Theory one is also a meritocracy. A school where students can become well-rounded, but also have the opportunity to specialize in a certain subject sounds like the exact school I want to attend.
Liberal arts majors are thought to score higher on critical thinking tests because they are required to read and write more than students in other studies. I can imagine advanced aptitude testing, like a bar exam for other professions to serve the needs of Theory 1, broad cultural literacy programs at the community college or adult education level to serve the needs of Theory 2, and self-contained coursework for specific credentials to serve the needs of Theory 3.
Theory two states that we learn for the sake of learning. Students have to demonstrate intellectual ability over time and across a range of subjects.
Sixty-eight percent of high school students are heading to college, but the reality is 50 percent of college students dropout of college and 60 percent of students in two-year programs are required to take remedial courses.
Additionally, high schools use grades to be selective within their own school.
The subscribers to this theory believe: It is way more interesting and itll show how much people improve. Intellectual growth is important.
I am not the best test taker out there. They are not talking about the liberal arts. Perhaps there are similarly sized opportunities available to those who develop the Marketing Aptitude Test or the U of P equivalent to the liberal arts! One, higher education is thought of as the obvious next step out of high school.
Ideally, we want everyone to go to college, because college gets everyone on the same page. In he then became a staff writer.
Someone could be really good in a class, but fail the tests because of test anxiety. This means more work for potential employers who need to be well-versed in the quirks and characteristics of many different departments at many different schools.
College is also an aptitude sorter. All three are leaders in their field, and all three are barely recognizable as members of the same species! The perspective on college has changed drastically, according to Menand. So are we really using college to our upmost potential?
Menand is a college professor who has worked at both an Ivy League university and public universities.Aug 16, · The New Yorker published an essay from Professor Louis Menand of Harvard, where he outlined the three implicit (and conflicting) theories of college in America.
Theory 1, which Menand labels "meritocratic," believes that college is means of testing intelligence: College is, essentially, a four-year intelligence test. Louis Menand offers three succinct theories that help explain the various purposes of higher education.
In a focused, well-developed essay, argue which of the three theories in Menands Why We Have College you believe the Cal State University system should emphasize and why.
The theory that fits their situation—Theory 3—is that advanced economies demand specialized knowledge and skills, and, since high school is aimed at the general learner, college is where people can be taught what they need in order to enter a vocation.
Louis Menands critique of The Blank. Customer Question. Essay 2: Rhetorical Analysis of an Argument Assignment: For the second essay, Reminder: Each Response needs to be substantive (theories, resources, and/or examples) and - words in length.
Research is requ. Still taking into consideration all of the possible beliefs of his audience, he finishes with the explanation of all three theories, in detail, pointing out the positive and negative for each one.
Louis Menand has been contributing to The New Yorker since In he then became a staff writer. Oct 27, · Menand discussed three theories in his article Live and Learn.
Menand’s first theory suggests that college is a sorting process, setting a value on graduates; students with the highest value, or merit, are the best.Download