGREEMENT ON VALUES?
         Even where there is agreement on the meanings of important terms, and also agreement on
what the facts are, there may be disagreement on values and their relative priority.
          Let's briefly return to those persons disputing "the law is too soft on criminals." Suppose they
agree on what key terms like "soft" mean, and suppose they also agree regarding: the average length
of sentence for felons convicted of violent crimes; what proportion of these sentences are actually
served; conditions in federal, state and local prisons; and so on. They may still disagree on whether or
not the law is "too soft on criminals" if what they value is different.

                                                                                     Page 17
        Valuing retribution some people might regard the facts about American crime and
punishment as evidence of spineless permissiveness. Others valuing rehabilitation may interpret the
same facts as evidence of misguided cruelty that will only produce more vicious criminals.
         Here are some possible indicators that issues of value are crucial to the dispute.
         • The dispute persists even though there does not seem to be a dispute about
             understanding or facts. (If time permits, these possibilities should be brought up in
             advance of inquiring into the possibility of value disputes.)
         • Parties to the dispute complain that their opponents have the wrong attitude. For
             example, “I don’t see why you think good behavior in prison should reduce time
             served!”
         • Disputants tend to see their opponents as perverse rather than as just misinformed.
             “Of course, the welfare queens and the tax-and-spenders are against my proposal!”
          Controversies rooted in value differences may only be resolvable if the disputants “agree to
disagree". This is not as unusual as it sounds. People in many countries disagree as to what the one
true religion is, for instance, and yet do not quarrel. Other things are thought to be more important.

ARE THERE META-PROBLEMS?
        Sometimes disputes are troubled by what might be called meta or background problems.
Some of the most important of these are:
        • logical errors
        • consensus issues
        • assumptions about the nature of society
        • hidden agendas
         There are no obvious indicators of these meta-problems for a person unfamiliar with what we
present in the chapters dealing with them. Prior to reading those chapters the best you can do is to
keep in mind that arguments may be troubled by problems of logic, consensus and social theory. And
particularly, remember there may be hidden agendas that keep controversies boiling.

IMPORTANT POINTS TO HOLD IN MIND
        Controversies should be critically evaluated before you decide to take sides. There are four
preliminary steps to such an evaluation.
        • First, ask whether the disputants agree on common meanings for critical terms. Without
             such agreement, they are "talking past each other."
        • Next ask whether the opponents agree on what the facts are. At bottom, factual disputes
             cannot be settled without recognizing a common authority as a source of fact.
        • Third, ask if those in dispute agree on what is desirable? Disputes about values cannot
             be settled without one side changing its values; or by both sides overlooking the values
             clash for the sake of a higher common priority.
        • Finally, consider that the argument might be confounded by meta-problems.
          Rather than rushing to take sides in an argument, use this process to start to examine what is
at issue and for whom it is an issue. Recognize, too, that disputes often involve a combination of the
kinds of problems described above.




                                                                                    Page 18
     HISTORY & CONTROVERSY IN HIGHER
     EDUCATION
I.      As a possible term paper select an issue from the list below or, with the permission of the
       instructor, another higher education issue you believe is pertinent.

         The Purposes of Higher Education                        Private vs Public
         Governance of the College, University                   Religious vs Secular
         Access to HE                                            The Place of Professional Studies
         Faculty Tenure                                          The Place of the Liberal Arts
         Funding Sources                                         Student Rights
         The Extracurriculum                                     The University and Industry
         Town & Gown                                             The University and Government
         Physical Structure                                      University Culture
         Curricular Structure                                    Science at the University
         The College and the Military                            The Professionalization of Administration


     II. Developing the initial draft of your Major Paper. (Max 10 pages)
         A. Look up a present controversy relating to an issue.
         B. Review that controversy. (Give citations)
         C. Analyze the controversy using the procedure presented in Analyzing Controversy in this
            workbook.
         D. Give parallel examples and historical background from Rudolph and/or Horowitz, etc. (Give
            citations)
         E. Select a date for distribution of copies to class members. Use Chicago MOS. See Section IV
            below.

     III. Preparing a Critique of a classmate's Major Paper (Max: 4 pages)
         A. Analyze the controversy given in the paper using distinctions presented in class. Cite
            fallacies, errors, oversights, etc.
         B. Use examples and historical background from Rudolph and/or Levin to support your
            criticisms.
         C. Suggest how paper could be improved. Cite strong points of paper.
         D. Put only your ID code on the paper.
         E. Prepare two copies. One for the professor; one, for the writer criticised.

     IV. Preparing your presentation (Maximum reading time: 30 minutes)
         You will read the initial draft of your Major Paper. If it is too long, shorten it. If it is boring, liven
            it up. Be prepared to publicly respond to the criticisms of your paper.

