I began my career in higher education in 1964 as an instructor of mathematics in the mechanical technology department of the school that was later to become Moraine Park Technical Institute. I spent two years teaching mathematics and physics at this two year institution that required, as all the two year programs in Wisconsin did, a course in American Institutions as an integral part of every major. The graduates of that school found work in the machine shops and small engine manufacturing firms throughout Wisconsin during those years. They were culturally steeped in a work ethic that more or less guaranteed a secure living to those who gave an honest day’s work. These students were well on their way to become what was referred to in those days as the "blue collar" middle class.

I left in 1966 to be a part of the Carnegie Technical Mathematics Curriculum Development Project at the Milwaukee Institute of Technology (later to become Milwaukee Area Technical College). This college was established in 1918 and modeled after the technical colleges (fortbildungschule¹) in Germany. I stayed at Milwaukee Area Technical College (MATC) in increasingly responsible positions and became Assistant to the President in 1990. During that time I became interested in comparative higher education and completed a study of technical higher/further education in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. I was also fortunate to be affiliated with a FIPSE (Fund for the Improvement of Post Secondary Education) Education and the Economy Alliance that tried to look at the relationship between work and learning within the context of the changing world economy.²

In 1991 I took a year to set up the Institutional Research Office at Brigham Young University Hawaii and subsequently became the Assistant to the President. Although my responsibilities at MATC forced me to view the entire curriculum within the context of the greater community and, in fact, become active in curricular responses to the "rust belt" phenomenon of the 1980s, it was at Brigham Young University Hawaii that I began my understanding of the potential impact of American higher education on the world during the twenty-first century.

I am now in my seventh year as Vice President for Academics at Brigham Young University Hawaii, a school of 2350 students, 50% of which are international, coming from 76 nations. During that time I have visited extensively with education, civic and government leaders in my travels to China, Mongolia, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Vanuatu, and The Republic of the Marshall Islands, Tahiti, Tonga, Fiji, Samoa, American Samoa, New Zealand and Australia. Prominent leaders from these and other countries from Asia, Africa and the Pacific Rim have visited the BYU Hawaii campus.

A critical objective of the BYU Hawaii endeavor is to prepare international students to return to their homelands and improve the quality of life in those countries. I have been forced, by my responsibilities, to examine how our curriculum prepares international students to return and lead productive lives that will have a positive influence upon peace. As I read about and work in higher education I have begun to realize that we, in American higher education, know very little about what international students bring to the college or university and therefore we know little about the context in which they process and eventually interpret and apply what they learn in America. I do believe that we, in US higher education have been missing an opportunity to make a positive impact upon globalization for the common good.

During my 40-plus years in higher education I have been an observer of and participant in these recurring debates and issues:

Education versus training

Liberal Arts versus Professions

The use of technology to deliver education

The importance of co-curricular and extra curricular activities in providing a total education.

The definition of general education (i.e. the culture wars)

The transition from teaching to learning

The high cost of college

The threat of for-profit schools

The market-driven college or university

As I review these issues and integrate them into the current discussions regarding American higher education in the world I see gaps regarding international students. Discussions within America regarding American higher education revolve around preparing Americans for the twenty-first century. By extension, international students studying in the United States would also be prepared for the twenty-first century. Although much discussion is taking place regarding the entry skills of American students, little acknowledgement of the diversity of international students, other than language, is included in the discussions. The lack of understanding of the culture and expectations of international students along with the locally, often vocationally, defined expectations of American higher education contribute to the missed opportunity to promote discussions regarding the common good.

Higher education in the US is certainly diverse and is delivered at many levels from technical and community colleges to comprehensive universities. The majority of these institutions have clearly stated missions that place them in specific roles relative to their communities, their potential students, the workforce and society. This diversity of institutions is part of what makes the American higher education system strong. But, the sector of higher education that carries status across borders is the research university. This is evident in the various lists attempting to define the best universities in the world. The practice of distinguishing between further and higher education in the UK is additional evidence of this. In this paper, higher education will mean the various senior institutions that award bachelors degrees and above.

The university as we know it today evolved from the institutions of medieval Europe and several of the Great Universities of the world are the traditional universities of Europe.

But, over the years the United States has become the envy of the rest of the world in the quality of graduate education being offered in its many prestigious research universities. According to the Institute of higher Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University nineteen of the twenty-five best universities in the world are American. Each year thousands of students come to the United States to study both as graduates and undergraduates.

These international students who study in the US are influenced not only by what happens in the university, but also by what occurs outside the university as they interface with American culture. They begin to understand democracy, capitalism, freedom, and religion from the point of view of a college student. Their "slice of America" will be as varied as their university, its community and their major. But, in some way, each will become Americanized.

