Stanley Fish What Should Colleges Teach

Colleges and universities stand at a crossroads, constantly debating their purpose and the most effective ways to equip students for the future. Stanley Fish, a prominent literary theorist, legal scholar, and public intellectual, has weighed in on this debate with his characteristic incisiveness and provocation. His arguments about what colleges should teach challenge conventional wisdom and offer a compelling, if controversial, vision of higher education. This article will delve into Fish’s perspectives, exploring his core arguments, examining the implications of his views, and considering the criticisms they have attracted.

The Fishian Perspective: Professionalism Over Personal Growth

Stanley Fish's stance on higher education is rooted in a specific understanding of the institution's purpose. He argues that colleges and universities should primarily focus on professionalism, training students in specific skills and knowledge that will make them competent in their chosen fields. This perspective directly contrasts with the more traditional view of college as a place for personal growth, character development, and the cultivation of well-rounded citizens.

Fish doesn’t dismiss the importance of these broader goals entirely, but he firmly believes they are secondary to the central mission of providing students with the tools they need to succeed in the workforce. He suggests that expecting colleges to address every aspect of a student's development is unrealistic and ultimately detracts from their primary responsibility: professional training.

Deconstructing the "Well-Rounded" Ideal

A cornerstone of Fish's argument is his critique of the "well-rounded" ideal. He challenges the notion that colleges should strive to produce graduates who are knowledgeable in a wide range of subjects, possess strong critical thinking skills, and are committed to civic engagement. He argues that this ideal is often vaguely defined and difficult to achieve in practice.

Furthermore, Fish contends that the pursuit of well-roundedness can dilute the quality of professional training. By requiring students to take courses outside their chosen field, colleges may be sacrificing the opportunity for them to develop deep expertise in their area of interest. He believes that a student who is highly skilled in a particular field is more valuable to society than one who possesses a superficial understanding of many different subjects.

The Case for Expertise and Specialized Knowledge

Fish champions the value of expertise and specialized knowledge. He argues that in an increasingly complex world, professionals need to be highly skilled in their respective domains. Colleges, therefore, should focus on providing students with the in-depth training they need to meet the demands of the modern workforce.

He emphasizes that specialized knowledge is not necessarily narrow or limiting. On the contrary, he believes that deep engagement with a particular subject can foster critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and a broader understanding of the world. By immersing themselves in a specific field, students can develop the intellectual tools they need to adapt to changing circumstances and contribute meaningfully to their chosen profession.

Reclaiming the University: A Focus on Skills and Competencies

For Fish, reclaiming the university's true purpose means prioritizing the transmission of skills and competencies directly relevant to professional success. This involves a shift away from general education requirements and towards more specialized curricula.

This doesn't mean abandoning the humanities altogether. Instead, Fish argues that the humanities should be taught in a way that is directly relevant to students' professional goals. For example, a student studying business might benefit from taking a course on rhetoric and persuasion, while a student studying computer science might find value in learning about the history of technology. The key is to connect the humanities to the specific needs and interests of students in different fields.

Practical Implications: Curriculum Reform and Faculty Roles

Fish’s perspective has significant implications for curriculum reform and the roles of faculty. He advocates for a more vocational approach to education, where courses are designed to equip students with the specific skills and knowledge they need to succeed in their chosen careers.

This would likely involve a reduction in general education requirements and an increase in the number of specialized courses offered. It would also require faculty to focus on teaching practical skills and providing students with opportunities to apply their knowledge in real-world settings.

Furthermore, Fish’s vision calls for a re-evaluation of faculty roles. He believes that faculty should be primarily responsible for imparting knowledge and skills, rather than acting as moral guides or social activists. He argues that faculty members should focus on their areas of expertise and avoid using the classroom as a platform for promoting their personal beliefs or political agendas.

Addressing the Criticisms: Beyond Job Training

Fish's views have been met with considerable criticism, particularly from those who believe that higher education should serve a broader purpose than simply preparing students for jobs. Critics argue that his focus on professionalism neglects the importance of personal growth, civic engagement, and the cultivation of critical thinking skills.