     V. Preparing the final version of your Major Paper (Max: 15 pages)
         Incorporate material from at least five other relevant articles into your final draft. (Give citations)
         Incorporate sustainable criticisms into your final version, or adjust it accordingly.



                                                                                             Page 19
THE FINAL PAPER
1.   Your final paper is due at the time of the next to last class.
2.   It will not be accepted unless you have handed in a rough draft at least one month in advance
     of the last class.
     a.   Students who have not presented by the time the rough draft is due, need only incorporate as
          many of the critiques as they have received by that time.
     b.   This suggests that you should get your presentation paper finished and handed out as soon as
          possible.
3.   Your rough draft will consist of your presented paper with additions and modifications from the
     critiques you have received from your classmates and instructor.
4.   Your final paper will contain any changes the instructor suggests in reviewing your rough draft
5.   Your rough draft will have the following form:
     a.   an abstract (one page)
     b.   an outline (one page)
     c.   the text
     d.   the references
     e.   total pages 12 --20
6.   Your final paper will have the same form as your rough draft.



                     Presentation Paper


                                                          Classmate Critiques




                                                          Instructor Critique


                     Rough Draft




                                                            Instructor Critique




                     Final Paper




                                                                                  Page 20
                                    THE CATHEDRAL OF LEARNING
                                    Originally located in the downtown section of Pittsburgh, the
                                    University bought an outlying hillside pasture in 1907 when a
                                    large section of property in Oakland was subdivided. The original
                                    plans were to build the University along the top of the steep hill
                                    where Pennsylvania Hall (originally known as State Hall) is now
                                    located. But Chancellor John Bowman led a vigorous campaign to
                                    build the Cathedral of Learning at its present location, which has
                                    firmly anchored the University on the lower campus.
                                         Seventeen thousand men and women and 97,000 school
                                    children, along with businesses, corporations, and industries joined
                                    the campaign to raise $10 million to build the Cathedral. Many
                                    Pittsburgh families today have certificates given to the school
                                    children who each contributed ten cents "to the building fund of
                                    the University and ... (were) hereby admitted to the fellowship of
                                    the builders of the Cathedral of Learning."
                                          In 1925, Chancellor Bowman said he had envisioned a
                                     Cathedral that would symbolize both power and achievement,
                                     "catching the spiritual, driving and courageous stuff that make
                                     Pittsburgh." The building would, in Bowman's eyes, "rise 500 feet
                                     or more above the grass; to rise and to express by parallel lines and
                                     sixty degree arches the heart and soul of education. Courage and
                                     spirituality-stones could be made to express such values of
character. Parallel lines going up and up-they would express courage, fearlessness. By lines, arches,
and great height, the building, with open space all around, would suggest, by its outside, the character
that ought to be in an educated man. The building, perfect in all details of material and of design,
would be a symbol of life on the campus. It would tell Pittsburgh every day of these values. It would
unify Pittsburgh into a community conscious of its character."
    Ground was broken in 1926, and in 1935 the first classes were held in the unfinished building.
The Cathedral, designed by architect Charles Z. Klauder, "to be the meeting of the modern skyscraper
and the medieval cathedral," was named a historic landmark in 1976 and is considered the largest
monument of Gothic revival in America.
    Founded on solid rock 60 feet below the ground, the Cathedral is faced with 165,000 blocks of
Indiana limestone on the exterior walls. At 42 stories (535 feet), it is one of the tallest academic
buildings in the world.


(from a brochure published by the University of Pittsburgh, 1996)




                                                                                    Page 21
     COLLEGE PRIORITIES MATRIX

     Rank each statement completion (down in column with choices a, b and c) from 1 (worst)
     to 5 (best). Sum your preferences across each row to the appropriate cell on the right.


      I. The best colleges insist IV. Most importantly,      VII. Above all, the
      on …                        college codes must …       professoriate should …          a.   b.   c.
a.
      high moral standards         promote morals            be role models
                               support academic
b.    measurable outcomes                                    be skilled instructors
                               achievement
      participation by all in  treat competing interests     accommodate individual
c.
      decision making          equitably                     and cultural differences
      II. Undesirable behavior V. The most serious           VIII. Above all, the
      is that which…           college deficiency is …       curriculum should…
a.
      is immoral                 failing to teach values     promote ethical behavior
b.                               failing to instruct
      impedes learning                                       pursue clear objectives
                                 effectively
c.                               neglecting individual and
      violates other’s rights                                respect varied interests
                                 cultural difference
                                 VI. A professor’s           IX. Teaching is most
      III. Ultimately, policy
                                 success is best             substantially helping to
      must be based on…
                                 measured by student…        develop…
a.
      moral considerations       morality                    character
b.
      efficiency concerns        skill levels                skills
c.
      civic considerations       respect for others          civil behavior