At the same time, universities in emerging nations are looking to American higher education as a model for their universities. Much of the professional discussion regarding American higher education has to do with its "fitness for purpose" for the American people. But what American higher education becomes impacts the world in several ways. First, international students studying in the United States will become somewhat Americanized and, if they return home, be influenced by the ethics and morality (or lack thereof) evident in American higher education as they reintegrate into their home countries. Second, as many of these countries look to the United States as a model of higher education they will adapt our system, along with its flaws, to their emerging higher education needs. Therefore, innovations to include a kind of ethical globalization, a globalization for the common good, in American higher education will have a significant impact on innovations in higher education throughout the world.

In this paper, I will briefly review the evolution of higher education in the United States, discuss current concerns in American higher education and relate them to higher education in the emerging nations. I will propose that decisions that are made regarding the nature of higher education in the United States will have an impact throughout the world as international students study in America and as American higher education influences developing nations. I will suggest that an open discussion of ethics and religion in the curriculum will have a positive impact on the common good throughout the world. After reading an earlier version of this paper, a Scholar from the Institute of World Religions at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences suggested that I was proposing the concept of a globalization of Spirituality. I prefer to suggest Globalization for the Common Good as defined by Kamran Mofid.

The university, as we know it, has grown out of a western tradition and has been exported throughout the world as one of the artifacts of colonialism. Although the details of higher (tertiary) education are different from place to place, the general concept and purposes are similar because of this colonial activity. Two significant results are currently evident: first, the influence of the British System in the Commonwealth nations; and second, the predominance of English as the medium of higher education. For instance, when I was visiting Hogeschool Enschede in the Netherlands in 1990, the school was involved in training electronics technicians from Mexico, in the Netherlands and the language of instruction was English. Although this was a technical school, the same is true for research universities as more of the new knowledge is being developed at universities where English is the language of instruction and discussion.

The Institute of Higher Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University recently ranked the top 500 universities in the world. The top twenty-five universities, their countries and the language of instruction are listed below.

The top twenty-five universities in the world:

1. Harvard University USA English

2. Stanford University USA English

3. University of Cambridge UK English

4. University of California-Berkeley USA English

5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology USA English

6. California Institute of Technology USA English

7. Princeton University USA English

8. University of Oxford UK English

9. Columbia University USA English

10. University of Chicago USA English

11. Yale University USA English

12. Cornell University USA English

13 University of California-San Diego USA English

14. Tokyo University Japan Japanese

15. University of Pennsylvania USA English

16. University of California-Los Angeles USA English

17. University of California-San Francisco USA English

18. University of Wisconsin-Madison USA English

19. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor USA English

20. University of Washington-Seattle USA English

21. Kyoto University Japan Japanese

22. Johns Hopkins University USA English

23. Imperial College London UK English

24. University of Toronto Canada English

25. Imperial College London UK English

25. University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign USA English

There are actually twenty-six universities because two are tied at twenty-fifth. Twenty-four of these twenty-six universities have English as the language of instruction. Therefore, the educated elite of the world will have a high probability of having been taught in English. These universities are ranked according to criteria that are defined to evaluate research quality and productivity. These are truly the "Best Research Universities" in the world. These are the universities that the top student scholars in the world seek out.

Nineteen of these top research universities are in the United States. Charles M. Vest, the former President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology outlines the factors he believes contribute to the "excellence and competitive success" of American higher education:

The diversity of institutions-from small liberal arts colleges to large public and private universities- allows students to select the school that best matches their needs

New assistant professors have freedom to choose what they teach as well as research

Our research universities weave together teaching and research in ways that bring freshness, intensity and renewal to both activities

We welcome students, scholars and faculty from abroad. Their intellectual and cultural richness help define our institutions

Support of frontier research in our universities has long been an important responsibility of the federal government, which awards grants to researchers on the basis of their merit in a competitive marketplace of ideas

A tradition of philanthropy, fostered by U.S. tax law, encourages alumni and others to support our colleges and universities. Scholarship funds they provide allow talented students from families of modest means to attend even the most costly schools

Open competition for faculty and students drive excellence.³

Two of the above factors are important to our discussion. First, the diversity of institutions, even though the many non-research colleges and universities in America are not listed as the "Best in the World," these institutions often supply the graduate students who perform so well in the ranked research universities. These will be discussed later. . Second, the inclusion of students, scholars and faculty from abroad, these international participants provide an intellectual richness to the American institutions.

4. The University in the United States

The early American colleges that were established in the colonial era were sponsored by various religious groups and were modeled after the British universities of Oxford and Cambridge. The idea of a residential college where students and scholars live and study together remains in the American psyche. The sense of shared mission and community has remained a theme within American higher education from the colonial times until now. The remaining colonial colleges, those founded before 1781, still maintain prestige, in part because of this mystique of community. These universities: Harvard University, The College of William and Mary, Yale University, Princeton University, Columbia University, Brown University, Dartmouth College, Rutgers University, and the University of Pennsylvania all maintain their colonial architecture as a physical reminder of their colonial heritage.