One common criticism is that Fish's vision of higher education is too narrow and instrumental. Critics argue that reducing college to a form of job training undermines its potential to transform students' lives and contribute to the common good. They believe that colleges should strive to produce graduates who are not only competent professionals but also engaged citizens and thoughtful individuals.

Another criticism is that Fish's emphasis on specialized knowledge may lead to a decline in creativity and innovation. Critics argue that a broad education is essential for fostering interdisciplinary thinking and generating new ideas. They believe that students who are exposed to a wide range of subjects are more likely to be creative, adaptable, and able to solve complex problems.

The Role of Critical Thinking: A Point of Contention

The role of critical thinking is a key point of contention in the debate over what colleges should teach. Fish acknowledges the importance of critical thinking skills, but he argues that they are best developed within the context of a specific field. He believes that students who are deeply engaged with a particular subject are more likely to develop the intellectual tools they need to analyze information, solve problems, and make informed decisions.

Critics, however, argue that critical thinking skills are essential for all students, regardless of their chosen field. They believe that colleges should provide students with opportunities to develop these skills in a variety of contexts, including courses in the humanities and social sciences. They argue that critical thinking is not simply a set of techniques but a way of approaching the world that requires a broad understanding of different perspectives and values.

The Value of the Humanities: A Defense of Liberal Arts

The value of the humanities is another central issue in this debate. Fish's focus on professionalism has been interpreted by some as a devaluation of the humanities, which are often seen as less directly relevant to professional success.

However, Fish argues that the humanities can be valuable to students in all fields, provided they are taught in a way that is relevant to their professional goals. He believes that the humanities can help students develop communication skills, critical thinking abilities, and a broader understanding of the world. He emphasizes that the humanities should not be seen as an end in themselves but as a means to achieving other goals.

Critics, on the other hand, argue that the humanities have intrinsic value and should not be justified solely on the basis of their instrumental benefits. They believe that the humanities can help students develop a deeper understanding of themselves, their culture, and the human condition. They argue that the humanities are essential for cultivating empathy, promoting social justice, and fostering a more humane society.

Finding a Balance: Integrating Professionalism and Liberal Arts

Ultimately, the debate over what colleges should teach is a debate about how to balance the competing goals of professional training and personal development. While Fish emphasizes the importance of professionalism, many educators believe that colleges should strive to achieve a balance between these two objectives.

One possible approach is to integrate professional training with liberal arts education. This could involve designing curricula that incorporate both specialized courses and courses in the humanities and social sciences. It could also involve creating opportunities for students to apply their knowledge in real-world settings, such as internships, research projects, and community service activities.

Another approach is to focus on developing transferable skills, such as communication, critical thinking, and problem-solving. These skills are valuable in a wide range of fields and can help students succeed in their chosen careers while also preparing them to be engaged citizens and lifelong learners.

The Future of Higher Education: Adapting to Change

The debate over what colleges should teach is likely to continue as higher education adapts to changing social, economic, and technological conditions. As the workforce becomes more competitive and the demands on professionals increase, colleges will need to find new ways to prepare students for success.

This will require a willingness to experiment with new pedagogical approaches, curriculum designs, and assessment methods. It will also require a commitment to ongoing dialogue and collaboration between faculty, students, employers, and policymakers. By working together, these stakeholders can ensure that higher education continues to serve the needs of students and society as a whole.

Conclusion: A Provocative Perspective

Stanley Fish's perspective on what colleges should teach is undoubtedly provocative. His emphasis on professionalism and specialized knowledge challenges conventional wisdom and raises important questions about the purpose of higher education. While his views have been met with criticism, they offer a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate about how to best prepare students for the future.

By forcing us to confront the trade-offs between professional training and personal development, Fish compels us to think critically about the goals of higher education and the most effective ways to achieve them. Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, his arguments deserve serious consideration by anyone who cares about the future of colleges and universities. He pushes us to consider: are we truly serving students best by adhering to outdated models, or is a more focused, professionally driven approach the key to their success in a rapidly evolving world? This is the central question at the heart of Fish's thesis, and one that will continue to shape the landscape of higher education for years to come.