Alex Williams
Eng Comp 110 H6
Emerson
09 Sept. 2017

Higher Learning Divide

Often, higher education is seen as black and white. People either place their entire life into their education, or they do not see the point of going beyond high school. To someone from the outside looking in they either see a grumpy, old professor who is stuck in his ways and has taught the same, boring stuff for thirty plus years. Or they see the warm, inviting professor who makes their classroom an environment to learn, create, and challenge. The bias of these two hypothetical professors will have an impact on how the student sees their college experience. It will determine whether they enjoy learning or not. Actually, it starts much earlier than this; the foundation is built way back in elementary and primary school. If they were fostered in an environment where they could excel, they would in theory have a more positive view on learning and education.
Barnett has a negative air about himself. Maybe Barnett himself had some bad experiences which shaped his opinion on this particular topic. Barnett assumes that every young adult who goes to college or partakes in post-secondary learning, is ungrateful and is taking their opportunities for granted. Of course higher education is not supposed to be a “cosy experience.” Of course in some areas of study, the work never stops; meaning, there will never be a definite answer to every question asked. That is not always the point of research. Sometimes, what matters most is the exploratory aspect of it. While Barnett may be correct on some points, he does not need to have a bitter undertone.
Nussbaum on the other hand has a more positive view on higher learning, and seems to be someone who focuses more on how the student can benefit from their opportunities. While Barnett does not exactly disagree with Nussbaum on this, he does use a sort of tactical fear to let one know how good they may have it. Nussbaum seems to think there is more “wiggle room” in the U.S. educational system as opposed to Barnett’s stiff and structured facts.
I have encountered both sides of the spectrum in my twelve years of schooling, especially in high school. There are teachers I have encountered who are strict (which is a good thing) but overly so and they loathe their job. There are also teachers who love working with children and teens and make some fun out of it. They thrive on existing creativity in hopes that it will result in more. Those educators love their job and will never day of it.
In the eighth grade, my history teacher would always have a power point for us. Those were our notes. We never opened the textbook. He wanted us to copy what was on the screen and there was no discussion, no explanation. When tests came around, they were always open note so if we wrote down the power points, we got all A’s. I did not learn a single thing in that class, and as far as I am concerned, neither did anyone else. In middle school and high school, I had the same two band teachers. They cared about all of their students and did not favor the ones who had better musical capabilities. Both directors knew every one of their students’ names. They cared about us and how they were shaping the way we saw music. That is the sign of a good teacher, even if it was not academic in nature. They loved their work and the results that came with it.
I fall in the middle of Nussbaum’s and Barnett’s opinions. An educator will get better results, more participation, higher grades, and so on if they show they are passionate and optimistic about what they do. There needs to be discipline. It can not be “fun” all the time because that is not the reality. Nussbaum is correct in saying learning is not inherently just about the cold, hard facts, while Barnett is also correct in saying that that needs to be the core of learning. There needs to be a delicate balance between both sides for the benefit of the students.