The current state universities in the United States evolved from the "land grant" legislation of the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The provisions of the Northwest Ordinance (1787) and the Morrill Act (1862) set aside land for universities "to establish collegiate programs in such ‘useful arts’ as agriculture, mechanics, mining, and military instruction."⁴ These universities would eventually become the flagship research universities of each state.

In the nineteenth century teacher education in the United States was supported by the development of normal schools that provided licenses for teachers. These schools eventually became teachers’ colleges that awarded bachelors degrees, then state colleges and eventually regional state universities that award bachelors degrees, masters degrees in applied areas and a few doctorates.

At the same time small denominational colleges were springing up throughout the East, South and Midwest. These flourished at different rates. Some closed, some merged and many continue into the twenty first century.

Together, these trends evolved into the diversity of higher education institutions that have provided a variety of choices so students can select the colleges or universities that best meet their needs. There are currently approximately 3.400 higher education institutions in the United States of which 2,200 award bachelor’s degrees or above. These institutions are independent from each other and could not be considered a "system" of higher education.

The oldest of these universities established themselves at the beginning of the last century as representing the most prestigious universities. In 1900 the presidents of fourteen American universities met and formed the Association of American Universities. The charter members were: Harvard University, Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University, University of Chicago, University of California, Clark University, Cornell University, Catholic University, University of Michigan, Leland Stanford, Jr. University (later to become Stanford University), University of Wisconsin, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, and Yale University. A few years later Edwin Slosson, editor of The Independent, published Great American Universities, a book which contained 12 of the original fourteen universities. Slosson replaced Clark University and Catholic University with the University of Illinois and the University of Minnesota. ⁵

In the most recent ranking of the 248 national universities thirteen of these fourteen are listed in the top fifty national universities and all fourteen in the top fifty research universities in the world. The Edwin Slosson fourteen are listed below with their 2006 U.S. News ranking in parenthesis followed by their Shanghai Jao Tong ranking:

The nine private universities of the original fourteen are still ranked in the top fourteen over one hundred years later. Four of the five public universities in the original fourteen are ranked in the top fifty with only the University of Minnesota falling out of the top fifty being ranked at sixty-sixth. This illustrates how enduring reputation is in American higher education. It would make sense that the private universities would rise to the top because they are well endowed and maintain market appeal through high tuition. The public universities on the other hand, although well funded, have less per student funding available. In addition, the public universities have been under pressure over the last 45 years to become accessible to a wider spectrum of students. What is interesting is the relative higher ranking of public universities among world universities. The five public universities in the Slosson list are all ranked higher in the World than they are in the US. This is clearly a result of the well funded research programs in these Land Grant institutions and the fact that the world rankings weigh research productivity highly.

How did the two schools which were replaced by Illinois and Minnesota do in 2006? Clark University ranked 84^th and Catholic University of America was ranked 120^th.

Interestingly, many of the highly ranked private universities grew out of colleges designed and established by various Christian denominations. Harvard was founded by Congregationalists, Princeton by Presbyterians, Yale by Puritans, and Columbia by Anglicans.⁶ In fact, Harvard College’s original mission statement in 1636 was a verse from the New Testament, John17:3. "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent." Frank Rhodes in The Creation of the Future asserts:

"The earliest faculty members of these colleges shared both a common faith and a common sense of mission. These were communities of conformity. Their students, sharing at least nominally these same convictions, pursued a common curriculum, which gained a unity and coherence from those convictions."⁷

These universities had a closeness among students and faculty that was a result of their small size and their shared religious perspectives. The growth and secularization of the universities has changed this environment and they are, in fact, different institutions today.

In the meantime eleven religious universities who keep their religious affiliation in their mission statements were ranked in the top 100 national (doctoral) universities by U.S news in 2006. They are listed below with their ranking in parenthesis:

As mentioned previously, the early private colleges that were originally religiously affiliated have evolved into large secular private research universities. But small religiously affiliated colleges still remain in American higher education and dominate the comprehensive bachelor’s degree-granting category. According to U.S. News, in 2006 there were 324 comprehensive bachelors’ institutions. These are considered less competitive than the national universities and are often considered as "regional" universities. They are principally teaching institutions and do not have research programs that compare to the national universities and are not ranked in the Shanghai Jiao Tong University list. But, in many ways these colleges are the most similar to the colonial colleges of any of the segments of higher education in the U.S. Because they are considered "regional" they are ranked in four regions in the United States. The top ten (or eleven or twelve when their may be a tie) for each region are listed below with the religious affiliation of each university in parenthesis.

