purpose of university education

What Is the Purpose and Future of Higher Education?

A sociologist explores the history and future of higher education..

Posted February 18, 2019 | Reviewed by Jessica Schrader

• Why Education Is Important
• Take our ADHD Test
• Find a Child Therapist

A recent story asked, “ Can small liberal arts colleges survive the next decade? ” This question is important as we see the closure of some small schools, mostly in areas away from big cities. Yet, as University of California Riverside sociology and public policy distinguished professor Steven G. Brint notes based on his new book Two Cheers for Higher Education , “There’s always been a small number of colleges that close every year—usually fewer than a dozen—and more are opened for the first time than closed.” This illustrates, among other things, why it is important to consider a historical perspective on higher education to place recent individual news stories in context. That’s exactly what his latest book does: It explores the rich history of higher education, leading him to argue that overall higher education appears to be doing quite well, but also that there remain important concerns for higher education on the horizon.

I asked Steven questions about the purpose of higher education, why he argues higher education is doing quite well, and what his concerns are for its future. Anyone interested in the rich history of higher education and how that informs the future of higher education should read this book. Going to college or university is increasingly a fixture and perhaps even an obsession for parents and students, and understanding the history of that industry is useful to help us think about why we encourage students to go to college in the first place.

What, in your view, is the purpose of higher education?

The aims of higher education change over time. In the United States, the original purposes were to prepare students for a few “learned professions,” especially the clergy, and to provide a strong, religiously tinged moral education. Many of the activities that we now associate with higher education—extra-curricular clubs, majoring in a defined specialization, faculty research, access for socioeconomically disadvantaged students—came later.

Today, we would have to start by recognizing the fundamental fact that the purposes of higher education are highly differentiated by the stratum in the system institutions occupy. The aims of community colleges are very different from those of research universities. I do not talk about community colleges in the book, though I did write a book on community colleges early in my career . The great majority of the 3,000 or so four-year colleges and universities are primarily devoted to teaching students, mainly in occupational fields that in theory equip graduates to obtain jobs. Students will receive a smattering of general education in lower-division and will have opportunities to participate in extra-curricular activities. The latter are more important for many students than classroom studies. Students hone interpersonal skills on campus, make contacts that can be useful for instrumental purposes as well as ends in themselves. For those who finish, their diplomas do provide a boost in the labor market, more for quantitative fields than for other fields.

Research universities are of course the most complex environments and the range of their activities is difficult to catalog in a short answer. In addition to providing instruction in hundreds of programs, they run hundreds of student clubs and organizations, contribute to the selection of high achieving students for graduate degrees, train and mentor graduate and professional students, produce thousands or tens of thousands of research papers annually, reach out to industrial partners, field semi-professional athletic teams, solve community problems, run tertiary care hospitals, patent new discoveries and attempt to create environments conducive to learning for a very wide variety of students. One could say that these activities, taken together, constitute the enacted purposes of research universities.

However, when you look at their activities from the perspective of public policy, the focus will tend to be on three main purposes: (1) human capital development (in other words, improving the cognitive and non-cognitive skills of students), (2) basic research and research in the national interest, and (3) the provision of access for students from lower-income and under-represented minority backgrounds. Implicitly, Two Cheers for Higher Education focuses more on these primary aims of public policy than on some of the ancillary activities of universities. Of course, some of the activities that could be considered ancillary—such as student clubs and the patenting of new discoveries—are clearly related to these public policy aims. For that reason, I do also discuss them at some length in the book.

At a time when we see stories of colleges closing, why is it that you argue that higher education is doing quite well?

We do see some colleges closing and more colleges merging. There’s always been a small number of colleges that close every year—usually fewer than a dozen—and more are opened for the first time than closed. We do hear a lot of talk about mergers in recent years, and some of the regional public universities in rural areas are definitely struggling. Where population is declining steadily, it becomes harder to make the case for the local college. But population is not declining in urban areas or in suburban areas around big cities. Here we see new colleges rising or existing colleges growing larger. Higher education is doing quite well in the parts of the country that are seeing growth in population and wealth. Sometimes higher education has been an important influence in attracting employers, new jobs, and new wealth. The state of Georgia is an interesting example. It now has the 10th largest economy of the 50 states, and the investments that state leaders and donors have made in Georgia Tech, Emory, the University of Georgia, and Georgia State University have played an important role in the state’s impressive development.

Though your book is largely positive about higher education, you note some concerns about the future of higher education. What are those?

According to public opinion surveys, the major concerns of Americans have to do with cost, the quality of undergraduate education, and liberal bias in the classroom. I address each of these issues in the book. One hopes that criminal justice reform may allow most of the 50 states to invest more heavily in higher education, reducing family’s burdens. I also advocate a universal, income-contingent loan repayment policy similar to the ones that already exist in England, Australia and several other countries. My research has led me to agree with the critics that the quality of undergraduate education is too low for too many. I show in the book how the lessons of the sciences of learning can be embedded without much more than forethought in even large lecture classes. The evidence on liberal bias is mixed. Clearly, minorities remain subject to many discriminatory and wounding acts on college campuses. At the same time, where we find a liberal orthodoxy there’s a risk that assumptions and commitments will substitute for evidence and reasoning. We do need more spaces on campus where contemporary social and political issues can be discussed and debated.

I also discuss what academic and political leaders can do about the threat to the physical campus represented by online competition , by the tremendous growth of campus administrative staff (compared to the slow growth of faculty), and the deplorable increase in poorly-paid and sometimes poorly-prepared adjunct instructors.

I hope that the evidence and recommendations that I provide will stimulate new thinking and action in each of these areas of concern. The U.S. is fortunate to have the strongest system of higher education in the world, but many problems arose during the period I cover. It will be important to address these problems before they undermine public support for institutions that are now central to the country’s future well-being.

Brint, S. G. (2018). Two cheers for higher education: Why American universities are stronger than ever--and how to meet the challenges they face . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Jonathan Wai, Ph.D. , is Assistant Professor of Education Policy and Psychology and the 21st Century Endowed Chair in Education Policy at the University of Arkansas.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• About the LSE Impact Blog
• Comments Policy
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts
• Subscribe to the Impact Blog
• Write for us
• LSE comment

Achala Gupta

January 21st, 2021, what’s the purpose of university your answer may depend on how much it costs you.

3 comments | 71 shares

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes

Achala Gupta discusses findings from the Eurostudents project in this repost , detailing how student perceptions of the value and purpose of higher education reflect levels of marketisation in different European higher education systems.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought the university sector under greater scrutiny. In some cases, this has prompted new conversations about the purpose of higher education. These have included the extent to which universities are upholding their commitment to public service , and whether the current institutional adjustments in universities will change the way higher education is delivered .

But what do students themselves think about what university is for? In 2017-18, my colleagues and I asked 295 students across six European countries – Denmark, England, Germany, Ireland, Poland and Spain – about what they believed to be the purpose of university study. Their responses shed light on the possible future of higher education in Europe.

This research , which forms part of the Eurostudents project , investigates how undergraduate students understand the purpose of higher education. We found that for many students, it serves three particular functions: to gain decent employment, to achieve personal growth, and to contribute to improvement in society.

But there were interesting variations in students’ views, which often corresponded to how much they had to pay for their studies.

The career ladder

The most common purpose of higher education that students spoke about was to prepare themselves for the labour market. Some students stated that a degree was essential to avoid having to take up a low-skilled job. However, many students believed that an undergraduate degree was insufficient for highly skilled or professional employment.

Here, we see a shift from a conception of higher education as an investment to help move up a social class to viewing it as insurance against downward social mobility .

As a student in England said:

“I don’t really think there’s much of an option. If you want to get a decent job these days, you’ve got to go to university because people won’t look at you if you haven’t been.”

There were some differences across countries. Emphasis on the purpose of university education being preparation for the job market was strongest in the three countries in our sample where students had to make greater personal financial contributions : England, Ireland and Spain.

Personal growth

The students in our study also discussed ideas of personal growth and enrichment. This was the case in all six countries, including in England where the higher education sector is highly marketised . This means it is set up as a competitive market, where students pay tuition fees and are protected by consumer rights legislation, while metrics such as league tables encourage competition among institutions.

Some students emphasised how they were “growing” through the knowledge they were gaining. Others placed more emphasis on aspects of wider learning that they had experienced since embarking upon their degree. This included interacting with a more diverse group of people than they had previously, and having to be more independent.

Students in Denmark, Germany and Poland talked about this kind of growth – which happened outside formal classes – more frequently than students in the other three nations. Notably, in these countries, students make less of a personal financial contribution to the cost of their university study. When this purpose was mentioned by English students, it was associated particularly with learning how to live independently.

Societal development

Students in all six countries talked about how higher education could improve society. This was brought up most frequently in Denmark, Germany and Poland – where students receive greater support from the government and make less of a personal financial investment to their university education than in the other countries in our sample.

Students tended to talk about their contribution to society by attending university in one of three ways: by contributing to a more enlightened society, by creating a more critical and reflective society, and by helping their country to be viewed more competitively worldwide.

A Polish student said:

“[University education is critical to] shaping a responsible and wise society …  one which is not blind, which will do as it is told.”

Meanwhile, a Danish student commented:

“We’re such a small country, we have to do well  … we have to do better because there are so many people around the world … we have to work even harder to compete with them.”

Only Danish and Irish students spoke about national competitiveness in this way. This is likely to be linked to specific geo-political and economic factors, particularly the relatively small size of both nations when compared to some of their European neighbours and the structure of their labour markets.

It is unsurprising to find that many students across Europe believe that a key purpose of university study is to equip them for the job market, as this is often the common message given by governments .

Nevertheless, as shown here, many students have broader views. They see the value of higher education in promoting democratic and critical engagement, while also furthering collective, rather than solely individual, ends.

The national variation we found also suggests that the enduring differences in funding across the continent may affect on how higher education is understood by students.

This post draws on the author’s co-authored article, Students’ views about the purpose of higher education: a comparative analysis of six European countries, published in Higher Education Research and Development . 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .

We are grateful to all students who gave up their time to participate in our focus groups. We would also like to thank the European Research Council for awarding Professor Rachel Brooks a Consolidator Grant, which funded this study (EUROSTUDENTS_681018).

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Impact of Social Science blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  Comments Policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

In text image, published with permission of the author. Featured Image Credit: Brooke Cagle via Unsplash.

About the author

Achala Gupta is a Research Fellow in Sociology at the University of Surrey

• Pingback: Topic 2: Open Learning – Sharing and Openness – ONL211 Sipponen
• Pingback: University Is Enough For The Revolutionary New Business World – Women Business

Very interesting read. I find it facinating how in this study and from anecdotal evidence most study are looking to enter the labour force in markets rather than continuing on the doctorate level studies. In this way, it seems as though there should be more focus on funding institutions which help students prepare for life outside of academia rather than providing them which narrowly focused theoretical knowledge.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Related Posts

A degree of studying –  Students who treat education as a commodity perform worse than their intrinsically motivated peers

January 15th, 2020.

