| Who Needs Harvard? |
3 February 2003
|
Affirmative Action Debate Misses the Point of Learning
The usual pundits appeared on TV and radio when the US judiciary got involved with the affirmative action admissions process at the University of Michigan. The right argued that a color-blind society should have no racial quotas, while the left maintained that people are being denied access to Camus, Kant and Copernicus because of their race. What no one asked is "why does a university education matter anymore?"
Education in its broadest sense is, of course, vital to our survival as a species, and it always has been. Homo sapiens made it so far not due to strength or speed but rather thanks to our brains and our ability to learn. However, the skills that people need to function in the 21st century may not be best acquired in a medieval institution like the university. Using a computer is a fundamental skill, but it does not require a four-year degree. Avionics, electronics, plumbing, construction, mechanics, marketing, sales, and more can readily be done without spending $100,000 at an Ivy League institution.
The insistence that a college education is for everyone is non-sense. What is needed is a total reformation in our thinking about learning. Where one got a diploma is irrelevant -- what one learned in acquiring that diploma is everything. If awarding degrees and certificates makes it easier for people and employers to assess what has been learned, then let us continue to award them. Yet we must remember, one does not succeed because of the degree, but rather because of the learning that stands behind it.
Should blacks and hispanics get preferential treatment in applying to Harvard? Maybe we should ask why the candidate needs a four-year degree before condemning them to four years in a city like Boston, which has all the evils of Britain with none of its charms and vile winters to boot.