Seven years ago, sociologists-turned-education-experts
Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa published a book (under the same name) in which
they made a startling argument. Unveiling a study involving 2,300 American students,
they claimed they had observed very “limited learning on college campuses.” A
majority of students were allegedly showing no or negligible improvement in
their thinking after 4 years of higher learning. Arum’s and Roksa’s methods and
conclusions attracted much flak from more optimistic experts and observers. There
was one curious assertion, however, which almost got lost in the whole debate. Arum
and Roksa had found that students majoring in business administration and
education were making the least progress of all. To the extent that their data
can be trusted, what could be a plausible explanation for this curious finding?
I offer a counterintuitive explanation in my new book, Mental Penguins: The Neverending Education Crisis and the False Promise
of the Information Age. And in the full version of this post on another,
learning-focused blog I have started at isardamov.com.