In the Midwest Region eleven of twelve are religiously affiliated.

In the North Region seven of eleven are religiously affiliated.

In the South Region nine of eleven are religiously affiliated.

In the West Region all ten of the top ranked colleges are religiously affiliated.

The strength of American Higher Education is that it allows the diversity of institutions so that when institutions evolve away from their original mission others will move into the mission if there is a market. Clearly, there is a market. Over eighty percent of these regionally elite institutions were religiously affiliated in 2005.

5. Crisis in US Education and how it impacts World Education

The GI Bill has been credited with changing the face of higher education in the United States in such a way as to have proven that increased access can be successful. The GI Bill enabled the members of the military who served during World War II to attend college via scholarships that were offered as a result of their service. This permanently changed the face of higher education in the United States and ushered in the era of accessibility. The civil rights struggles of the 1960’s further opened higher education to previously disenfranchised members of American society.

It was no longer "business as usual". These new and different students brought a variety of backgrounds, habits, expectations and learning styles to the campus. Much of the literature in higher education in the subsequent years has dealt with various attempts to define and deal with the changing student needs. Traditional students have been and continue to be served well by American higher education. Nontraditional students succeed at much lower rates. On the other hand, with the possible exception of European-Americans, ethnic groups participate in American higher education at higher rates than the participation in higher education in the regions of their historic origin.

Peter Smith, in his recent book The Quiet Crisis outlines how higher education, in his opinion, is currently failing America. His experience with adult learners and nontraditional colleges and universities has given him a unique insight into the underserved portion of American Higher Education. Smith addresses these concerns regarding these new students as he states what we know about higher education as it enters the twenty-first century. He states the following:

We know that today’s world has very different standards for success.

We know that today’s students are different people representing different demographics and cultures.

We know that today’s students learn in many different ways.

We know that technology now allows us to both better understand how people learn and to design learning systems that fit the uniqueness of each student.⁸

His concern is for the underserved and his caution is that America has failed them. Smith views two current trends in higher education as providing the potential to turn this around. The first is service learning and the second is the increased use of technology from the point of view of both learning and flexibility. He is convinced that "a high-quality education in the 21^st century can deliver employability as well as intellectual development."⁹

Smith goes on to outline the intellectual characteristics that employers say they need in college graduates and concludes that those are also the intellectual characteristics of a well-educated, liberal arts graduate. These include:

The ability to think critically and analytically

The ability to solve problems by applying information and knowledge across different situations

The ability to work effectively on teams, to collaborate and achieve consensus

The ability to reach comfortably across cultural and ethnic traditions

The ability to understand domestic and global co-workers and customers, write effectively, and read broadly

The ability to employ technology as a second language¹⁰

Seventeen years earlier I reported in Liberal Education and Education for Work a similar conclusion when summarizing the results of the then current FIPSE (Fund for the Improvement of Post Secondary Education) projects that were members of the Education and the Economy Alliance. My conclusion at that time was:

"All of these projects are providing education for work. Each was designed specifically to provide education for work in response to specific local economic needs. In responding to these needs, the project researchers identified desirable outcomes of education for work. Many of these outcomes are shared by all of the projects even though they were arrived at independently. These common outcomes established by business and industry employers are desirable characteristics of effective workers at all levels. The common outcomes were reported as follows:

Overall, business and industry reported a need for independent self-starters as employees at all levels. In other words, employers need liberally educated workers.

The members of the Education and the Economy Alliance have concluded that liberal education and education for work must be one in the same in order that the worker may adjust to changes in the labor market. What is still being debated is the relationship between liberal education and the liberal arts."¹¹

Reviewing my comments in 1987 and Smith’s comments we can see that the three areas that have emerged as needed between 1987 and 2005 have been cross-cultural understanding, globalization and technology. What is disappointing is that neither of us identified moral or ethical behavior as important. I would like to assume that the reason was that ethical, honest behavior is just expected of everyone and is such a part of our culture that it doesn’t even have to be mentioned. But recent scandals in business have shown this not to be true. The evolution from religiously affiliated colleges and universities with consistent and agreed upon moral and ethical standards to secular universities where the "Christian gentleman" is replaced by the "liberally educated person" has been rocky as each college or university struggles with its own definition of liberal education. In speaking of this in the greater context of society, Byker states:

"Tocqueville maintained that religion is even more fundamental than respect for law in the formation of the habits of the heart and mind that underpin civil society. That view was soon to be contested. Dostoevsky thought that if people have no sense of the divine, no transcendent moral anchoring for the self, nothing to which the will is bound to submit, nothing inherent in the natural order to keep it in check, no compelling reason to be burdened by guilt, then anything is possible—because there is no inhibiting "Truth." Even Nietzsche agreed that without God all that is left is the human will-to-power."¹²

Byker continues; "The developments of the past 150 years have undermined the capacity to form the convictions upon which character must be based. Rationalist and constructivist alternatives have been based on the Enlightenment principle described by Kuyper as, ‘No God, no master!".¹³ These alternatives have led to the decline of the moral and social capital needed to sustain social, economic, and political prosperity."¹⁴ This trend, along with globalization in general is leading us away from education that promotes the common good.

