Alec Ward | Practice isn't what we preach

Talking Backward | Practicum credit system is contrary to SAS' core philosophy

By Alec Ward 02/10/15 11:38pm

A new idea is evidently circulating among the leaders of the School of Arts and Sciences. Buried in the pages of the recently released SAS Strategic Plan were the following three sentences: “Additionally, we will work to create a structure for recognizing students’ efforts to put theory into practice through a new kind of credit on the transcript, distinct from academic credit. These efforts include research, work/internship experience, or community engagement. The College will explore instituting a requirement that students amass several such credits for graduation.”

There are self-evident problems with mandatory community service, namely that any work done not out of altruism but out of a desire to either complete a mandatory step toward the receipt of one’s own degree, or a desire to make one’s transcript more appealing to potential evaluators is probably better described as “self-service by means of community-related work” than as true community service. It’s more a philosophical than a practical complaint; in practice, this probably happens all the time — it would be naive to think that nobody does community work out of a desire to pad out their resume — but it isn’t the sort of disingenuousness the College should incentivize as a matter of policy. The strategic plan seems to want to sidestep this issue by using the term “community engagement” rather than “community service,” but such semantic tinkering does not dodge the larger issue.

However, I recognize that one could argue back and forth on the merits of mandatory or incentivized “community service” for hours. What concerns me more are inevitable issues of philosophical consistency inherent in the proposal.

Rewarding students for participating in research is consistent with the College’s mission to be an institution dedicated to the discovery of new knowledge and the search for truth. While there are already ways in which students may be able to receive academic credit for doing research — including research seminars and independent studies — a comprehensive, streamlined policy would certainly help students whose research is currently ineligible for credit.

Awarding transcript credit — academic or otherwise — for work and community service, however, is not consistent with the College’s mission. While “put[ting] theory into practice,” especially in the realm of community service, is a fine and worthwhile pursuit, it is not what the College, as a liberal arts institution, is here to do. In fact, rewarding the practical application of theoretical knowledge with even some lesser form of credit runs contrary to the the core belief upon which the liberal arts endeavor is based: that acquisition of knowledge is, independent of any other outcomes or effects, a positive and worthwhile good; that learning and contemplating truth are not means to some other end, but the noblest of ends in their own rights.

This belief in the independent value of learning is, to put it bluntly, under siege in our time. Demands increasingly mount that the liberal arts education justify its existence and expense by producing some tangible, “useful” result, some positive secondary outcome to account for the resources it consumes. Many if not most College students would say without hesitation that their primary expectation for their Penn education is that it provide them with job opportunities. Though some might chalk this up to Penn’s notoriously pre-professional culture, the same is true of students at numerous other liberal arts institutions. A number of college ranking schemes, including President Obama’s “College Scorecard” program use the expected cash value of a degree as a weighty criterion for deciding which schools to rank highly, while giving less or no weight to student satisfaction or quality of instruction. Last week, The Washington Post reported that Wisconsin governor Scott Walker had proposed removing “the search for truth” from the University of Wisconsin system’s mission statement and adding “to meet the state’s workforce needs.”

The alternative credit proposal shows an alarming willingness on SAS’ part to back away from its foundational philosophy and acquiesce, at least partially, to these misguided demands. The types of activities that the College chooses to reward with credit should reflect the basic philosophical underpinnings of the mission to which the institution is committed, by definition and by its own mission statement.

ALEC WARD is a College sophomore from Washington, D.C., studying history. His email address is alecward@sas.upenn.edu. “Talking Backward” appears every Wednesday.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.