What we talk about when we talk about universities, a review essay

January 12th, 2020.

What do universities want to be? A content analysis of mission and vision statements worldwide

December 20th, 2017.

Retaining the Human Touch When Supporting Students in Transitioning to Asynchronous Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education

August 12th, 2020.

Visit our sister blog LSE Review of Books

• Yale University
• About Yale Insights
• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility

What’s the Value of Higher Education?

Have political and fiscal debates about higher education lost sight of the value of education for individuals and society? Dr. Johnnetta Cole discusses how universities can inform and inspire.

• Dr. Johnnetta Cole President Emerita, Smithsonian National Museum of African Art; President Emerita, Spelman College and Bennett College

This interview was conducted at the Yale Higher Education Leadership Summit , hosted by Yale SOM’s Chief Executive Leadership Institute on January 30, 2018.

The value of a college degree can be measured in a number of different ways: increased lifetime earnings potential, a network of classmates and fellow alumni, subject-matter expertise, a signal of stick-to-itiveness, potentially a marker of class or the capacity to move across classes. There are also less tangible benefits, like becoming a more well-rounded individual and part of a well-informed public.

Yale Insights recently talked with Dr. Johnnetta Cole about how she measures the value of higher education. Cole is the former president of Spelman College and Bennett College, the only two historically black colleges and universities that are exclusively women’s colleges. After retiring from academia, she served as the director of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African Art. In addition, she served on the boards of a number of corporations, including Home Depot, Merck, and Coca-Cola. She was the first African-American chair of the board for the United Way of America.

Q: Why does higher education matter?

I would say that we could get widespread agreement on what I’m going to call the first purpose of higher education: through this amazingly powerful process of teaching and learning, students come to better understand the world.

There might be some disagreement on the second purpose. I’d say it is to inspire students to figure out how they can contribute to helping to make the world better. Certainly, higher education is about scholarship, but it’s also about service. It’s about creativity. It’s about matters of the mind, but it’s also, or at least it should be, about matters of the heart and the soul.

Q: Has the public perception of universities changed in recent years?

Throughout the history—and herstory—of higher education, there have been doubters, those who have critiqued it. But I have a concern, and some polls tell us, in this period in which we are living, many people believe that higher education is not contributing in a positive way to American life.

That’s something that we need to work on, those of us who are deeply engaged in and care about higher education, because I think when one looks with as much objectivity as possible, the truth is, and it’s always been, that higher education contributes substantially.

Q: You’ve led two historically black colleges for women. What is the role of special mission institutions?

In my view, we still need special mission institutions. Remember Brandeis, Notre Dame, and Brigham Young are special mission institutions.

With respect to historically black colleges and universities (HBCU), not every African American wants to or does go to an HBCU. The same is true of women and women’s colleges. But for those who wish that kind of education, and if the fit is right, it’s almost magical.

I think it is as basic as having an entire community believe that you can. On these campuses, we believe that black students can do whatever they set their minds to do. On the women’s campuses, we believe that women can reach heights that have not been imagined for women.

HBCUs are not totally free of racism. Women’s colleges are not utopias where there are no expressions of gender inequality or sexism. But they come far closer than at our predominately white and co-ed institutions.

Q: One of the big issues with higher education now is cost. How do we solve the affordability problem?

The affordability question is highly complex and serious. James Baldwin said, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed that is not faced.” I believe that this is a perfect example. Colleges and universities are not just raising tuitions so they can make big profits. Pell grants are no longer at least a reasonable response to the affordability question.

We’ve got to figure this out because, in a democracy, accessibility to education is fundamental. The idea that something as precious, as powerful, as a solid education is only accessible to some and not to others, is an assault upon democracy.

Q: You came out of retirement to lead the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art. Why was the draw so strong?

I’ve managed, systematically, to get a failing grade in retirement.

I grew up in the South, in the days of legalized segregation—you could also call it state-sponsored racism. I didn’t have access to symphony halls. I didn’t have access to art museums. I still remember the library that I went to in order to travel the world through books, was the A. L. Lewis Colored Public Library.

As a young girl, I fell in love with the visual arts, especially African and African-American art. I went off to Fisk University at age 15 and began to see the real works of art for which we only had reproductions in my home. From Fisk, I went to Oberlin, where the Allen Memorial Art Gallery was a special place of solace for me

The opportunity with the Smithsonian wasn’t something I sought; I was asked to apply. My doctorate is in anthropology, not art history, so I was reluctant, but they told me they were looking for a leader, not an art historian. It was one of the most extraordinary experiences of my life. The work was an almost indescribable joy.

Generally, our museums across America do not reflect who America is, nor do they reflect how our world looks. They need to be far more diverse in terms of their boards, staff, exhibitions, educational programs, and visitorship.

What the African art museum has is a unique opportunity because it can speak to something that binds us together. If one is human, just go back far enough, I mean way back, and we have all come from a single place. It is called Africa.

Here’s a museum that says to its visitors, “No matter who you are, by race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age, ability or disability, or nationality, come to a place where the visual arts connect you to the very cradle of humanity.”

During those eight years when I had the joy of being the director of the National Museum of African Art, I would greet our visitors by saying “Welcome home! Welcome to a place that presents the diverse and dynamic, the exquisite arts of Africa, humanity’s original home.”

Q: Do you think that our education and cultural institutions are properly valued in our society?

I have to say no. Because if we did, we would take better care of them. If we did, we would make sure that not some but all of our educational institutions from kindergarten through post-secondary education, into graduate and professional schools, have the means to do what needs to be done.

If we really value all of our cultural expressions, whether it’s dance or music, visual arts, theater, when there is a budget shortfall, we wouldn’t say, “These are the first things to go.” We wouldn’t say, “Kids can do without music in their public school.” It’s one thing to say we love an institution; it’s another to care for and protect an institution. I think we can do far better.

• Career Paths
• Innovations

For What It’s Worth: The Value of a University Education

By amy gutmann, president, university of pennsylvania.

Editor’s Note: This article derives from an endowed lecture President Gutmann delivered on achieving the aims of higher education at the Spencer Foundation Conference at Northwestern University and subsequently developed further at the De Lange Conference at Rice University. Revised for publication October 21, 2013.

Explore Keywords

In 2010, PayPal co-founder and Facebook “angel” investor Peter Thiel announced he would annually award $100,000 each to 20 young people for them to drop out of college and spend two years starting a tech-based business. “You know, we’ve looked at the math on this, and I estimate that 70 to 80 percent of the colleges in the U.S. are not generating a positive return on investment,” Thiel told an interviewer, explaining his view that we are in the midst of a higher education bubble not dissimilar to the housing and dot-com bubbles of previous decades. “Education is a bubble in a classic sense. To call something a bubble, it must be overpriced and there must be an intense belief in it… there’s this sort of psycho-social component to people taking on these enormous debts when they go to college simply because that’s what everybody’s doing.”

Since his announcement, more than 60 Thiel Fellows have decamped from university—a significant number of them from Stanford, MIT, and Ivy League schools—to follow their dreams of entrepreneurial glory. Thiel says he hopes his program will prod more people to question if a college education is really worthwhile: “Education may be the only thing people still believe in in the United States. To question education is really dangerous. It is the absolute taboo. It’s like telling the world there’s no Santa Claus.”

Digital Vision/Photodisc/Thinkstock

This is a complex, but not impossible, question to answer. The simplest response is to tally the added income benefits a university education accrues to its graduates, subtract its added costs, and determine if in fact benefits exceed costs. Some economists have done this quite well. The overwhelming answer is that a college education has paid off for most graduates to date, has increased rather than decreased its wage premium as time has gone on, and can be expected to continue to do so moving forward. If well-paid equates to worthwhile , then the worth of a college education can be settled by the net wage premium of the average college graduate over the average high school graduate—there would be little more to discuss in the matter.

But it would be a serious mistake to equate the value of a university education to the wage premium earned by its graduates. If higher education is to be understood as something more—something much more—than a trade school in robes, before answering the question of whether a university education is worthwhile, we must first address the more fundamental—and more fundamentally complex—question of mission: What should universities aim to achieve for individuals and society?

It is reassuring to those who believe in the worth of a university education—and all the more so in a high-unemployment, low-growth economy—to show that the average person with a college education earns a lot more over her lifetime than the average high school graduate, even after subtracting the cost of college. But even if we are reassured, we should not allow ourselves to be entirely satisfied with that metric, because economic payback to university graduates is neither the only aim, nor even the primary aim, of a university education. Rather, it is best to consider the value-added proposition of higher education in light of the three fundamental aims of colleges and universities in the 21st century:

■ The first aim speaks to who is to receive an education and calls for broader access to higher education based on talent and hard work, rather than family income and inherited wealth: Opportunity , for short.

■ The second aim speaks to the core intellectual aim of a university education, which calls for advanced learning fostered by a greater integration of knowledge not only within the liberal arts and sciences but also between the liberal arts and professional education: Creative Understanding , for short.

■ The third aim is an important consequence to the successful integration of knowledge, not only by enabling and encouraging university graduates to meaningfully contribute to society, but also in the creation of new knowledge through research and the application of creative understanding: Contribution , for short.

Although the challenges of increasing opportunity, advancing creative understanding, and promoting useful social contribution are not new, they take on a renewed urgency in today’s climate. Jobs are scarce. The United States is perceived to be declining in global competitiveness. Gridlock besets our political discourse and increasingly seems to define our national sense of purpose as well. In this environment, it behooves us to remind those who would propose to reform higher education by simply removing some or all of it of the apt observation of the Sage of Baltimore, H.L. Mencken: “There is an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.”

Many external obstacles to educational and economic opportunity exist in the United States—including poverty, broken families, and cutbacks in public support—which warrant our national attention and, in some instances, urgent action. No one credibly claims that greater access to college education will solve all or even most of these issues. But there is good reason to believe that greater access to high-quality higher education is a vitally important tool in building a more just, prosperous, and successful society. We can, and we must , do a better job in meeting the three fundamental goals of opportunity, creative understanding, and contribution to afford the utmost benefits of higher education for both personal and societal progress. Taking to heart the ethical injunction, “physician heal thyself,” I focus here on what universities themselves can do to better realize their primary aims.

Starting with the first: What can universities do to help increase educational opportunity? For low- and middle-income students, gainful employment itself is likely to be the most basic economic advantage of a college degree. A recent Brookings Institution study found college is “expensive, but a smart choice,” noting that almost 90 percent of young college graduates were employed in 2010, compared with only 64 percent of their peers who did not attend college. Moreover, college graduates are making on average almost double the annual earnings of those with only a high school diploma. And this advantage is likely to stick with them over a lifetime of work. Perhaps most relevant is that even in the depths of the Great Recession, the unemployment rate of college graduates was less than half that of high school graduates, and never exceeded 5.1 percent. Clearly, the more affordable universities make their education to qualified young people from low- and middle-income families, the more we will contribute to both educational and economic opportunity. Other things being equal, universities provide even greater value-added opportunity to low- and middle-income students than to their wealthier peers.