In their recent study of fifty American Universities, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni examined the core curriculum at fifty top American universities. The idea of a core curriculum, a general education curriculum or a liberal arts curriculum, all address the current efforts to develop an educated citizen. This core curriculum was meant to provide the ethical insights and knowledge that would provide the modern day equivalent of the earlier "Christian Gentleman". They defined the core curriculum as courses in the following areas:

This clearly illustrates the concerns of Byker in that there is no mention of anything that specifically could, "form the convictions upon which character must be based."

Even though these seven curricular areas comprise a core that falls short of educating a replacement for the "Christian Gentleman" of earlier times, the major universities in America even fall short of the lesser core requirement. Twenty four of the fifty colleges had two or fewer of these seven requirements. These included such prestigious universities as Harvard, UC-Berkeley, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Michigan State, Pennsylvania, Princeton, Yale Brown, Colgate, Cornell, Iowa State, Nebraska, Northwestern, Pennsylvania State, and Wisconsin.¹⁶ This doesn’t necessarily mean that these universities do not have a course requirement in ethical thought and moral values. The study did not specifically address this topic.

The Association of American Colleges and Universities, representing approximately 1,000 universities and colleges, concerns itself primarily with liberal education in American higher education. In October of 1998, their Board of Directors adopted the following Statement on Liberal Learning;

"A truly liberal education is one that prepares us to live responsible, productive, and creative lives in a dramatically changing world. It is an education that fosters a well-grounded intellectual resilience, a disposition toward lifelong learning, and an acceptance of responsibility for the ethical consequences of our ideas and actions. Liberal education requires that we understand the foundations of knowledge and inquiry about nature, culture and society; that we master core skills of perception, analysis, and expression; that we cultivate respect for truth; that we recognize the importance of historical and cultural context; and that we explore connections among formal learning, citizenship, and service in our communities." ¹⁷

This definition of a liberal education includes "acceptance of responsibility for the ethical consequences of our ideas and actions." This is the point around which ethics and morality can be discussed in the secular university. But, the statement itself is deliberately value free, leaving the individual to decide what is ethical.

Having a general education and being liberally educated are terms that are regularly interchanged in America. In higher education in America each university identifies what it means to be generally educated. Therefore, nearly every American university has a general education statement. The "qualities of a generally educated student" as defined by Brigham Young University Hawaii are included below as a current example of a statement from a religiously affiliated university.

The generally educated student will:

Pursue truth. The student will seek to learn truth through a variety of discovery processes, search for knowledge, and be able to synthesize and analyze information.

Communicate effectively. The student will be able to demonstrate throughout the curriculum the abilities to read and listen with understanding and express complex ideas in spoken and written forms.

Solve problems. The student will think innovatively, and apply appropriate strategies for the resolution of life’s problems.

Respond aesthetically. The student will be able to respond with sensitivity and discrimination to various creative forms.

Behave ethically. The student will be able to purposefully define personal values, apply ethical and religious principles in making moral judgments, and accept the consequences of decisions.

Integrate socially. The student will develop understanding of various perspectives, elicit the views of others and be able to integrate successfully in collaborative environments.

Be globally responsible. The student will recognize the interdependence of global forces and local contexts, learning to act with an understanding of the social and environmental issues that shape the world.

In an example of a currently secular university, Princeton University summarizes its general education requirements as follows:

"… The University requirements for graduation transcend the boundaries of specialization and provide all students with a common language and common skills. It is as important for a student in engineering to engage in disciplined reflection on human conduct, character, and ways of life or to develop critical skills through the study of history, aesthetics, and theory of literature and the arts as it is for a student in humanities to understand the rigors of quantitative reasoning and to develop a basic knowledge of the capabilities and limitations of scientific inquiry and technological development."¹⁸

Although the Princeton statement makes no specific reference to ethical and moral development, the general education requirements at Princeton include a course in the area of "Ethical Thought and Moral Values."

Carefully reviewing the above two statements reveals the willingness of a religious university to include "ethical principles’ and "moral judgments" in language about the goals of general education while the more secular university is apt to list courses or topics.

Clearly, the expectation of a generally educated person to behave ethically should be an integral part of the moral development expected in higher education, especially if we are concerned with promoting the common good.