                                                                 TOTAL OF ABOVE

                                                                                             T    F    TM




                                                                                        Page 22
COLLEGE COLORS
(Adapted from "An Academic Costume Code and Ceremony Guide," American Universities and
Colleges (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1959).
         Although European institutions continue to show great diversity in their specifications of
academic dress, American colleges and universities adopted a system of academic apparel during the
early 20th Century, when a code was devised for all to follow. This was generally based on colors
already adapted by sports teams with the most prestigious colleges laying first claim to any particular
color combination.
          The history of academic dress begins in the early days of the oldest universities. A statute of
1321 required all "Doctors, Licentiates, and Bachelors" of the University of Coimbra to wear gowns.
In England during the second half of the 14th century, the statutes of certain colleges forbade "excess
apparel" and prescribed the wearing of a long gown. It is still a question whether academic dress finds
its sources chiefly in ecclesiastical or in civilian dress. Gowns may have been considered necessary
for warmth in the unheated buildings used by medieval scholars. Hoods may have served to cover the
tonsured head until superseded for that purpose by the skull cap. The cap was later displaced by a
headdress similar to ones now recognized as "academic.”
          GOWNS. The gown for the bachelor's degree has pointed sleeves and is worn closed. The
gown for the master's degree has an oblong sleeve, open at the wrist, with the sleeve base hanging
down in the traditional manner. The rear part of the sleeve's oblong shape is square cut and the front
part has an arc cut away. It may be worn open or closed. The gown for the doctor's degree has bell-
shaped sleeves and may be worn open or closed. Bachelor's and master's gowns have no trimmings,
but the doctor's may be faced on the front with black or colored velvet and with three bars of the same
across the sleeves. If color is used, it is the color distinctive of the subject to which the degree
pertains, and it matches the edging or binding of the hood. For all academic purposes, including
trimmings of doctors' gowns, edging of hoods, and tassels of caps, the colors associated with the
different subjects are as follows:

Agriculture-Maize                                             Medicine-Green
Arts, Letters, Humanities-White                               Music-Pink
Commerce, Accountancy,                                        Nursing-Apricot
Business-Drab Brown                                           Oratory (Speech)-Silver Gray
Dentistry-Lilac                                               Pharmacy-Olive Green
Economics-Copper                                              Philosophy-Dark Blue
Education-Light Blue                                          Physical Education-Sage Green
Engineering-Orange                                            Public Administration- Peacock Blue
Fine Arts-Brown                                               Public Health-Salmon Pink
Forestry-Russet Journalism-Crimson                            Science-Golden Yellow
Law-Purple                                                    Social Work-Citron
Library Science-Lemon                                         Theology-Scarlet
                                                              Veterinary Science-Gray

HOODS. Hoods are lined with the- official color or colors of the college or university conferring the
degree. The binding or edging of the hood is the color indicative of the subject to which the degree
pertains.
CAPS. Mortarboards are generally worn as part of the academic costume. The long tassel fastened to
the middle point of the cap's top is either black or the color appropriate to the subject, except that the
doctor's cap may have its tassel of gold threads.




                                                                                      Page 23
COLLINS ON CURRICULUM GOALS THROUGH
HISTORY
(Based on Randall Collins “Some Comparative Principles of Educational Stratification” Harvard Educational
Review, Vol 47, No. 1 February 1977)


         Collins sees curriculum through time and across many cultures as falling into three types
              promoted by certain kinds of interests:
         a. Status Interests promote curriculum that supports particular values and that maintains or
                  enhances the status of a particular group vis-à-vis other groups.
         b. Vocational Interests promote curriculum that aims at employment or career benefits.
         c. Social Control Interests promote curriculum that enhances the power or control of some
                  group over another.
Using the typology given above, sort out the following educational items:



Course prerequisites                 A minimum 4 course full time         Inter-collegiate football
Late bells                           load                                 Dormitory regulation
SAT scores                           Ethnic studies                       Physical education
Subject Disciplines                  Degree distribution                  requirements
Co-curricular programs               requirements                         Field trips
Computer literacy                    Convocations and assemblies          Laboratories
National Merit Examinations          Art appreciation courses             Awards and honors
French                               Latin                                Fraternity hazing
Competency Based Education           Examinations                         Academic probation
                                     Honor codes                          Academic
				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: Provides interpretation problems, exercises, discussion templates and examples supporting readings and study in the history of higher education.
BUY THIS DOCUMENT NOW PRICE: $6 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEED
PARTNER Edward  Rozycki