It is especially important to note that opening the door to higher education can have profound effects both on an individual’s lifetime earnings and lifelong satisfaction, regardless of whether or not that door is framed by ivy. Less selective two-year, four-year, and community colleges have an especially important role to play here, as selective universities cannot do everything: their focus on cutting-edge study and discovery limits their ability to engage in compensatory education. (The ability to work with a broad range of student readiness is one of the great advantages of community colleges and some less selective institutions, an advantage we risk forfeiting as an ever-higher percentage of the cost of an education is shifted from state and government support to individual responsibility.) Nonetheless, the available data show that selective universities can provide greater access to qualified students from low- and middle-income families than they have in the past.

My concern for increasing access began with a focus on recruiting qualified students from the lowest income groups. Learning more led to the conclusion that increasing access for middle-income students should also be a high priority. At Penn, we began by asking: What proportion of students on a set of selective university campuses (that included Penn) come from the top 20 percent of American families as measured by income? The answer (as of 2003) was 57 percent.

Since all colleges and universities should admit only students who can succeed once admitted, selective colleges and universities also need to ask: What percent of all students who are well-qualified come from the wealthiest 20 percent? Thirty-six percent of all highly qualified seniors (with high grades and combined SATs over 1,200) come from the top 20 percent, while 57 percent of selective university students come from this group. Thus, the wealthiest 20 percent of American families are overrepresented on our campuses by a margin of 21 percent. All of the other income groups are underrepresented . Students from the lowest 40 percent of income distribution, whose families earn under about $41,000, are underrepresented by 4.3 percent. The middle 20 percent, who come from families earning $41,000 to $61,000, are underrepresented by 8.4 percent. Students from the second highest income group, whose families earn between $62,000 and $94,000, are also underrepresented by 8.4 percent.

Increasing access to our universities for middle- and low-income students is both an especially worthy, and an increasingly daunting, challenge in the wake of the Great Recession.

Increasing access to our universities for middle- and low-income students is both an especially worthy, and an increasingly daunting, challenge in the wake of the Great Recession. Before the Recession, taking financial aid into account, middle- and low-income families were spending between 25 percent and 55 percent of their annual income to cover the expense of a public four-year college education. That burden has skyrocketed in the past five years, especially for middle-income students who are ineligible for Pell grants and who attend public universities whose public funding (in many cases) has been decimated. This has led to a situation where a student from a typical middle-income family today may pay less to attend Penn than many flagship public universities!

Yet private universities too have experienced a painful financial squeeze. Only by making student aid one of their highest priorities and successfully raising many millions of dollars from generous donors can most private institutions afford to admit students on a need-blind basis and provide financial aid that meets full need. This may be the reason why only about one percent of America’s 4,000 colleges and universities are committed to need-blind admissions and to meeting the full financial need of their undergraduate students. An even smaller group—just a tiny fraction—of universities are committed not only to meeting the full financial need of all students who are admitted on a need-blind basis, but also to providing financial aid exclusively on the basis of need . Those of us in this group thereby maximize the use of scarce aid dollars for students with demonstrated financial need.

At Penn, a focus on need-only aid has enabled us to actually lower our costs to all students from families with demonstrated financial need. Since I became president, we have increased Penn’s financial aid budget by more than 125 percent. And the net annual cost to all aided undergraduates is actually ten percent lower today than it was a decade ago when controlled for inflation. Penn also instituted an all-grant/no-loan policy, substituting cash grants for loans for all undergraduates eligible for financial aid. This policy enables middle- and low-income students to graduate debt-free, and opens up a world of career possibilities to graduates who otherwise would feel far greater pressure to pick the highest paying rather than the most satisfying and promising careers.

Although much more work remains, Penn has significantly increased the proportion of first-generation, low- and middle-income, and underrepresented minority students on our campus. In 2013, one out of eight members of Penn’s freshman class will be—like I was—the first in their family to graduate from college. The percentage of underrepresented minorities at Penn has increased from 15 percent to 22 percent over the past eight years. All minorities account for almost half of Penn’s student body. After they arrive, many campus-wide initiatives enable these students to feel more at home and to succeed. Graduation rates for all groups are above 90 percent.

It is also important to note that the benefit of increasing opportunity extends far beyond the economic advancement of low- and middle-income students who are admitted. Increased socio-economic and racial diversity enriches the educational experience for everyone on a campus. By promoting greater understanding of different life experiences and introducing perspectives that differ profoundly from the prevailing attitudes among the most privileged, a truly diverse educational environment prods all of us to think harder, more deeply, and oftentimes, more daringly.

Goodluz/iStock/Thinkstock

So what does this need to cultivate global understanding in the 21st century require of our universities? Among other things, I suggest it demands that we foster intensive learning across academic disciplines within the liberal arts and integrate that knowledge with a much stronger understanding of the role and responsibilities of the professions. Whether the issue is health care or human rights, unemployment or immigration, educational attainment or economic inequality, the big questions cannot be comprehended—let alone effectively addressed—by the tools of only one academic discipline, no matter how masterful its methods or powerful its paradigms.

Consider, for example, the issue of climate change in a world that is both more interconnected and more populous than ever before. To be prepared to make a positive difference in this world, students must understand not only the science of sustainable design and development, but also the economic, political, and other issues in play. In this immensely complex challenge, a good foundation in chemical engineering—which is not a traditional liberal arts discipline nor even conventionally considered part of the liberal arts (engineering is typically classified as “professional or pre-professional education”)—is just as important as an understanding of economics or political science. The key to solving every complex problem—climate change being one among many—will require connecting knowledge across multiple areas of expertise to both broaden and deepen global comprehension and in so doing unleash truly creative and innovative responses.

A liberal arts education is the broadest kind of undergraduate education the modern world has known, and its breadth is an integral part of its power to foster creative understanding. But it is a mistake to accept the conventional boundaries of a liberal arts education as fixed, rather than as a humanly alterable product of particular historical conditions.

In my own field of political philosophy, for example, a scholarly approach centered on intellectual history ceded significant ground in the 1970s to critical analysis of contemporary public affairs, which was a paradigm common to many earlier generations of political philosophers. Were the liberal arts motivated solely by the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, and not any concern for worldly relevance, then it would be hard to make sense of such shifts. In the case of this important shift in political philosophy, scholars thought it valuable, in the face of ongoing injustice, to revive a tradition of ethical understanding and criticism of society.

A liberal arts degree is a prerequisite to professional education, and most liberal arts universities and their faculties stand firmly on the proposition that the liberal arts should inform the professions. Why then are liberal arts curricula not replete with courses that teach students to think carefully, critically, and creatively about the roles and responsibilities of professionals and the professions? Perhaps we are assuming that students will make these connections for themselves or that it will suffice if professional schools do so later. Neither of these assumptions can be sustained.

For example, we must not assume that students themselves will translate ethics as typically taught in a philosophy curriculum into the roles and responsibilities of the medical, business, and legal professions. The ethical considerations are too complex and profoundly affected by the institutional roles and responsibilities of professionals. Many lawyers, for example, are part of an adversarial system of justice; many doctors are part of a system where they financially benefit from procedures the costs of which are not paid directly by their patients; and many businesspeople operate in what is commonly called a free market, where external interferences are (rightly or wrongly) presumed, prima facie , to be suspect. These and many other contextual considerations profoundly complicate the practical ethics of law, medicine, and business.

My primary point is this: Although the separation of the liberal arts from the subject of professional roles and responsibilities may be taken for granted because it is so conventional, it really should strike us as strange, on both intellectual and educational grounds, that so few courses in the undergraduate curriculum explicitly relate the liberal arts to professional life. This is a puzzle worthy of both intellectual and practical solution.

I propose that we proudly proclaim a liberal arts education, including its focus on basic research, as broadly pre-professional and optimally instrumental in pursuit of real world goals.

This stark separation of the practical and theoretical was neither an inevitable outgrowth of earlier educational efforts, nor has it ever been universally accepted. In fact, it flew in the face of at least one early American effort to integrate the liberal arts and professional education. In his educational blueprint (“Proposals Relating to the Education of Youth in Pensilvania”), which later led to the founding of the University of Pennsylvania, Benjamin Franklin called for students to be taught “every Thing that is useful, and every Thing that is ornamental.” Being a principled pragmatist, Franklin immediately ad dressed an obvious rejoinder, that no educational institution can teach everything. And so he continued: “But Art is long, and their Time is short. It is therefore propos’d that they learn those Things that are likely to be most useful and most ornamental.”

As Franklin’s intellectual heirs, we recognize that something educationally significant is lost if students choose their majors for either purely scholastic or purely professional reasons, rather than because they want to be both well-educated and well-prepared for a likely future career. The introduction of distribution requirements for all majors is one way of responding to this potential problem. The glory and strength of American liberal arts education is its enabling undergraduates to keep their intellectual sights and their career options open, while cultivating intellectual curiosity and creativity that will enhance any of the career paths they later choose to follow. These are among the most eminently defensible aims of a liberal arts education: to broaden rather than narrow the sights of undergraduates, and to strengthen rather than stifle their creative potential.

I propose that we proudly proclaim a liberal arts education, including its focus on basic research, as broadly pre-professional and optimally instrumental in pursuit of real world goals. At its best, a liberal arts education prepares undergraduates for success in whatever profession they choose to pursue, and it does so by virtue of teaching them to think creatively and critically about themselves, their society (including the roles and responsibilities of the professions in their society), and the world.

So what can we do to bolster this optimal educational system, as envisioned by Franklin? As 21st century colleges and universities, we can build more productive intellectual bridges between liberal arts and professional education. We can show how insights of history, philosophy, literature, politics, economics, sociology, and science enrich understandings of law, business, medicine, nursing, engineering, architecture, and education—and how professional understandings in turn can enrich the insights of liberal arts disciplines. We can demonstrate that understanding the roles and responsibilities of professionals in society is an important part of the higher education of democratic citizens.

©michaeljung/iStock/thinkstock

These are discoveries such as those made by Dr. Carl June and his team at Penn’s Abramson Cancer Center, with contributions from colleagues at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Their pioneering research with individualized cancer treatments produced a reengineered T-cell therapy. Just in time, too, for young Emma Whitehead, who was stricken with advanced leukemia when she was just five years old. Under Dr. June’s care, Emma, now seven, has beaten her cancer into remission. She’s back at school, laughing and learning and playing with her friends. Her miraculous recovery not only means a renewed chance at a long, fulfilling life for her and her parents— it promises renewed hope for so many who are ravaged by cancer.