6. The Higher Education Business and International Students

Internationally mobile students have become a source of income for universities in the United States and many other developed nations. In the 2002/03 school year 40% of the students studying abroad were studying in the United States. More importantly, the second- and third-ranked destination countries, the United Kingdom (18%) and Australia (6%) were also English-speaking nations.¹⁹ These countries, along with Canada, account for over two thirds of the students in the world studying abroad. Clearly, English will continue to be the language of education and scholarship. Singapore’s success with English has been an example to other Asian nations, and developing nations such as Mongolia are considering making English a second official language of the country.

The number of international students studying in the United States dropped from 586,323 in 2002/03 to 572,509 in 2003/04. During that time the number of international graduate students rose slightly from 267,876 to 274,310. But, the number of international students taking Intensive English Language programs in the United States declined from 16,856 to 10,224.²⁰ This was a decrease of 39.3%. This was clearly the result of tighter visa screening, improved English Language programs in the home countries, and increased competition from other English-speaking nations.

Part of this is because after 9/11 there has been a shift in enrollment to other western nations. But it is also a signal that the tertiary institutions in countries such as Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom see Intensive English Language programs as a stable source of revenue. Additionally, Intensive English Language programs are increasing in the home countries of non-English speakers. As English becomes more evident in these countries, students will not necessarily have to travel abroad to learn English. The growing pool of in-country English speakers will provide English teachers for those countries.

In the 2003/04 school year the number of international students in the top three areas of study declined by 4%. These were; Business and Management (-2.4%), Engineering (-4.9%) and Mathematics and Computer Sciences (-5.8%). In actual numbers this represented a decline of 5,590 in Business and Management, a decline of 1,362 in Engineering and a decline of 4,190 in Mathematics and Computer Science. At the same time the enrollment of international students in Social Sciences increased 8,105 and Physical and Life Sciences increased 1,056.²¹

These international students are getting high quality educations that include curriculum that reflects each university’s perceptions of what it means to be an educated American. Therefore international students should be aware of these discussions. In the same manner, universities with high international enrollments would benefit from viewing their curriculum as preparing well-educated world citizens. If the third paragraph of the AAC &U Statement on Liberal Learning is implemented on a campus, it would increase the value of the international student’s experience.

"Because liberal learning aims to free us from the constraints of ignorance, sectarianism, and myopia, it prizes curiosity and seeks to expand the boundaries of human knowledge. By its nature, therefore, liberal learning is global and pluralistic. It embraces the diversity of ideas and experiences that characterize the social, natural, and intellectual world. To acknowledge such diversity in all its forms is both an intellectual commitment and a social responsibility, for nothing less will equip us to understand our world and to pursue fruitful lives." ²²

The international student, therefore, will benefit from studying in America. But, in the same manner, the American student will benefit from having the international student on campus.

7. Ethics and Spirituality in Higher Education

As the American university has evolved over the last several centuries, it followed the path of secularization. In The Creation of the Future: The Role of the American University, Frank Rhodes described the decline of Christian influence in higher education as more secular state universities were being established. This, combined with the intellectual fragmentation caused by the growth in specialized knowledge, created a void in higher education that was expected to be met by the humanities and the development of the general education curriculum. He explains the void as follows:

"The void that was left by the eclipse of Christian influence was only partly intellectual: it was also partly moral and partly social. It was intellectual because it was no longer clear that there was any ultimate unity, or even harmony of knowledge to which one could aspire. It was moral in that the earlier tradition had sought to encourage and promote right conduct—to produce a well-rounded "Christian gentleman"—and had provided a broad cohesion of integrating purpose for the larger educational enterprise, and, indeed – the social part – for a life of meaningful purpose and fulfillment within a just and benevolent society." ²³

But the expectation that the humanities would fill the void was inhibited by the increased intellectual fragmentation and increased size. The residential community of scholars was replaced with what Clark Kerr called a "multiversity". The sense of community of the earlier colleges has left most of the large research universities. This loss of community is lamented by Rhodes:

"In the case of universities, loss of community is not a mere misfortune; it is a catastrophe, for it undermines the very foundation on which the universities were established: conviction that the pursuit of knowledge is best undertaken by scholars, living and working, not in isolation, but in the yeasty and challenging atmosphere of community." ²⁴

With no clear direction, the non-vocational piece of a typical student’s higher education often becomes a series of disjointed courses. In fact, some very prestigious universities, such as Brown University, pride themselves in having no specific general education requirement.

Alexander Astin laments these results in his keynote address at the conference "Spirituality as a Legitimate Concern for Higher Education," in 2002. His concern is that students’ values have been changing over recent decades (1966-1996). American college students used to concern themselves with "developing a meaningful philosophy of life" and are now more interested in "being very well off financially".²⁵ Astin states that "spiritual" questions encompass a broad set of issues:

How do we achieve a greater sense of community and shared purpose in higher education?

