Annotations:
Questions for Engaging with Scheuer:
Question #1:
What do you think of when you hear the phrase “liberal arts”?
A1: Before I read this article, when I thought of “liberal arts,” I usually associated it with politics, such as fields concerning law, literature, history, writing, and so on.
Question #2:
Scheuer writes that there are three “nested, and largely tacit, conceptions” that most people associate with the phrase. What are these conceptions?
A2: The first conception that Scheuer refers to is one which “embraces the ideal of integrated curriculum” (Scheuer 2), in other words, this is the comprehensive definition. It focuses on interdisciplinary learning, one that encompasses interconnections of all nonprofessional higher learning. The second conception excludes the sciences, but not not criticize them unfairly. The third conception focuses mainly on the humanities.
Question #3:
Scheuer describes citizenship as a “social ecology” with three related facets. What are these three facets or dimensions?
A3: The first is the civic dimension. This involves activities such as voting, jury service, advocacy, volunteering, dialogue and information sharing, and other forms of participation focused in the public sphere. The second dimension is economic citizenship – being a productive member of a community, such as workin in a factory, farm, home, etc. Also about being a critical consumer, seeing connections between political and economic spheres. The third dimension is cultural citizenship. This is participation in various conversations that make up a culture. Cultural citizenship is the particular focus of the humanities – note how many of the liberal colleges were found by religious sects and host cultural events.
Paraphrase and respond to each of Scheuer’s ideas below. The first is about critical thinking, the second concludes his essay:
Idea #1:
“The assimilation of facts, ideas, and conceptual frameworks, and the development of critical minds, are equal parts of a liberal education. Or almost equal: at least outside the hard sciences, the intellectual tools and standards of rigor may have more lasting value than accrued factual knowledge. Precisely because they transcend the knowledge bases of the various disciplines, critical-thinking skills enable students to become lifelong learners and engaged citizens—in all three senses of citizenship—and to adapt to change and to multiple career paths. Thus, as William Deresiewicz observes, “The first thing that college is for is to teach you to think.”
Summary & Response 1:
SUMMARY: Scheuer explains how the components and those skills obtained by critical thinking have more lasting value than the factual knowledge that science-based learning methods focus heavily on. This is because they extend the knowledge of these disciplines in a way that allows students to connect various ideas and become more well-round individuals in all three senses of citizenship. Critical thinking also allow for more malleability in the workforce and change in general. Thus, college is less about obtaining facts, and more about teaching students how to think. MY RESPONSE: I believe that this is a very important notion. I have never seen college in this light before. Throughout my entire journey through high school, and even up until now, I thought of college as being a gateway to a career. Certainly, it is. However, now I feel as though I’ve been utilizing the tools in which I am provided with all wrong. Maybe a holistic approach is not to focus on the career in the future, but the skills developed in order to prepare for a sea of careers that I can pick and choose from. Maybe I am more of a liberal arts student: it intimidates me to pick one career, I want options, and in a science-based field, options are few and far between. It is all about specialization, rather than expanding the mind. I want to expand my mind, make connections – not be filled with a database of facts aimed at one specific occupation.
Idea #2:
“The STEM disciplines are obviously important to economic productivity, but so is the entire rainbow of human knowledge and the ability to think critically. That’s why nations around the world are beginning to embrace the liberal arts idea that American education has done so much to promote, even as we question it. We need skilled thinkers, problem solvers, team workers, and communicators, and not just in the business, scientific, and technology sectors. The liberal arts embody precisely the skills a democracy must cultivate to maintain its vital reservoir of active, thoughtful, humane, and productive citizens.”
Summary & Response 2:
SUMMARY: Scheuer explains that STEM disciplines are important, but they are not the most important and should not be the main focus. The ability to think critically and human knowledge should not be diminished by STEM disciplines. Nations are following in Americas footsteps to embrace the liberal arts, while we question its relevance. The liberal arts play a crucial role in instilling skills that yield efficient citizens, not just in the classroom, but ones that can be utilized in a vast array of real-world situations and change. In other words, liberal arts serve as a versatile tool that more Americans should pay attention to in a modern world of STEM-based classrooms. MY RESPONSE: STEM has taken over, and it has happened right before my eyes. I was never introduced to STEM classes, but I saw the classes below me experience the change first-hand. What I noticed about these classes when I talked to students within them, a majority didn’t like them because they believed them to be too restricting. They couldn’t take classes they wanted to such as creative writing, band, anything except science and math courses. They complained for a more broad education. I believe this is the exact problem: schools are encouraging students to take math and science classes so that they land solid careers, but not all students want this. They want to expand their minds, and, as Scheuer puts it, to become better, more well-rounded and productive citizens with versatile skills.
Possible connections between Scheuer’s description (and defense) of the liberal arts with our other readings (Sullivan, Gilory, and/or the excerpt from Newstok):
- Newstok, Sullivan and Scheuer all focus heavily on critical thinking.
- When reading Scheuer, I noticed that a lot of the qualities of Renaissance learning that Newstok described relate directly to the qualities and skills obtained by the liberal arts.
- Sullivan focuses on “deep reading.” This deep reading means engaging more in texts and making connections, all while extending curiosity. This is the exact point Scheuer makes – that liberal arts is versatile and involves critical thinking and critical inquiry. Critical inquiry and the traits of Sullivans “deep reading” are very similar.
- Newstoks and Scheuer both focus on the effects of a narrowly minded system – with Newstok focusing on standardized testing and skills of recollection and Scheuer focusing on STEM classes and the same recollection of facts. Both emphasize the need for deeper connections.