In university classrooms and laboratories across the country, the brightest minds are leveraging research and discovery to contribute to the social good. Most of these stories are not as dramatic as Emma’s, but each in its own way has changed and will continue to change how we live and work and understand our world. The full tale of the benefits that universities bring extends far beyond technological and medical advances. We help governments build good public policy based on robust empirical data, garnered from university research. We build better international cooperation through the study of languages and cultures, economic markets, and political relations. We strengthen economies by fostering scores of newly discovered products, markets, and industries. We safeguard our collective health and well-being with insight into global phenomena and systems such as climate change, shifting sea levels, and food supply and agricultural production. All the vital basic and applied research being conducted by universities cannot be accounted for in any one list—the sum is too vast. What I can sum up here is this: If we do not do this research, no one will. Colleges and universities also contribute to society at the local level by modeling ethical responsibility and social service in their institutional practices and initiatives. Their capital investments in educational facilities contribute to the economic progress of their local communities. Colleges and universities at every level can be institutional models of environmental sustainability in the way they build and maintain their campuses.

While the core social contribution of universities lies in both increasing opportunity for students and cultivating their creative understanding, the analogous core social contributions of universities in the realms of faculty research and clinical service are similarly crucial. And both are only strengthened by better integrating insights across the liberal arts and the professions. An education that cultivates creative understanding enables diverse, talented, hardworking graduates to pursue productive careers, to enjoy the pleasures of lifelong learning, and to reap the satisfactions of creatively contributing to society. The corresponding institutional mission of colleges and universities at all levels is to increase opportunity, to cultivate creative understanding, and— by these and other important means such as innovative research and clinical service—to contribute to society.

At their best, universities recruit hardworking, talented, and diverse student bodies and help them develop the understandings—including the roles and responsibilities of the professions in society—that are needed to address complex social challenges in the 21st century. To the extent that universities do this and do it well, we can confidently say to our students and our society that a university education is a wise investment indeed.

• Terms & Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• © Carnegie Corporation of New York, 2014

What you need to know about higher education

UNESCO, as the only United Nations agency with a mandate in higher education, works with countries to ensure all students have equal opportunities to access and complete good quality higher education with internationally recognized qualifications. It places special focus on developing countries, notably Africa. 

Why does higher education matter?  

Higher education is a rich cultural and scientific asset which enables personal development and promotes economic, technological and social change. It promotes the exchange of knowledge, research and innovation and equips students with the skills needed to meet ever changing labour markets. For students in vulnerable circumstances, it is a passport to economic security and a stable future. 

What is the current situation? 

Higher education has changed dramatically over the past decades with increasing enrolment, student mobility, diversity of provision, research dynamics and technology. Some 254 million students are enrolled in universities around the world – a number that has more than doubled in the last 20 years and is set to expand. Yet despite the boom in demand, the overall enrolment ratio is 42% with large differences between countries and regions. More than 6.4 million students are pursuing their further education abroad. And among the world’s more than 82 million refugees, only 7% of eligible youth are enrolled in higher education, whereas comparative figures for primary and secondary education are 68% and 34%, respectively ( UNHCR) . The COVID-19 pandemic further disrupted the way higher education was provided.

What does UNESCO do to ensure access for everyone to higher education? 

UNESCO's work is aligned with Target 4.3 of SDG 4 which aims, by 2030, “to ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university”. To achieve this, UNESCO supports countries by providing knowledge, evidence-based information and technical assistance in the development of higher education systems and policies based on the equal distribution of opportunities for all students. 

UNESCO supports countries to enhance recognition, mobility and inter-university cooperation through the ratification and implementation of the Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education and regional recognition conventions . To tackle the low rate of refugee youth in higher education UNESCO has developed the UNESCO Qualifications Passport for Refugees and Vulnerable Migrants , a tool which makes it easier for those groups with qualifications to move between countries. The passport brings together information on educational and other qualifications, language, work history. UNESCO places a special focus on Africa with projects such as the Higher Technical Education in Africa project for a technical and innovative workforce supported by China Funds-in-Trust.  

​​​​​​​How does UNESCO ensure the quality of higher education? 

The explosion in demand for higher education and increasing internationalization means UNESCO is expanding its work on quality assurance, helping Member States countries to establish their own agencies and mechanisms to enhance quality and develop policies particularly in developing countries and based on the Conventions. Such bodies are absent in many countries, making learners more vulnerable to exploitative providers.  

It also facilitates the sharing of good practices and innovative approaches to widen inclusion in higher education. As part of this work, it collaborates with the International Association of Universities to produce the World Higher Education Database which provides information on higher education systems, credentials and institutions worldwide. 

​​​​​​​How does UNESCO keep pace with digital change?  

The expansion of connectivity worldwide has boosted the growth of online and blended learning, and revealed the importance of digital services, such as Artificial Intelligence, Big Data and Higher Education Management Information Systems in helping higher education institutions utilize data for better planning, financing and quality. 

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this transformation and increased the number of providers and the range of degree offerings from cross-border to offshore education. The Organization provides technical support and policy advice on innovative approaches to widening access and inclusion including through the use of ICTs and by developing new types of learning opportunities both on-campus and online. 

How does UNESCO address the needs of a changing job market?

Labour markets are experiencing rapid changes, with increased digitization and greening of economies, but also the rising internationalization of higher education. UNESCO places a strong emphasis on developing science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education, indispensable to sustainable development and innovation. It aims to strengthen skills development for youth and adults, particularly literacy, TVET, STEM and higher education to meet individual, labour market and societal demands.  

Related items

• Higher education

• Higher Ed Gamma

The True Purpose of a College Education

By  Steven Mintz

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

There are metaphors that we live by. If we think of the United States as the world’s policeman or as a nation of immigrants or as a land of self-made men, these metaphors inevitably shape people’s political attitudes and public policies.

Similarly, if we think of our students as customers or creators of knowledge or partners, those metaphors, too, color the way we think about teaching and our professorial responsibilities.

I am a historian of the life course, so I supposed it’s not surprising that I think of college students through that metaphorical lens.

Some undergraduates are late adolescents who continue to engage in adolescent-like behavior. At the same time, a growing number are adults who juggle their college-going with a variety of adult responsibilities.

But most undergraduates, especially at four-year institutions, are emerging adults, and, in my view, the education they receive should reflect that reality.

Emerging adulthood is the extended period of life that lies between adolescent dependence and adult independence. It is the life stage that exists when individuals have begun to leave home yet before they have committed themselves to a steady job and a committed and sustained relationship -- the roles that structure most adult lives.

As scholars like Jeffrey Arnett have shown, emerging adults encounter a series of Erik Erikson-like developmental tasks. These include:

• Identity exploration: experimenting with various life possibilities.
• Psychological and behavioral maturation, which typically entails developing more intimate interpersonal relationships, assuming new levels of personal responsibility and cultivating a capacity to handle increasingly complex life demands.
• Developing competences, which encompasses not only skills development and knowledge acquisition but obtaining technical or professional expertise and creating a supportive network.

During this protracted, stressful, problematic life stage, emerging adults are especially prone to mood disorders, high levels of anxiety and substance abuse. Risk-taking behavior tends to peak during this time of life, evident in the widespread incidence of binge drinking, illicit drug use, drunk or drugged driving, and casual sex.

In my view, a deeper understanding of the needs of emerging adults and the psychological, emotional, interpersonal and behavioral challenges that they face should inform the ways that we think about a college education.

We should ask ourselves:

• How can we better nurture the development of higher-order cognitive skills and students’ aesthetic, cultural, historical and intellectual sophistication?
• How can we best help our students better handle problematic emotions (such as anger, anxiety, depression, fear, guilt and shame) and fraught, dysfunctional and abusive interpersonal relationships?
• How can we best help students to develop a sense of direction and purpose, autonomy and the ability to monitor and self-evaluate the quality of their performance?
• How can we assist students in developing mature interpersonal relationships, including a respect for difference among people, ideas and values?

The Strada Education Network’s 2021 Alumni Survey, which asked a nationally representative sample of college graduates to reflect on the value of their education, suggests to me the gap between what many students consider the purpose of their education and what it could and should be.

According to the survey, most students attend college in order to qualify for a good job, be successful at work, make money, learn new things and grow as a person. I’d consider this a rather impoverished understanding of the purposes of a college education.

Yet even with this narrow conception of the aims of undergraduate education, only half of the graduates felt that their education was worth the cost and had also helped them fulfill their personal goals. Alumni of color, first-generation and female graduates all were significantly less likely to feel that their education was worth the cost or had helped them achieve their aims.

Whether or not graduates found their education worthwhile, the surveyors concluded, hinged on three variables:

• Whether the graduate had developed a connection with faculty.
• Whether the graduates’ education was connected to their postcollege career.
• Whether the graduate had acquired in-demand professional skills.

It’s perhaps not surprising that Strada Education Network would have a particular interest in degree value and the alignment of higher education with careers. Originally United Student Aid Funds, Strada was among the largest guarantors of federal student loans under the bank-based Federal Family Educational Loan program, until that program effectively ended in 2010.

I, too, believe that we should embed career preparation across the undergraduate experience. But we shouldn’t focus on employment outcomes to the detriment of other essential aspects of students’ maturation.

For anyone who cares about the education that our colleges and universities provide, the Strada survey should raise certain red flags. Three questions stand out:

• Are we doing enough to help students articulate the value of college beyond its employment and income outcomes? If most graduates think that a college education’s essential value lies in career preparation, then we’re doing a poor job of explaining our broader objectives: to produce culturally literate, well-rounded adults who are knowledgeable about the arts, the humanities and the social, behavioral and natural sciences, who can think critically, communicate effectively, argue logically and solve complex problems.
• Are we doing enough to connect students and faculty? Among the variables that separate those graduates who did or did not find their education worth the cost, one factor that stands out is whether the student felt a connection to a faculty member. In the best case, that faculty member was a mentor, a trusted adviser, a role model and ardent supporter. But those qualities weren’t essential. At a minimum, the professor needed to be a skilled teacher, a provider of helpful feedback and someone who helped the student see the world in fresh ways.
• Are we doing enough to draw connections between an undergraduate education and postcollege careers? The degree to which graduates value their education hinges, to a significant degree, on whether they gained insights into the job market, acquired essential professional skills and crafted a realistic pathway into a career.

What would it take to make more graduates feel that their education was worthwhile? Here are certain principles that I think ought to guide our efforts.