How can we provide greater opportunities for individual and institutional renewal?

What are the causes of the division and fragmentation that so many academics experience in their institutional and personal lives?

What does it mean to be authentic, both in the classroom and in our dealings with colleagues?

What are some of the practices and traditions that make it difficult for us to be authentic in an academic setting?

What are some of the disconnections that higher education is experiencing in relation to the larger society? How might we better serve the public good?

How can we help our students achieve a greater sense of meaning and purpose in their academic and personal lives? ²⁶

These are all addressing, as Byker describes it, "the capacity to form convictions upon which character must be based." ²⁷

A case in point is the recent Enron Scandal. On December 11^th 2002, Enron’s lawyers filed the largest bankruptcy case in the history of the United States. Enron was a multibillion dollar energy company headquartered in Houston, Texas and led by the best and brightest that American higher education could produce. The leaders were smart, they knew they were smart, and they valued being smarter than the others. They were driven by greed and valued cleverness over morality.

The founder, chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Enron was Ken Lay who held a PhD in Economics from the University of Missouri. Jeff Skilling, the President and chief operating officer (COO) held an MBA from Harvard University. Andrew Fastow, the chief financial officer (CFO) of Enron held an MBA from Northwestern University. Rebecca Mark, the CEO of Enron International held an MBA from Harvard University.

Although many people feel that this scandal has seriously affected the trust the public has in American business, a more important concern is the impact this should have on American higher education. These men and women were educated in the most prestigious universities in America. They learned how business, economics and finance worked. They knew how to get the most out of accounting loopholes and they learned how to line their pockets at the expense of others, knowing that they would never get caught because they were smarter than the others. Although the discussion regarding the content of the general education curriculum has been occurring regularly in American higher education, this high profile bankruptcy has made the content of these discussions of more interest outside of academe.

This interaction between business and education with regard to a common body of knowledge and skills has become more evident as evidenced by the Wall Street Journal’s editorial in response to Harvard University’s review of it’s curriculum in 2004. In an editorial in May of 2004 entitled "Liberal to the Core: Harvard wants to lower its standards, again." The Wall Street Journal complains:

"Recently the university initiated a review of its curriculum by asking itself what it will mean ‘to be an educated woman or man in the first quarter of the 21^st century.’ Judging from the recommendations that emerged from this review—the first in three decades—the answer is a mishmash of more science, more choice and more study abroad.

"We don’t mean to pick on Harvard. According to a study by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, America’s leading colleges and universities have largely abandoned the idea that there exists some common body of knowledge and skills that all graduates ought to master. If Harvard gets more attention, that’s only because its prominence ensures that the way it defines undergraduate education will affect the debate elsewhere." ²⁸

As we preview globalization in the twenty-first century and we see the challenges of an ever changing world along with the increased secularization and fragmentation of knowledge the question we may ask at this time is "What is the modern day equivalent of the ‘Christian Gentleman’?"

The liberal arts core, including the humanities, was expected to replace ethics and morality taught in the original "Christian" colleges of Colonial times. Universities have continued to address this at various levels. The AACU statement on Liberal Learning that was quoted earlier in this paper has certainly addressed this as "acceptance of responsibility for the ethical consequences of our ideas and actions."²⁹ This is as good a statement as any committee could gain consensus on and therefore lacks specifics. What is missing is that extra clarification that shared values would supply. It appears as though many universities and educators have evolved to interpret a liberal or general education in terms of a list of required courses. This allows the university to imply that these courses, which provide a cross section of university disciplines, are in fact providing a liberal or general education. This may be true that the education is broad, but the development of character and morality do not necessarily follow from broad exposure. It is not necessarily true that this broad exposure will provide, what Byker laments, the capacity to form the convictions upon which character is based. When we look for places to educate young people regarding globalization and the common good we will have difficulty finding large research universities that are effective because they avoid the discussion of values. On the other hand, because they are willing to address a shared moral philosophy that transcends individual disciplines, it is my opinion, that at this time in the United States the religiously affiliated regional comprehensive universities are much closer to defining this "modern day equivalent" than are the highly prestigious public and private research universities and are, therefore the places where we can begin our discussions regarding globalization and the common good.

The discussions regarding Globalization for the Common Good have already begun, officially since 2002 when Kamran Mofid convened the first Conference on Globalization for the Common Good at Oxford. As this interfaith dialogue of economics, business, philosophy and religion expands it will find these regional religiously affiliated universities as welcomed catalysts for the expansion of these ideas.

Endnotes

[1] Robert W. Tarbell, A History of the Milwaukee Vocational and Adult Schools: From 1912 to 1958 (Wisconsin: The Milwaukee Vocational and Adult Schools Press, 1958), 17.

