I enjoyed hearing Michael Goodwin highlight a particularly damaging “birthright” in Western society – freedom from failure. No person enjoys failure, because self-exaltation is an innate human trait. Paradoxically, the only proven route to self-exaltation runs through failing. According to an anonymous proverb: “The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary.” Inevitably, then, failure must precede success, since any sincere effort en route to success will involve failure.
I share Goodwin’s view that education provides one of the clearest arenas to observe misguided efforts to blunt failure. As a college student who needs to pay tuition, I know firsthand the effects of educational safety nets against failure. In my view, the concept of remedial college courses in English and math are ludicrous. By definition, if a freshman hasn’t acquired basic English and math skills, (s)he should not be in college, regardless of the reason for their lack of skill. This assessment might appear harsh, but its realization would benefit everyone involved in higher education, because tolerating mediocrity in one aspect of an enterprise inevitably lowers the quality of other areas of the enterprise. By way of analogy, the military recognizes this principle and rejects applicants who are physically unqualified.
Western education today has largely degenerated into a mere ritual required to obtain a comfortable job (which, ironically, is economically losing its worth).1 By contrast, in the past there was a more balanced emphasis on the formation of practical skills and a healthy intellect.2 Making material benefits the goal of education is self-defeating, because it prioritizes pragmatism over diligence and undermines the formation of diligent work habits required to sustain material benefits. Unfortunately, falling academic standards3 in today’s universities reflect a shift in emphasis from mastering a subject to accessing a middle-class lifestyle through minimum academic effort. This shift diverts academic energy that could be invested elsewhere into remedial courses, frustrates diligent students by lowering class quality, and overall contradicts the mission of the university. In addition, widespread academic mediocrity eventually harms society as whole by producing unqualified college graduates to take over society’s vital functions. Humans are like matter: we are inclined to exert as little effort as possible unless an external force galvanizes us to further action. Since humans generally will not reform inadequate performances unless they suffer tangible consequences, only the metaphorical heat of failure is sufficient to correct inadequate performance and, in the long term, improve society.
Is it unfair to punish students for “failures” that that really lie with their educational background? I would contend that it is not, because accepting the consequences of failure is the most effective method to remedy it. In problem-solving, it is essential that the root of the problem be addressed and not just its symptoms. If inadequate learning environments are truly to blame for poor academic performances, acknowledging the failure of these environments by the raising of academic standards will likely provide a needed incentive to produce reform in these inadequate environments.
---
1. Drea. “The Inflation of Higher Education.” Business Pundit, 16 September 2010. Web. 31 March 2009. < http://www.businesspundit.com/the-inflation-of-higher-education/>
2. Henrie, Mark. “Why Go To College?” The Canon. Spring 2008: 24-35. Web. 31 March 2009.
3. Williams, Walter. “Choosing the Right College.” The Canon. Spring 2008: 36-39. Web. 31 March 2009.
