Patrick O'Shea

Comments -

• I would echo Frank Codispoti's concern about the use of "business terminology" at SFA, or in any venue of higher education. When we use such language, we contribute to a disturbing trend that I have noticed in which the students take on the role of the disgruntled consumer. Such a situation changes the very nature of a university education. Instead of college faculty providing the appropriate opportunity and environment for learning, they are further expected to somehow be responsible when students choose not to avail themselves of that opportunity. I am certain that we have all had the unpleasant experience of having a student challenge a failing or poor grade with no better argument than their perception that they don't "deserve" to fail. The suggestion seems to be that they have paid their money, and that SFA now has the responsibility to "make them smart," perhaps even in spite of their poor study habits.
• We must instead emphasize that the payment of tuition affords students the opportunity to become part of an academic community - that they are paying for the privilege of surrounding themselves in an environment which allows them to develop and follow avenues of self-motivated intellectual endeavor. Of course, such intellectual growth takes place with the guidance of the faculty, but it must be student-driven. The concept of the community is central to this educational ideal, as it has been from the time of the Athenian Golden Age, through the medieval universities, right up to the present time. We cannot become a "service provider" and thus define our educational mission in purely managerial or economic terms. To do so, quite simply, negates our most important identity, that of a true university.