[2] Keith J. Roberts, Liberal Education and Education for Work,” Liberal Arts and Professional Growth: Conference Proceedings, Washington: Pacific Lutheran University, 1988:78-85.

[3] Charles M. Vest, “World Class Universities: American Lessons,” International Higher Education 38 (2005), http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/News38/text004.htm.

[4] John R. Thelin, A History of American Higher Education (Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press, 2004), 76.

[5] Ibid., 110-111.

[6] Frank H.T. Rhodes, The Creation of the Future: The Role of the American University (New York: Cornell University Press, 2001), 46.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Peter Smith, The Quiet Crisis: How Higher Education is Failing America (Massachusetts: Anker Publishing Company, 2004), 27.

[9] Ibid., 111.

[10] Smith, Quiet Crisis, 115.

[11] Roberts, “Liberal Education and Education for Work,” 82.

[12] Gaylen J. Byker, “The Religious and Moral Foundations of Civil Society and Free Market Economy,” Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 13, no. ½ (2001): 9.

[13] Luis E. Lugo, ed., Religion, Pluralism and Public Life: Abraham Kuyper’s Legacy for the Twenty-First Century (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000).

[14] Byker, The Religious and Moral Foundations, 9.

[15] Barry Latzer, The Hollow Core: Failure of the General Education Curriculum (Washington DC: American Council of Trustees and Alumni, 2004): 8-9.

[16] Latzer, The Hollow Core, 26.

[17] Association of American Colleges and Universities, “Statement on Liberal Learning,” About AAC&U, 2005, http://www.aacu-edu.org/About/statements/liberal_learning.cfm.

[18] Princeton University, “General Education Requirements,” Princeton University Undergraduate Announcement, 2003-2004 Edition, http://www.princeton.edu/ pr/catalog/ ua/03/ 056.htm.  

[19] Hey-Kyunk Koh Chin, ed., Open Doors 2004: Report on International Educational Exchange, 2004. (New York: Institute of International Education, Inc., 2004), 28.

[20] Ibid., 21.

[21] Ibid., 15.

[22] Association of American Colleges and Universities, “Statement on Liberal Learning.”

[23] Rhodes, Creation of the Future, 46.

[24] Ibid., 47.

[25] Alexander Astin, Keynote address presented at the conference, “Spirituality as a Legitimate Concern for Higher Education” (Buffalo: SUNY-University, 2002).

[26] Astin, "Spirituality as a Legitimate Concern for Higher Education."

[27] Byker, The Religious and Moral Foundations, 9.

[28] Wall Street Journal. Editorial.  14 May 2004.

[29] Association of American Colleges and Universities, “Statement on Liberal Learning,”

Bibliography

Association of American Colleges and Universities. "Statement on Liberal Learning." About AAC&U, 2005. http://www.aacu-edu.org/About/statements/liberal_learning.cfm.

Astin, Alexander. Keynote address presented at the conference, "Spirituality as a Legitimate Concern for Higher Education," November 5, 2002, SUNY-University at Buffalo.

Byker, Gaylen J. "The Religious and Moral Foundations of Civil Society and Free Market Economy." Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 13, ½ (2001): 9.

Koh Chin, Hey-Kyunk ed. Open Doors 2004: Report on International Educational Exchange, 2004. New York: Institute of International Education, Inc., 2004.

Latzer, Barry. The Hollow Core: Failure of the General Education Curriculum, Washington DC: American Council of Trustees and Alumni, 2004.

Lugo, Luis E., ed. Religion, Pluralism and Public Life: Abraham Kuyper’s Legacy for the Twenty-First Century. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000.

Princeton University. "General Education Requirements." Princeton University Undergraduate Announcement, 2003-2004 Edition. http://www.princeton.edu/ pr/catalog/ua/03/056.htm

Rhodes, Frank H.T. The Creation of the Future: The Role of the American University. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2001.

Roberts, Keith J. "Liberal Education and Education for Work." In Liberal Arts and Professional Growth: Conference Proceedings, edited by David M. Atkinson and Janice C. Barker, 78-85. Tacoma, Washington: Pacific Lutheran University, 1988.

Smith, Peter. The Quiet Crisis: How Higher Education is Failing America. Bolton, Ma: Anker Publishing Company, 2004.

Tarbell, Robert W. A History of the Milwaukee Vocational and Adult Schools: From 1912 to 1958. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: The Milwaukee Vocational and Adult Schools Press, 1958.

Thelin, John R. A History of American Higher Education. Baltimore, Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press, 2004.

Vest, Charles M. "World Class Universities: American Lessons." International Higher Education 38 (Winter, 2005). 1-2. http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/News38/text004.htm.  

Wall Street Journal. Editorial. 14 May 2004.

Copyright 2006 - Journal of Globalization for the Common Good - www.commongoodjournal.com