• Transparency. Be explicit about the purposes of every requirement, assignment and assessment. These should not simply repeat the learning objectives specified on your syllabus. These should speak more broadly to the purpose of your course, the logic behind your class’s organization, the themes you are examining and the skills you are building.
• Authenticity. Use real-world examples to illustrate concepts. Have students work with authentic evidence. Create assessments that have real-world analogues, like policy briefs or environmental impact statements.
• Relevance. Speak to the applicability of the concepts, knowledge and skills that you are teaching to a variety of contexts -- academic but also nonacademic.
• Transferability. Integrate transferable skills building activities into your courses. If your goals include enhancing students’ written and oral presentation skills or their analytic and critical thinking skills, make sure that your class activities build these skills and your assessments evaluate student mastery.
• Mentorship. In my view, mentorship needs to become an integral part of the undergraduate experience. I’d urge departments to redesign their curricula to include a greater emphasis on mentored undergraduate research and, above all, opportunities for students to undertake a meaningful project in collaboration with a faculty member. To develop the interactive courseware that I use in my introductory U.S. history survey courses, I had the opportunity to work with a team of undergraduates who co-created the user experience and designed many of the interactive features. As an undergraduate, my stepson had the chance to work with a professor and classmates on a gamelike app used by hospitals to monitor the well-being of adolescents suffering from chronic pain. Collaborative projects like these result in much more than a useful product. In addition to learning much more about the relevant content, the process teaches the students many skills that they will find useful in later life, whether they pursue history (in my case) or psychology (in my stepson’s). These include organizational, collaboration and project-management skills and personal accountability.
• Incentivizing desired outcomes. I understand full well that no one-size-fits-all path through an undergraduate education will fly. Higher education’s stakeholders are too diverse to ever reach much more than a superficial consensus about the literacies, competencies and attributes of a successful bachelor’s degree holder. But we could incentivize the kinds of educational experiences that we most value. These incentives might include certificates or another kind of diploma designation (like the certificate offered by Purdue’s Cornerstone Integrated Liberal Arts Program) or participation in a cohort program (like Hunter College’s Athena, Daedalus, Muse, Nursing, Roosevelt and Yalow scholars cohorts), or in the programming offered by specialized centers and offices (for example, an office of the arts or the health sciences or public policy).

To return to my theme, the metaphors we live by, let me conclude by asking: What should the relationship of a college to its students be? Obviously, it can’t be “paternal,” with its associations with hierarchy, condescension and control. “Maternal,” with its connotations with warmth and caring, is a bit better, but this metaphor, too, reduces an undergraduate to a childlike status.

Nor should we think of ourselves as our students’ peers or friends or confidantes.

Neither should we think of the relationship as permissive, given the revival of the in loco parentis principle by the courts, parents and activist students. Lenience, tolerance, even indulgence are expected, but treating students wholly as adults has proven unacceptable, though we should also not embrace the role of problem solver, either.

So here’s my suggestion: follow the advice we give to parents of emerging adults . Recognize that undergraduates are undergoing a messy period of transition.

• Create opportunities for your students to experiment with identities and test new ideas with as few constraints and penalties as possible.
• Foster a responsible independence.
• Model desired behavior.
• Nurture an atmosphere of mutual trust and open communication.
• Provide empathy, support, feedback and guidance as needed.
• But don’t facilitate continued dependence or immaturity.

Above all, take to heart another message from the advice provided to parents of emerging adults. Maturation is a prolonged process that is trying and problematic, not just for emerging adults but for those of us with a duty of care.

Steven Mintz is professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin.

Survey: When Should College Students Use AI? They’re Not Sure

Data from Inside Higher Ed ’s 2024 Student Voice survey shows that three in 10 students are not clear on when

Share This Article

More from higher ed gamma.

Navigating Life’s Layers of Complexity

What you can learn from this country’s premier chronicler of trauma and the broken heart.

Why We Should Worry About the Decline of American Intellectual History as a Field of Study

• Become a Member
• Sign up for Newsletters
• Learning & Assessment
• Diversity & Equity
• Career Development
• Labor & Unionization
• Shared Governance
• Academic Freedom
• Books & Publishing
• Financial Aid
• Residential Life
• Free Speech
• Physical & Mental Health
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Socioeconomics
• Traditional-Age
• Adult & Post-Traditional
• Teaching & Learning
• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Publishing
• Data Analytics
• Administrative Tech
• Alternative Credentials
• Financial Health
• Cost-Cutting
• Revenue Strategies
• Academic Programs
• Physical Campuses
• Mergers & Collaboration
• Fundraising
• Research Universities
• Regional Public Universities
• Community Colleges
• Private Nonprofit Colleges
• Minority-Serving Institutions
• Religious Colleges
• Women's Colleges
• Specialized Colleges
• For-Profit Colleges
• Executive Leadership
• Trustees & Regents
• State Oversight
• Accreditation
• Politics & Elections
• Supreme Court
• Student Aid Policy
• Science & Research Policy
• State Policy
• Colleges & Localities
• Employee Satisfaction
• Remote & Flexible Work
• Staff Issues
• Study Abroad
• International Students in U.S.
• U.S. Colleges in the World
• Intellectual Affairs
• Seeking a Faculty Job
• Advancing in the Faculty
• Seeking an Administrative Job
• Advancing as an Administrator
• Beyond Transfer
• Call to Action
• Confessions of a Community College Dean
• Higher Ed Policy
• Just Explain It to Me!
• Just Visiting
• Law, Policy—and IT?
• Leadership & StratEDgy
• Leadership in Higher Education
• Learning Innovation
• Online: Trending Now
• Resident Scholar
• University of Venus
• Student Voice
• Academic Life
• Health & Wellness
• The College Experience
• Life After College
• Academic Minute
• Weekly Wisdom
• Reports & Data
• Quick Takes
• Advertising & Marketing
• Consulting Services
• Data & Insights
• Hiring & Jobs
• Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

• Sign Up, It’s FREE

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Education Issue

What Is the Point of College?

By Kwame Anthony Appiah

• Sept. 8, 2015

I gave my first university lecture in philosophy at the University of Ghana, Legon, when I was a freshly credentialed 21-year-old. My audience was a couple of hundred students gathered in a vast hall, with ceiling fans to move the hot and humid air. Above the murmur of the fans and the muttering of students, I tried to explain why Descartes thought the mere possibility that there was an Evil Demon deceiving their senses meant they couldn’t know for sure that I was really there. Ah, Cartesian skepticism! I remember diagraming the structure of the argument in huge chalk letters on an enormous blackboard.

After the class, a group of students, many of them older than I, followed me home across campus. Was I really worried, they wanted to know, that there might be such a powerful Evil Demon? What they didn’t ask was why they had to listen to this bizarre argument made by a Frenchman three and a half centuries earlier. Yes, the material would be on the exam every student had to pass at the end of the first year. But why?

The answer used to be easy: College is a place where you come to learn such things. But as higher education expands its reach, it’s increasingly hard to say what college is like and what college is for. In the United States, where I now teach, more than 17 million undergraduates will be enrolling in classes this fall. They will be passing through institutions small and large, public and private, two-year and four-year, online and on campus. Some of them will be doing vocational courses — in accounting or nursing or web design — at for-profit institutions like DeVry University and the University of Phoenix. Many will be entering community colleges hoping to gain a useful qualification or to prepare themselves for a transfer to a four-year college. Others will be entering liberal-arts colleges without plans for a major, let alone a profession. On whatever track, quite a few will encounter Descartes as part of their undergraduate requirements. Why should that be? You’ll be hard-pressed to find a consensus on such things. That’s because two distinct visions of higher education contend throughout our classrooms and campuses.

One vision focuses on how college can be useful — to its graduates, to employers and to a globally competitive America. When presidential candidates talk about making college more affordable, they often mention those benefits, and they measure them largely in dollars and cents. How is it helping postgraduate earnings, or increasing G.D.P.? As college grows more expensive, plenty of people want to know whether they’re getting a good return on their investment. They believe in Utility U.

Another vision of college centers on what John Stuart Mill called ‘‘experiments in living,’’ aimed at getting students ready for life as free men and women. (This was not an entirely new thought: the ‘‘liberal’’ in ‘‘liberal education’’ comes from the Latin liberalis , which means ‘‘befitting a free person.’’) Here, college is about building your soul as much as your skills. Students want to think critically about the values that guide them, and they will inevitably want to test out their ideas and ideals in the campus community. (Though more and more students are taking degrees online, most undergraduates will be on campus a lot of the time.) College, in this view, is where you hone the tools for the foundational American project, the pursuit of happiness. Welcome to Utopia U.

Together, these visions — Utility and Utopia — explain a great deal about modern colleges and universities. But taken singly, they lead to very different metrics for success.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

Early universities

Impact of the protestant reformation and the counter-reformation on european universities.

• First universities in the Western Hemisphere
• Reorganization, secularization, and modernization from the 19th century
• Modern universities

What is a university?

Should university student loan debt be eliminated via forgiveness or bankruptcy, should universities pay college athletes, is a university education worth it.

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Table Of Contents

A university is an institution of higher education , usually comprising a college of liberal arts and sciences and graduate and professional schools and having the authority to confer degrees in various fields of study. A university differs from a college in that it is usually larger, has a broader curriculum, and offers graduate and professional degrees in addition to undergraduate degrees. Although universities did not arise in the West until the Middle Ages in Europe, they existed in some parts of Asia and Africa in ancient times.

Whether university student loan debt should be eliminated via forgiveness or bankruptcy is widely debated. Some argue forgiveness would boost the economy, help rectify racial inequity, and foster a healthier citizenry, while denying student loan debtors the benefits of bankruptcy--benefits that other debtors have access to--is unfair. Others argue that people must be held responsible for their personal economic choices, that forgiveness would disproportionately help more financially secure university graduates and would only be a temporary bandage for the much larger problem of inflated university costs, while bankruptcy would allow borrowers to abuse the loan system and encourage universities to increase tuition. For more on the student loan debt debate, visit ProCon.org .

Whether university athletes should be paid is widely debated. Some argue the NCAA, colleges, and universities profit unfairly and exorbitantly from the work and likenesses of college athletes, who are risking their bodies as well as their future careers and earning potential while often living below the poverty line. Others argue that the scholarships given to student athletes are fair compensation for their services, especially since so few college athletes actually "go pro," and that the real problem is not greater compensation for student-athletes but an incompetent amateur sports system for feeding talent to professional sports leagues. For more on the debate over paying college athletes, visit ProCon.org .

Whether a university education is worth it is widely debated. Some say college graduates make more money and jobs increasingly require college degrees. Others say student loan debt is crippling for college graduates and forces students to delay adult milestones like marriage. For more on the college worth debate, visit ProCon.org .

Recent News

university , institution of higher education , usually comprising a college of liberal arts and sciences and graduate and professional schools and having the authority to confer degrees in various fields of study. A university differs from a college in that it is usually larger, has a broader curriculum, and offers graduate and professional degrees ( master’s and doctorates ), professional degrees, in addition to undergraduate degrees (such as the bachelor’s degree ). Although universities did not arise in the West until the Middle Ages in Europe , they existed in some parts of Asia and Africa in ancient times.

The modern Western university evolved from the medieval schools known as studia generalia ; they were generally recognized places of study open to students from all parts of Europe . The earliest studia arose out of efforts to educate clerks and monks beyond the level of the cathedral and monastic schools. The inclusion of scholars from foreign countries constituted the primary difference between the studia and the schools from which they grew.

The earliest Western institution that can be called a university was a famous medical school that arose at Salerno , Italy , in the 9th century and drew students from all over Europe. It remained merely a medical school, however. The first true university in the West was founded at Bologna late in the 11th century. It became a widely respected school of canon and civil law . The first university to arise in northern Europe was the University of Paris , founded between 1150 and 1170. It became noted for its teaching of theology , and it served as a model for other universities in northern Europe such as the University of Oxford in England, which was well established by the end of the 12th century. The Universities of Paris and Oxford were composed of colleges, which were actually endowed residence halls for scholars.

