Email Exchange With Reader on God and Man at Harvard

My post God and Man at Harvard generated a number of comments from people. One led to an email exchange which I have included below.

Reader Writes:

The days when college was a place to passively soak in the liberal arts, get Cs, then go off to work at your dad’s friend’s law firm went out with the advent of need-blind admissions and the general shift to merit — not social station — as the primary factor in college admission decisions.

The purpose of college has changed. It serves many different needs, and it can no longer be expected to explictly address only the concerns of a certain segment pining away for the “good ‘ole days.” It
seems the response to Baker’s article should be: if you want a strong liberal arts education, then take hard liberal arts courses. If you want more than anything to be a doctor, then take hard pre-med
courses. If you want to be a humor writer, go to Harvard and work your ass off to get on the Lampoon. If you want to do all three, then do all three. Just because no one is forcing a specific path, no one is
preventing on either.

College has been opened up to the masses, and in return, it demands that the masses take the initiative. It can longer force fit everyone into one model of education. The onus is now on the student. The student can no longer be passive. He must be proactive; use college as chance to shape a future — not a holding period before descending a pre-determined path.

My response:

I think you make some interesting points. A lot of people are telling college students (and high school students) just what you said – be proactive, take steps to shape your future, if you want to be X then you must do Y, etc. By junior year in high school, people are asking “what do you think you want to major in?” By senior year, it’s “what do you want to be when you grow up?” By college, if you’re not on the fast track for a successful, rich career, then something is wrong with you.

This troubles me and I think there are a number of consequences. First and foremost it means our education system will be churning out people who are very specialized and focused on their one area. Just as public intellectuals and academics now specialize in the most narrow areas imaginable, students are getting put on this track too. This may mean you can be successful at that one career, but what if it’s not a passion? What if it gets boring? Being successful doesn’t make you an interesting person who has knowledge in a wide range of areas and thus will only take you so far up the totem pole. I believe going to college should be about intellectual stimulation, not which hoop to jump through next.

A lot of high school/college students are asking themselves, What if I don’t know what I want to be? What if I don’t know what I’m interested in? Indeed, they should opt-in to a liberal arts curriculum that will offer broad exposure.

You would argue, and I agree, that our education system now offers schools that have different educational philosophies. Some that mandate a core curriculum forcing everyone to take Chemistry 101. Others have no academic requirements. You seem to be saying that it’s up to the student to go to a school that is a good match for them based on where they are in answering the question “What do I want to be/do in this world?” I agree.

My takeaway from the God and Man at Harvard piece was basically that since Harvard is the most visible educational institution in the country, it should set the standard and lead by example by mandating broad academic requirements before graduating.

God and Man at Harvard

I was going to blog about a good article in this month’s Atlantic called The Truth About Harvard but instead I highly reccomended printing out the Q and A with the author of that article in a piece titled God and Man at Harvard. Ross Douthat is a recent Harvard grad and talks about the social and academic realities of a Harvard education. “Elite meritocratic ennui may not be the most urgent social problem on the national agenda today, but in mapping its contours, Douthat makes an intriguing contribution to the ongoing conversation about the skills, ideals, and affiliations we choose to value most as a society.” It’s terrific and thought provoking.

If you need to be a subscriber, I’m happy to email you the full text. Just leave a comment.

Paul Graham on What You'll Wish You'd Known (High School)

In his book Hackers & Painters Paul Graham spent a surprising amount of time talking about high school and college and the education system. Today, he published an essay on his web site called What You’ll Wish You’d Known written in second-person voice directed to high school students but applicable to anyone interested in youth or the education system.

It’s a good read. The first part of the essay is golden (the second half he starts rambling a bit). He talks about how high school kids are freaking out about what their life work is going to be – so true – and how every May graduation speakers tell us “don’t give up your dreams!” What that means, he says, is that we are encouraged to pick a goal 20 years out and work backwards from it. But this means that we’re bound by some plan we made early on and can lead to a disaster. He has lots of other thought-provoking nuggets, so stop reading me, and go read his essay if you a) have kids, b) are a kid, c) interested in young people, d) interested in how we approach education and teaching.

Integrity in Business and in School

A couple people I don’t know at my school cheated on a test and now they’re busted. Word spread like wildfire mostly due to the high profile nature of the students and stupidity of the act (writing answers on arms and legs). People talked about the appropriate disciplinary action that should be taken in light of the fact that "everyone cheats." What?! I haven’t, and won’t. I think I’m in the majority but it’s shocking how many people openly admit to doing all sorts of dishonest things just to get the grade.

Integrity is a big deal in education but probably the hardest to talk about. A few years ago we had an "honor committee" and it was a complete joke. It’s very tough to talk about morals and values and integrity and honesty and what all those big words mean.

About a year ago I got into a sticky situation involving integrity but in my business. I had stumbled across something that, if I exploited it, could have easily done amazing things for my company. My "stumbling" was a little bit stumbling, a little bit curiosity, and a little bit technical savvy. In the ensuing weeks I had a big internal battle whether I should act on my findings or leave it. My chief advisor told me "Ben, you can rationalize it any way you want. But you know, and I know, that this should go no further. If you acted on it, it would be wrong. There’s no other way to put it." Looking back, despite the "What ifs…" I’m glad I made the right ethical decision.

As always, I turned and continue to turn to books to help me understand these thick issues. I reccomend Stephen Carter’s Integrity for a very thorough and well-written look at integrity that tries to answer this big question: Why do we care more about winning than playing by the rules?

IT Directors: The Gap Btwn Adults and Kids on Technology

The IT Director at my school asked me to speak at a meeting of Bay Area private school tech directors on the topic of the growing disconnect between young people and adults (specifically educators) when it comes to technology. I spent 20 minutes there this morning and didn’t have much profound to say. In fact, I was so exhausted from this past week (tests, games, meetings, calls…repeat 3 times) that I went into “rhetoric” mode. I’m fortunate to be able to sound articulate. I’m fortunate to be able to mask any nervousness and deliver a speech or presentation without fidgeting or stumbling (for the most part). The upside to this is obvious. This morning for example I didn’t prepare really at all and can’t remember much. But words came out, they sounded ok, and people were impressed I think. “Rhetoric mode” is rare and a sign that I need to recharge my batteries.

A couple interesting points discussed – one person said how kids of today don’t realize how public they live their lives when they have blogs or photos online etc. I said “BS. Kids know.” After a little elaboration I added that through my blog I am striving for a lot of transparency and honesty with the outside world. The guy responded “Ben, you’ve chosen to live your life like that. None of us in this room ever did that when we were young.”

Another asked if blogs, IM, email, etc. has contributed to the decline in writing skills. Again, for the sake of argument, I disagreed (discussions like this go nowhere when everyone agrees) and said that the more writing you do, the better it gets. Period. (I actually don’t agree with this. I think IM and email has contributed to a decline in writing and grammar at all ages. But I’m sick of kids saying “I don’t know how to spell anymore because of computers. Come on, that’s a personal choice.”)

Overall, my key point was that everybody (adults) seems to be throwing their hands up and declaring that the “understanding gap” btwn adults and Millenials on technology is huge and, thus, unsolvable. It’s not that hard of a problem. It would be great if an entrepreneur set out to solve it.