fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

A College the Size of a Seminar

A glut of Ph.D.s and endlessly rising college tuition prompted Hollis Robbins to wonder in the Chronicle of Higher Education if we should revive the tradition of the private tutor at the post-secondary level. As a matter of economics, why not consider the option of hiring a single professor to teach a first-year curriculum to […]
uchicago class

A glut of Ph.D.s and endlessly rising college tuition prompted Hollis Robbins to wonder in the Chronicle of Higher Education if we should revive the tradition of the private tutor at the post-secondary level.

As a matter of economics, why not consider the option of hiring a single professor to teach a first-year curriculum to a small number of students? At the level of the individual student, it may make sense to some families. Rather than spend $50,000 for a year of college at a selective private institution, one could hire a single Ivy League-trained individual with a doctorate and qualifications in multiple fields for, say, two-thirds the price (far more than an adjunct professor would make for teaching five courses at an average of $2,700 per course).

The idea becomes more attractive with multiple students. A half-dozen families (or the students themselves) could pool resources to hire a single professor, who would provide all six students with a tailored first-year liberal-arts education (leaving aside laboratory science) at a cost much lower than six private-college tuitions, and at the level of a real salary for a good sole-proprietor professor.

If Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) like those offered by Udacity and Coursera assume that education is primarily a question of transferring skills, which can be learned and practiced with or without personal supervision, the latter-day Septimus Hodges envisioned by Robbins reinfuse the idea of apprenticeship to education.

An apprentice, immersed in the work of her mentor, has the chance to learn things that her teacher may not know how to verbalize. In Edward Frenkel’s memoir Love and Math: The Heart of Hidden Reality, he describes his apprenticeship in mathematics, where professors set him problems to work, and invited him to departmental lectures where he could learn not only how to use the theorems that had been threshed out of conjecture, but the process by which they were generated and tested, and the aesthetic standards that many of his fellow mathematicians believed were a guide to truth.

Trying to teach Frenkel mathematics solely though textbooks and lectures, brilliant as he was, would have made as much sense as teaching blacksmithing out of a book. No matter how detailed the diagrams and instructions, the book would capture only the elements of the discipline we knew how to pin down into what Daniel Kahneman would call System Two thinking—the work we do deliberately, not instinctively.

Many college classes feel like they could be eclipsed by MOOCs because they’re taught at such a remove from the teacher’s own experience of their discipline that apprenticeship is impossible. Apprenticeship is more common in the last two years of college and graduate school, when students have worked through the introductory material in their hundred person lectures and move on to seminars with professors. Robbins’s reform would be intended to bridge this gap (he imagines that after one or two years with a tutor, students would join normal universities as transfer students).

But, although tutors would restore an intimate, vertical relationship between teacher and student, small groups or solo learning might interfere with the lateral relationships between students on campus. Students hold their own symposia in dormitories (albeit with 3am pizza substituted for watered wine and flute girls). Digesting material through the lens of conversation and debate with peers helps promote digestion of material and a more freewheeling exploration of the reading that may be possible while on the clock with a tutor.

While lessons with a tutor are hierarchical, conversations with classmates have the potential for fruitful disruption, as the students review and reevaluate the material together and bring their questions and concerns back to the professor and the traditional academic discussion. A small, private seminar may need to deliberately cultivate this dynamic, since the social traditions and weak ties of a campus will be absent. The solution to a new problem can wind up disrupting the fix to an old one.

The disruptive reforms of MOOCs and tutors are forcing us to reevaluate our expectations about education. As innovators try to unbundle the different goals of college, we have a chance to find better, cheaper solutions, but we also may wind up strengthening traditional institutes of learning, once the debate has helped us disambiguate what we desire for our children besides “a diploma.”


Advertisement

Comments

Become a Member today for a growing stake in the conservative movement.
Join here!
Join here