These early universities were corporations of students and masters, and they eventually received their charters from popes , emperors , and kings . The University of Naples , founded by Emperor Frederick II (1224), was the first to be established under imperial authority, while the University of Toulouse, founded by Pope Gregory IX (1229), was the first to be established by papal decree. These universities were free to govern themselves, provided they taught neither atheism nor heresy . Students and masters together elected their own rectors (presidents). As the price of independence, however, universities had to finance themselves. So teachers charged fees, and, to assure themselves of a livelihood, they had to please their students. These early universities had no permanent buildings and little corporate property , and they were subject to the loss of dissatisfied students and masters who could migrate to another city and establish a place of study there. The history of the University of Cambridge began in 1209 when a number of disaffected students moved there from Oxford, and 20 years later Oxford profited by a migration of students from the University of Paris.

From the 13th century on, universities were established in many of the principal cities of Europe. Universities were founded at Montpellier (beginning of the 13th century) and Aix-en-Provence (1409) in France , at Padua (1222), Rome (1303), and Florence (1321) in Italy, at Salamanca (1218) in Spain , at Prague (1348) and Vienna (1365) in central Europe, at Heidelberg (1386), Leipzig (1409), Freiburg (1457), and Tübingen (1477) in what is now Germany , at Louvain (1425) in present-day Belgium , and at Saint Andrews (1411) and Glasgow (1451) in Scotland.

Until the end of the 18th century, most Western universities offered a core curriculum based on the seven liberal arts: grammar , logic , rhetoric , geometry , arithmetic , astronomy , and music . Students then proceeded to study under one of the professional faculties of medicine , law , and theology. Final examinations were grueling, and many students failed.

The Protestant Reformation of the 16th century and the ensuing Counter-Reformation affected the universities of Europe in different ways. In the German states, new Protestant universities were founded and older schools were taken over by Protestants, while many Roman Catholic universities became staunch defenders of the traditional learning associated with the Catholic church. By the 17th century, both Protestant and Catholic universities had become overly devoted to defending correct religious doctrines and hence remained resistant to the new interest in science that had begun to sweep through Europe. The new learning was discouraged, and thus many universities underwent a period of relative decline. New schools continued to be founded during this time, however, including ones at Edinburgh (1583), Leiden (1575), and Strasbourg (university status, 1621).

The first modern university in Europe was that of Halle , founded by Lutherans in 1694. This school was one of the first to renounce religious orthodoxy of any kind in favour of rational and objective intellectual inquiry, and it was the first where teachers lectured in German (i.e., a vernacular language) rather than in Latin . Halle’s innovations were adopted by the University of Göttingen (founded 1737) a generation later and subsequently by most German and many American universities.

In the later 18th and 19th centuries religion was gradually displaced as the dominant force as European universities became institutions of modern learning and research and were secularized in their curriculum and administration. These trends were typified by the University of Berlin (1809), in which laboratory experimentation replaced conjecture; theological, philosophical, and other traditional doctrines were examined with a new rigour and objectivity; and modern standards of academic freedom were pioneered. The German model of the university as a complex of graduate schools performing advanced research and experimentation proved to have a worldwide influence.

What is the purpose of higher education?

Counsellors, students and parents can have very different ideas about what higher education should achieve. Can those ideas be reconciled?

• More on this topic

You may also like

“Rankings are indicative of the quality of education.”

“Rankings do not reflect the quality of education.”

“I don’t want to study history/philosophy/humanities because I won’t be able to get a job.”

“Getting a broad base of knowledge in humanities will allow you to understand the world.”

“Being able to think critically is important.”

“I want to study business and make a lot of money.”

These remarks and snippets of conversations may sound familiar to any college counsellor.

Wrestling with students and parents over the validity of rankings, appropriate majors to study and the purpose of college education seems to be a perennial yet begrudgingly accepted part of the job. It’s almost as if we are speaking different languages – we understand each other, but the message does not penetrate. Why is this so?

I believe this wrangling reflects an underlying conceptual difference in the perceived goal of education. Specifically: do you see education as transactional or transformational?

Is education transactional or transformational?

The transactional-transformational dichotomy was originally developed to describe leadership styles. Transactional leadership focuses on regulation and organisation, as well as performance. Compliance is enacted through reward and penalty.

Transformational leadership focuses on inspiration, stimulation and self-development. Modeling and articulating your vision results in loyalty among your followers.

But these two categories can be applied to education as well.

Transactional model of education

The transactional model of education aims to equip students with the skills they need to achieve socially accepted measures of success. These outcomes are tangible: a high salary or a prestigious work placement.

In this model of education, rankings are touted as a trustworthy measure of a university’s capacity to produce successful graduates. Study pathways that aim to create students to fill a clearly delineated role in society (such as pre-professional courses of study) are drawing from this view of education.

Transformational model of education

The transformational model of education aims to develop individuals who are able to think critically and independently. Naturally, the outcomes are less tangible than those of the transactional model of education as it is decidedly less straightforward to measure the success of critical thinking.

The transformational model of education does not avoid (and even sometimes encourages) raising individuals to challenge what a society dictates. This is why proponents of this view eschew commonly accepted measures of success, such as rankings. An exemplar of this model of education is the liberal arts education common in the US.

Meeting basic needs

It is important to point out that it’s easier to develop and adhere to a transformational model of education when one’s basic needs have been met. This can overlap on to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs , where lower-level needs (safety, acceptance) correspond to the measures of success of the transactional view. Meanwhile, the upper-level needs (self-actualisation) can loosely map on to the measures of success of the transformational model.

Some of our students' parents grew up in environments where resources were scarce. If your aim is to make enough money to be able to create a comfortable life for yourself and your children, then developing capacity for critical thought is unlikely to be at the forefront of your mind.

Given the large sums of money that parents often invest in their children’s education, it’s easy to see why they can lean towards a transactional model of education, where the benefits are more tangible and immediate.

Bridging the gap

Tensions in college counselling arise when the other party across the table is constantly citing seemingly unimportant variables when making one of the most important decisions in a student’s life.

As counsellors, we need to be able to bridge this gap, in order to promote more effective conversations and, ultimately, find the right fit course and college for the student. Fostering a holistic rather than a dualistic model – thinking in terms of both/and, rather than either/or – should be our aim.

So, how can one move towards recognising and reconciling this difference in attitude?

Practical strategies

1. Examine your own internalised model of education. As the college counsellor, it’s especially easy to fall into the trap of feeling that your view of education is the correct one, but this is not helpful in facilitating effective communication. Reflecting on how culture and generation helped to form your worldview may help you to understand that the other party is not necessarily wrong, even when they hold a different opinion from you.

2. Have an open discussion with students and parents about the purpose of education. Introducing the educational philosophies of universities – which often incorporate both models – can be a good way to raise awareness of the validity of both approaches.

3. Consider both models of education when pitching universities and programmes to students and parents. University representatives already do this, by highlighting graduate outcomes and internship opportunities as well as areas where the ability to think independently is valued. Collaborate with them to pitch the rationale and outcomes of both approaches to students.

4. Share stories of alumni who have successfully bridged the gap. For example, you may know of an alumnus who became a successful consultant after studying a humanities course. Outlining various narratives helps parents and students to understand that there is more than one path to success .

5. Consider interdisciplinary majors that incorporate both approaches. Many universities already have and are creating programmes that touch upon both models of education, so that students do not necessarily need to choose one over the other.

6. Have regular conversations and build trust. Given the deep-seated nature of these ideas, getting the other party see the value of a different model of education requires trust built up over multiple conversations.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• The State of American Jobs
• 5. The value of a college education

Table of Contents

• 1. Changes in the American workplace
• 2. How Americans assess the job situation today and prospects for the future
• 3. How Americans view their jobs
• 4. Skills and training needed to compete in today’s economy
• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

An extensive body of research has argued that obtaining a college diploma is a good deal for graduates on almost any measure – from higher earnings to lower unemployment rates. By the same token, those without a college degree can find their upward mobility in the job market limited by a lack of educational credentials: This survey finds that one-third of Americans who lack a four-year college degree report that they have declined to apply for a job they felt they were qualified for, because that job required a bachelor’s degree.

But despite the potential benefits and opportunities available to college graduates – and the potential challenges faced by those who lack a college diploma – Americans have somewhat mixed attitudes about the effectiveness of traditional four-year colleges and other higher education institutions. On a personal level, many college graduates describe their own educational experience as having a generally positive impact on their personal and professional development. Roughly six-in-ten (62%) college graduates with two- or four-year degrees think their degree was very useful for helping them grow personally and intellectually, while roughly half think it was very useful for opening up job opportunities (53%) or for providing them with useful job-related skills and knowledge (49%).

Yet even as many college graduates view their own educational experience in positive terms, the public as a whole – including a substantial share of college graduates – expresses reservations about the extent to which various higher education institutions prepare students for the workforce more generally. Just 16% of Americans think that a four-year degree prepares students very well for a well-paying job in today’s economy, and 51% say this type of degree prepares students “somewhat well” for the workplace. Some 12% think that a two-year associate degree prepares students very well (46% say somewhat well), and 26% feel that certification programs in a professional, technical, or vocational field prepare students very well (52% say somewhat well).

The purpose of college: Americans view workforce-relevant skills and knowledge as more important than personal and intellectual growth

Americans’ views of what a college education should be tend to prioritize specific, workplace-related skills and knowledge rather than general intellectual development and personal growth. Half of Americans say that the main purpose of college should be to teach specific skills and knowledge that can be used in the workplace, while 35% think its main purpose should be to help students grow and develop personally and intellectually and 13% volunteer that these objectives are equally important. The public’s views on this issue have shifted slightly in favor of skills development since the last time Pew Research Center asked this question in 2011. At that point, 47% said main purpose of college should be to teach specific skills and knowledge and 39% said it should be to promote personal and intellectual growth.

Americans who have engaged in additional schooling beyond a bachelor’s degree are especially likely to say that the main purpose of college should be personal and intellectual growth, rather than the acquisition of specific skills and knowledge. Some 47% of those with a postgraduate or professional degree think the main purpose of college should be personal and intellectual growth, while 35% think it should be teaching workplace-relevant skills.

In contrast, those with limited college experience (or no college experience at all) are more likely to prioritize the development of specific skills over general intellectual improvement. For instance, 56% of Americans with a high school diploma or less say college should be primarily a place to develop specific work-oriented knowledge and skills, while just 31% see it primarily as a place for personal and intellectual growth.

There is also a partisan element to these views, with Republicans and Democrats expressing highly differing opinions on the purpose of college. Democrats (including Democratic-leaning independents) are about evenly split on which of these objectives is more important: 42% say colleges should prioritize personal and intellectual growth, while 43% say they should prioritize the development of workforce-relevant skills. But among Republicans and Republican leaners, 58% say that the main purpose of college should be teach specific skills – while just 28% feel that the main purpose should be general personal and intellectual growth.

