| 
|
This piece is part of a larger section called 'Questions, comments and continuing conversations'.
To see all of that section, click on these lines.
Preparing students to compete in the global economy
In reply to Ben Brown's response to my earlier letter:
I have an associates degree in liberal arts. So I definitely know what a liberal arts education entails. I am saying that the role of liberal arts education as formation is excellent and important for preserving the fundamental beliefs and principles which should be so much a part of our lives but sadly are not.
My position was and is that our education needs to have some practical application to it. That is, when graduation time comes we have to be ready compete in the global economy and be prepared to defend the Gospel. We are going to have difficulty defending the Gospel without practical training.
The core curriculum task force is looking at ways to have both liberal arts study with necessary applications as computer training, resume and cover letter writing. They are talking about ways to do this so our students will be both educated and trained. Franciscan University is both a liberal arts school and a school of professional programs.
It is academically irresponsible for someone not to take courses and/or workshops on computer literacy, resume writing, and how to do a job interview. Education for its own purpose is good when it is integrated with practical applications.
Peter Cole, MA Education program
Related Articles:
• Shouldn't we have a real core curriculum at Franciscan University?, John F. Crosby (I,1)
• Core curriculum (1), R.J. Convery (I,2)
• Core curriculum (2), Jim Fox (I,2)
• What is a 'real' Catholic education?, Kathleen van Schaijik (I,2)
• Core curriculum (3), Katherine Kemmis (I,3)
• Core curriculum and anti-intellectualism, Adam Tate (I,4)
• Core curriculum and critical thinking, Joseph A. Loizzo (I,5)
• Core curriculum (4), Regis Martin (I,6)
• A defense of a diversified core, Mark Fischer (I,7)
• Making 'the connection': A Steubenville education, Regina Schmiedicke (I,7)
• In reply to Mark Fischer's defense of the present core curriculum, John F. Crosby (II,1)
• More on the curriculum debate, Mark Fischer (II,2)
• Last words on the core, John F. Crosby (II,3)
• What liberal educators may not omit, Regis Martin (IV,4)
• Dr. Martin does it again, Joanna K. M. Bratten (IV,5)
• FUS needs to get more practical about education, Peter Cole (IV,5)
• Why non-liberal majors need a liberal core, Susan C. Fischer (IV,5)
• The real purpose of liberal education, Ben Brown (IV,6)
• The will and the intellect are inseparable, Martha L. Blandford (IV,7)
• Preparing students to compete in the global economy, Peter Cole (IV,7)
• Education not limited to the mind, Susan C. Fischer (IV,7)
• According to the Tradition, education aims beyond the intellect, Matthew Fish (IV,7)
• Newman, education and context, Kathleen van Schaijik (IV,7)
• More on the aim of education: Ben Brown replies to his critics, Ben Brown (V,1)
• Preparing FUS graduates for the modern world, Jason Negri (V,2)
• Liberal arts and professional programs: a reply to Jason Negri, Ben Brown (V,3)
• Let's improve our stats, Sofia Genato (V,3)
• The ideal of perfecting the mind is timeless, Michael Houser (V,3)
• Cultivating the intellect, Anne Schmiesing (V,3)
• Computers and liberal learning, Ben Brown (V,5)
• The eternally practical liberal arts, Timothy J. Williams (V,5)
• Liberal arts with professional training: the best of both worlds, Thomas E. Kelly (V,6)
• Education is not primarily about preparing to evangelize in the workplace, Ben Brown (V,7)
• The God gap in the workplaces of the world, Peter Cole (V,7)
• Arrogant idealism, Jason Negri (V,8)
By the same author:
• FUS needs to get more practical about education, (IV,5)
• Preparing students to compete in the global economy, (IV,7)
• A key difference between 'Church work' and regular 'work', (V,2)
• The God gap in the workplaces of the world, (V,7)
[back to top]
© The University Concourse, May 4, 1999
|