These partisan differences hold true even after accounting for differences in educational attainment. Democrats and Democratic leaners with high levels of educational attainment are more likely to prioritize personal and intellectual growth relative to Democrats and Democratic leaners with lower levels of educational attainment.

But Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents at all educational levels are more likely than Republicans and Republican-leaning independents with similar levels of education to believe that personal and intellectual growth should be the main purpose of college.

Along with Democrats and those who have progressed beyond a bachelor’s degree, younger adults (those ages 18 to 29) are more likely than older adults to feel that personal and intellectual growth should be the primary purpose of college: some 43% of 18- to 29-year olds feel this way, compared with roughly one-third of those in older age groups.

In addition, Americans who themselves work in the education field tend to place a greater emphasis on personal and intellectual growth as the primary purpose of college: 46% believe that this should be the main purpose of a college degree, while 35% believe that college should mainly be a place to develop specific skills and knowledge (19% of those who work in the education industry consider them equally important).

Most college graduates regard their college experience as very useful for intellectual growth; views are more mixed when it comes to job opportunities and marketable skills

When asked to assess certain aspects of their own educational experience, about six-in-ten (62%) college graduates (including those who graduated from a two-year degree program) feel that their time in college was very useful in helping them grow personally and intellectually. About half say their college experience was very useful in helping them access job opportunities (53%) or in helping them develop skills and knowledge they could use in the workplace (49%).

The further people have progressed in their college career, the more likely they are to consider their experience very useful. Those with a postgraduate or professional degree are more likely to say that their college education was very useful in each of these respects compared with four-year degree holders, who are in turn more likely than those with a two-year associate degree to say that their education was very useful across each of these measures. For example, while two-thirds of those with a postgraduate or professional degree say their college education was very useful in opening doors to job opportunities, 56% of those with a four-year degree, and an even smaller share (40%) among those with a two-year degree, say the same. And while 57% of those with more than a bachelor’s degree say college was very useful in helping them develop marketable skills, about half or a smaller share among those with a four- or two-year degree hold this view (49% and 43%, respectively).

When it comes to helping them grow professionally and intellectually, majorities of those with a postgraduate or professional degree (77%) and those with a bachelor’s degree (64%) say college was very useful, compared with 46% of those with a two-year college degree.

Americans have mixed views about the extent to which college prepares students for a well-paying job in today’s economy

When asked a broader set of questions about the impact of college more generally, the public expresses somewhat mixed views about the extent to which a college education prepares students for success in the workforce.

Two-thirds of Americans (67%) think that a traditional four-year degree prepares students for a well-paying job in today’s economy at least somewhat well, but just 16% think it prepares them very well, and 29% think it does not prepare them well. A somewhat smaller share of Americans (58%) think that a two-year community college degree prepares students for a well-paying job either very (12%) or somewhat (46%) well, while 38% think that these programs do not prepare students well.

Interestingly, Americans with a four-year college degree are generally no more positive – or negative – than those with less education about the relationship between a four-year degree and a well-paying job: 13% of those with a bachelor’s degree or more education say a four-year degree prepares people very well, as do 11% of those with a two-year associate degree, 12% of those with some college experience but no degree, and 17% of those with a high school diploma. Among those who did not complete high school, however, 40% believe that a four-year college degree does a very good job of preparing people for a well-paying job.

When it comes to assessments of a two-year college degree, about one-in-six (16%) Americans who hold this type of degree say it prepares workers very well for a well-paying job. This is considerably larger than the share of those with at least a bachelor’s degree (7%) who say a two-year degree prepares people very well, but not necessarily more positive than the views of those with less education.

Blacks and Hispanics are more likely than whites to say four- and two-year degrees prepare people very well for a job in today’s economy. For example, about three-in-ten (29%) Hispanics and about a quarter (24%) of blacks say this about a four-year degree, compared with 12% of whites. And while about one-in-five blacks and Hispanics (18% each) say a two-year associate degree prepares people very well, one-in-ten whites share this view.

These findings are consistent with previous Pew Research Center surveys that found that black and Latino parents view college as more essential for their children’s success than do white parents.

A substantially larger share of the public has positive attitudes towards certification programs in a professional, technical or vocational field in the context of workforce development. Some 78% of Americans think that these programs prepare students well for a job in today’s economy, including 26% who think they prepare students very well. Just roughly one-in-five (19%) think they do not prepare students well. It is important to note, however, that respondents were not asked about the effectiveness of certification programs instead of a college education.

Positive assessments of certificate programs as a way to prepare workers for jobs in today’s economy are particularly widespread among those who did not complete high school; 44% in this group say these types of programs prepare people very well, compared with about a quarter (27%) of those with a high school diploma and a similar share of those with some college, but no degree (22%), a two-year degree (28%), or a four-year degree or more education (22%). Certificate programs are also particularly well-regarded among Hispanics, 39% of whom say they prepare people very well for a good job in today’s economy. About a quarter of blacks (25%) and whites (23%) say the same.

One-third of Americans without a bachelor’s degree have elected to not apply for a job they felt they were qualified for because it required a four-year degree

Recent research has argued that there is a “ credentials gap ” in today’s workforce, as employers increasingly require a bachelor’s degree for positions that did not demand this level of schooling in the past. And the survey finds that 33% of Americans who do not have a four-year college degree report that they have declined to apply for a job they felt they were qualified for, because it required a bachelor’s degree.

Americans who have engaged in some type of formal education beyond high school (short of obtaining a bachelor’s degree) are particularly likely to believe they’ve been adversely affected by credentialing requirements as they work their way up the educational ladder. Some 25% of Americans with a high school diploma or less and no additional schooling beyond that have not applied for a job because of a bachelor’s degree requirement. But that figure rises to 34% among those with a high school diploma plus additional vocational schooling, to 38% among those with some college experience but no degree, and to 44% among those with a two-year associate degree. Put somewhat differently, as people receive additional formal education without actually obtaining a bachelor’s degree, they may develop relevant skills without the on-paper credentials to match.

In addition, adults younger than 50 are much more likely than older adults to have refrained from applying to a job they felt they were qualified for because they didn’t meet the formal educational requirements. About four-in-ten non-college graduates ages 18 to 29 (41%) and ages 30 to 49 (44%) say this has happened, compared with 31% of those ages 50 to 64 and just 12% of those 65 and older.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Business & Workplace
• Employee Benefits

A look at small businesses in the U.S.

A look at black-owned businesses in the u.s., 2023 saw some of the biggest, hardest-fought labor disputes in recent decades, do you tip more or less often than the average american, diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, most popular, report materials.

• State of American Jobs omnibus survey

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• The Big Think Interview
• Your Brain on Money
• Explore the Library
• The Universe. A History.
• The Progress Issue
• A Brief History Of Quantum Mechanics
• 6 Flaws In Our Understanding Of The Universe
• Michio Kaku
• Neil deGrasse Tyson
• Michelle Thaller
• Steven Pinker
• Ray Kurzweil
• Cornel West
• Helen Fisher
• Smart Skills
• High Culture
• The Present
• Hard Science
• Special Issues
• Starts With A Bang
• Everyday Philosophy
• The Learning Curve
• The Long Game
• Perception Box
• Strange Maps
• Free Newsletters
• Memberships

What is the purpose of universities?

Credit: Institute for Humane Studies, and Adobe Stock

• In a lecture at UCCS, NYU professor Jonathan Haidt considers the ‘telos’ or purpose of universities: To discover truth.
• Universities that prioritize the emotional comfort of students over the pursuit of truth fail to deliver on that purpose, at a great societal cost.
• To make that point, Haidt quotes CNN contributor Van Jones: “I don’t want you to be safe ideologically. I don’t want you to be safe emotionally. I want you to be strong—that’s different.”

Imagine someone had a knife and told you, “This is a great knife. The only problem is it can’t cut anything.”

You’d think, Then it’s not a great knife.

“ Telos is the Greek word that Aristotle and others use to define the end or purpose of something,” Jonathan Haidt , professor at New York University Stern School of Business and bestselling coauthor of The Coddling of the American Mind , says in a recorded lecture at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs. The telos of a knife is to cut. What, Haidt asks, is the telos of a university?

Professor Jonathan Haidt speaks at UCCS – YouTube www.youtube.com

​ Truth—that’s the purpose of higher education, Haidt says. The academy aims to be an arena where truth is sought, discovered, and explored. When the university is functioning at its best, students learn to present arguments and receive counter-arguments in pursuit of truth.

The question is then: Are today’s universities achieving their purpose?

In his lecture, Haidt suggests that changes in campus culture over the past decade have rerouted university resources away from the pursuit of truth and towards creating an emotionally and intellectually comfortable environment for students.

“From out of nowhere, students in 2014 began asking for trigger warnings,” Haidt says. A growing contingent among student bodies and administrators seemed to believe students were fragile and needed to be aggressively protected from “bad” ideas, offensive imagery, and provocative arguments. Students began reporting faculty, protesting speakers, and publicly shaming peers whose words made them uncomfortable.

CNN contributor Van Jones speaks onstage at the EMA IMPACT Summit in 2018. Credit: Michael Kovac/Getty Images for Environmental Media Association

There are many places and institutions whose purpose, or telos , is comfort. But a university is not one of those places. To make that point, Haidt quotes CNN contributor Van Jones:

I don’t want you to be safe ideologically. I don’t want you to be safe emotionally. I want you to be strong—that’s different. I’m not going to pave the jungle for you. Put on some boots and learn how to deal with adversity. I’m not going to take all the weights out of the gym. That’s the whole point of the gym. This is the gym.

By prioritizing comfort over the pursuit of truth, universities are ignoring their purpose. Higher education should be an arena of open inquiry and free expression, where ideas are exchanged, tested, and scrutinized. A liberal education should be “an invitation to be concerned not with the employment of what is familiar but with understanding what is not yet understood,” according to philosopher Michael Oakeshott.

What are the social repercussions if universities fail to achieve their purpose? New generations could lose more than academic muscle; they could lose the ability and inclination to pursue and prioritize truth. They could become so dependent on emotional comfort that they refuse to contemplate “what is not yet understood” in good faith, instead catastrophizing everything that doesn’t fit into comfortable frameworks.

This is already happening, Haidt points out in his lecture. “We isolate young people from the adult skills that they will one day have to master,” he says. This manifests in growing anxiety, depression, and other disorders among college students.

With college enrollment on the decline, and the global economy under tremendous strain, universities need to realize their telos —or they’ll risk losing their essential role in society.

How overparenting backfired on Americans | Jonathan Haidt | Big Think www.youtube.com

What’s the purpose of university? Your answer may depend on how much it costs you

Research Fellow in Sociology, University of Surrey

Disclosure statement

We are grateful to all students who gave up their time to participate in our focus groups. We would also like to thank the European Research Council for awarding Professor Rachel Brooks a Consolidator Grant, which funded this study (EUROSTUDENTS_681018).

University of Surrey provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought the university sector under greater scrutiny. In some cases, this has prompted new conversations about the purpose of higher education. These have included the extent to which universities are upholding their commitment to public service , and whether the current institutional adjustments in universities will change the way higher education is delivered .

But what do students themselves think about what university is for? In 2017-18, my colleagues and I asked 295 students across six European countries – Denmark, England, Germany, Ireland, Poland and Spain – about what they believed to be the purpose of university study. Their responses shed light on the possible future of higher education in Europe.

This research, which forms part of the Eurostudents project , investigates how undergraduate students understand the purpose of higher education. We found that for many students, it serves three particular functions: to gain decent employment, to achieve personal growth, and to contribute to improvement in society.

But there were interesting variations in students’ views, which often corresponded to how much they had to pay for their studies.

The career ladder

The most common purpose of higher education that students spoke about was to prepare themselves for the labour market. Some students stated that a degree was essential to avoid having to take up a low-skilled job. However, many students believed that an undergraduate degree was insufficient for highly skilled or professional employment.

Here, we see a shift from a conception of higher education as an investment to help move up a social class to viewing it as insurance against downward social mobility .

As a student in England said:

I don’t really think there’s much of an option. If you want to get a decent job these days, you’ve got to go to university because people won’t look at you if you haven’t been.

There were some differences across countries. Emphasis on the purpose of university education being preparation for the job market was strongest in the three countries in our sample where students had to make greater personal financial contributions : England, Ireland and Spain.

Personal growth

The students in our study also discussed ideas of personal growth and enrichment. This was the case in all six countries, including in England where the higher education sector is highly marketised . This means it is set up as a competitive market, where students pay tuition fees and are protected by consumer rights legislation, while metrics such as league tables encourage competition among institutions.

Some students emphasised how they were “growing” through the knowledge they were gaining. Others placed more emphasis on aspects of wider learning that they had experienced since embarking upon their degree. This included interacting with a more diverse group of people than they had previously, and having to be more independent.

Students in Denmark, Germany and Poland talked about this kind of growth – which happened outside formal classes – more frequently than students in the other three nations. Notably, in these countries, students make less of a personal financial contribution to the cost of their university study. When this purpose was mentioned by English students, it was associated particularly with learning how to live independently.

Societal development

Students in all six countries talked about how higher education could improve society. This was brought up most frequently in Denmark, Germany and Poland – where students receive greater support from the government and make less of a personal financial investment to their university education than in the other countries in our sample.

Students tended to talk about their contribution to society by attending university in one of three ways: by contributing to a more enlightened society, by creating a more critical and reflective society, and by helping their country to be viewed more competitively worldwide.

A Polish student said:

[University education is critical to] shaping a responsible and wise society …  one which is not blind, which will do as it is told.

Meanwhile, a Danish student commented:

We’re such a small country, we have to do well  … we have to do better because there are so many people around the world … we have to work even harder to compete with them.

Only Danish and Irish students spoke about national competitiveness in this way. This is likely to be linked to specific geo-political and economic factors, particularly the relatively small size of both nations when compared to some of their European neighbours and the structure of their labour markets.

It is unsurprising to find that many students across Europe believe that a key purpose of university study is to equip them for the job market, as this is often the common message given by governments .

Nevertheless, as shown here, many students have broader views. They see the value of higher education in promoting democratic and critical engagement, while also furthering collective, rather than solely individual, ends.

The national variation we found also suggests that the enduring differences in funding across the continent may affect on how higher education is understood by students.

• Higher education
• Social mobility

Professor of Indigenous Cultural and Creative Industries (Identified)

Communications Director

Associate Director, Post-Award, RGCF

University Relations Manager

2024 Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellowships

What is the purpose of a university education?

Sun kwok says it isn’t just about enhancing one’s career prospects. at its best, a university should broaden students’ minds and horizons, allowing then to discern connections and analyse problems successfully, thus empowering them to change the world.

In the past, we emphasised computational techniques and demanded that our students calculate answers quickly and accurately. But such technical tasks are being taken over by machines

The purpose of institutions of higher learning has evolved over the past millennium: from praising the glory of God, to self-fulfilment, to the search for truth. The 20th century saw the gradual introduction of agriculture and mining schools, teacher colleges and business schools to serve practical needs. In the 21st century, even the world’s leading universities use a mixed model. In addition to arts and science, most include professional disciplines such as architecture, business, engineering, law and medicine, where students train for professional qualifications to practise. I should note, however, that most professional programmes in North America require a four-year general degree as an entrance requirement.

Our world is changing quickly. We cannot expect the material we learn in a professional discipline to remain relevant for the rest of our career. Just look at the hi-tech industry: most of the technical skills needed today were not part of engineering school curriculums a few years ago. Technology and artificial intelligence are also rapidly making certain routine human enterprises obsolete. A successful university education must therefore provide students with fundamental skills and help them learn on their own and adapt to evolving circumstances.

READ MORE: A university degree in Hong Kong is no longer worth what it once was

What are these fundamentals? Language skills, including comprehension, expression and communication, will always be needed. Quantitative skills, such as the ability to analyse a problem, see hidden patterns, identify relevant variables and formulate solutions, are crucial to many jobs in society.

In the past, we emphasised computational techniques and demanded that our students calculate answers quickly and accurately. But such technical tasks are being taken over by machines.

I took four years of mathematics in university. But after I obtained my PhD, I never performed an integration, inverted a matrix, found the root of a non-linear equation or derived solutions to a differential equation by hand. If I need to perform these tasks, I use a calculator or computer. Possessing such technical abilities is far less important than my ability to know what kind of mathematics to apply and how to formulate equations to solve a real-life problem.

A good university education should train a student as a person, to broaden their mind and horizons, to allow them to see the relationships of apparently disparate phenomena, to acquire knowledge independently and to develop the confidence to challenge authority or dogma. These are the qualities that will make them leaders of the future. Such training requires a very different set-up from the current discipline-specific, narrowly focused subject learning that was popular in the old days of the British empire or the Soviet Union.

More From Forbes

The future of higher education: what it means for students and educators.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

The Future of Higher Education What It Means For Students and Educators

“The idea that one can earn a degree at the age of 22 and be set for a career has become as antiquated as the pocket watch.”

—Jeffrey R. Brown, dean at the Gies College of Business at the University of Illinois, from his position paper: “ It’s Time to Transform Higher Education ”

• How do we prepare students and workers to do jobs that don’t even exist yet?
• For challenges we can’t even imagine yet?
• To compete in industries and with business models that haven’t even been invented yet?

Higher education is facing one of its biggest periods of unknowns in recent memory. There’s not a single person or aspect of education that hasn’t been utterly shaken by the pandemic.

But that’s not the only source of uncertainty. Technology changes so fast, the skills we master in school are constantly changing and becoming outdated in a matter of years. Some of the most exciting career opportunities might be for roles that don’t even exist yet in industries we can’t even imagine.

We must acknowledge the pace at which technology evolves, and the extent to which the traditional model limits access to education. Experts across higher education suggest that education should look less structured and make room for more variety: calling for new paths, multiple streams, a wider array of credentials — so people can reskill as needed and put those skills to work immediately.

One of those experts is Jeffrey R. Brown, dean at the Gies College of Business at the University of Illinois, author of this report: “ It’s Time to Transform Higher Education .”

Best Travel Insurance Companies

Best covid-19 travel insurance plans.

He argues that to fully embrace their missions, higher education institutions and educators must think differently about the suite of educational “products” they offer. In his report, he calls for “new forms of content delivery, new ways to assess learning, and new ways to certify that a learner has mastered various concepts and skills.”

I had a conversation with him to explore those ideas further. He started with a reminder of the original purpose of higher education.

“If we go back to the classical, liberal education, the idea was to make us more rational, more thoughtful, more informed citizens,” he said. “And that has benefits not only to the individual receiving the education, but also to society at large – to teach us that there's a bigger world out there, to think about the world's problems.”

Higher education used to be a luxury for a small segment of society, but it’s become more of a necessity for people to be able to thrive, take care of their families, and solve the grand problems of the world. He said there’s still a role for traditional education, but what we also need today is lifelong, skills-based training that is available to people at any point in their lives.

“That's the transformation that needs to take place,” said Brown. “We're working with a very old model, and that old model is not as well-suited to the needs of today's citizens.”

He outlined three main ways higher education needs to evolve.

Transformation in higher education: 3 ways to make it more accessible, lifelong and skills-based

1. The future of higher education is democratized. He wants to democratize education by taking advantage of technology.

“We need to use technology to expand our educational offerings to be less expensive, to work around people's work and family lives, and to reach people who are not fortunate enough to live in an area where they have access to top scholars and top universities.”

2. The future of higher education is individualized. Once you're operating at scale and with technology, you can individualize education. He recommends expanding our idea of what types of credentials are valued – getting beyond the four-year degree to include sub-degrees or less-intensive credentials, certificates, or digital badges. Some people don’t necessarily need to spend two years getting an MBA, but they could benefit from learning cutting-edge material in business, finance or analytics. There should be recognized credentials for doing so.

“It might be enough for me to take three courses in these areas that I really need right now to reach that next level of excellence in my current job. I can individualize my educational needs to where I am in my life, where I am in my career.”

3. The future of higher education is accessible. He talked about breaking down the many barriers that exist for people to get the education they want. Those barriers might be that it’s too expensive, they’ve got a family and a full-time job, or there are no good schools within a 50-mile radius of their home. Leaders can demolish those barriers with some intentional design.

“We've tried to design our program not just in terms of your ability to choose content, but also with some scheduling flexibility to accommodate when you're able to jump in and out – to truly make it more accessible.”

For more insights on the future of higher education, listen to our conversation below.

Future Generations and Higher Education: Students need to Lead the Way

I have a seven-year-old daughter, so I asked Brown: What's the higher education experience going to look like for her?

“Children need to learn how to learn in multiple environments,” he said. “I know the pandemic was a painful time for lots of school-aged children. But they're going to need to learn to navigate in a world where they have face-to-face interaction, online interaction and, increasingly, virtual interactions – using augmented or virtual reality. Getting exposure to a wide range of learning modalities, in addition to a wide range of fields and materials, is going to be really important.”

Leaders in higher education, take note: change is coming whether you’re ready or not. As Brown put it: “You've basically got three choices. You can lead. You can be a very fast follower. Or you can become irrelevant.”

Higher education has been through the ringer over the past few years. Make sure you don’t simply rebuild what you’ve been doing since the 1600s and miss your opportunity to evolve.

"What makes a great leader today is the ability to tolerate and even welcome a future that's unknown," said Wendy York, dean of Clemson's Wilbur O. and Ann Powers College of Business.

Are you ready to adapt? If you can’t change your institution, how can you claim the ability to shape the next generation of leaders that society needs?

To learn more about how leaders are preparing for the future of higher education, register free for the virtual version of the 2022 Leadership in the Age of Personalization Summit hosted by Clemson University’s Wilbur O. and Ann Powers College of Business on October 14.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.