Medieval Dignity, Modern Education (Part V)

The Modern University

By the end of the eighteenth century (ending the early modern period that spanned from c. 1500-1800), the number of universities was approximately 143 in Europe with the highest concentrations in the German Empire (34), Italian city-states (26), France (25), and Spain (23) – a 500% increase from the fifteenth century.[47] Universities increasingly came under state control with the faculty governance model becoming more prominent.[48] The curriculum continued to rely upon the works of Aristotle but the infusion of humanist philosophy – the discovery, exposition, and adoption of classical texts and languages into the university and society – reoriented research and teaching to the human rather than the divine.[49] With the studia humanitatis, humanist professors transformed the study of grammar and rhetoric by relying on pagan writers at the expense of church authors to prepare students for politics and business rather than the church.[50]

The new science of Bacon, Descartes, and others led to tensions between scientists and the universities, with universities resistant to change and thereby driving scientists towards private benefactors in princely courts and scientific societies.[51] The creation of this new epistemology of science not only challenged the Aristotelian framework of the university but also initiated the idea that science was an autonomous discipline. Instead of being a general scholar, the specialist arose who put science first and viewed science as a vocation in and of itself. Over time some universities started to accept the new ideas of science, such as adopting Cartesian epistemology or integrating Copernican mathematics into instruction and debate, but the tensions between science and Aristotelianism, the scientist and the general scholar , and external associations and the university continued throughout the early modern period.[52]

By the end of the eighteenth century, the university had changed into what we now recognized as the modern university: Aristotelian philosophy was replaced with science as the epistemological and methodological foci of the university; theology had been dethroned as the apex of knowledge with the humanities firmly established; and knowledge was seen to be disseminated in society and to be of use in the formation of the modern state. The German model of the research university was conceived by Wilhelm von Humboldt and spread throughout the world with universities concentrating on science.[53] With the exception of religious-affiliated universities, theology’s role either disappeared in the university curriculum or morphed into “religious studies” programs.[54]

The dominance of science in the modern university corresponds with the modern conception of dignity as dominance over nature to increase our power and stabilize our subjectivity. Students are educated not in first principles (why) but in the mastery of the mechanics of knowledge (how). The purpose of knowledge is to learn how to better manipulate nature for whatever purpose we deem fit: there is no normative dimension in the modern university education because there is no agreed upon account of human dignity. We are marooned in a world where we learn more about how to do things but without knowing why.

One of the consequences of this conception of dignity and education is the increasing standardization of the university in teaching, research, and governance. Teaching is defined by ratio with standardized metrics assessing whether students have learned; the value of research is determined by algorithmic formulas rather than qualitative evaluation; and universities are governed by an administrative class of managers that are detached pedagogical or intellectual concerns and instead focused on financial and business matters. [and universities are governed by an administrative class of managers who focus on financial and business matters rather than intellectual and pedagogical questions.[55]] This standardization of knowledge and conduct is justified on power and domination. Because it is easier to manipulate reality if is standardized, administrators, researchers, teachers, and students are forced to conform their activities into these metrics to maximize their performance.

Notes

[47] Guy Neave, “Patterns,” in A History of the University in Europe. Vol. 1: Universities in the Middle Ages, Hilde Der Ridder-Symoens, ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 31-72; Paul F. Grendler, “The Universities of the Renaissance and Reformation,” Renaissance Quarterly 57.1 (2004): 1-42.

[48] J.C. Scott, “The Mission of the University: Medieval to Postmodern Transformations,” Journal of Higher Education 77.1 (2006): 10-13.

[49] Andris Barblan, “Epilogue: From the University in Europe to the Universities of Europe,” in A History of the University in Europe. Vol. 1: Universities in the Middle Ages, Hilde Der Ridder-Symoens, ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 550-74; Paul F. Grendler, The Universities of the Italian Renaissance (Baltimore: John Hopkins University, 2002), 197; Grendler, “The Universities of the Renaissance and Reformation,” 12-13, 23.

[50] For more about the studia humanitatis, see Paul F. Grendler, Schooling in Renaissance Italy Literacy and Learning, 1300-1600 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989), Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks, Early Modern Europe, 1450-1789 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

[51] Richard S. Westfall, The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanism and Mechanics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 105; Mordechai Feingold, “Tradition vs Novelty: Universities and Scientific Societies in the Early Modern Period,” in Revolution and Continuity: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Early Modern Science, P. Barker and R. Ariew, eds. (Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1991), 46-62.

[52] John Gascoigne, “A Reappraisal of the Role of the Universities in the Scientific Revolution,” in Reappraisals Scientific Revolution, Robert S. Westman and David C. Lindberg, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 207-60; Feingold, “Tradition vs Novelty.”

[53] For more about German research university, see Lee Trepanier, “A Philosophy of Prudence and the Purpose of Higher Education Today,” in The Relevance of Higher Education, Timothy L. Simpson, ed. (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2013), 1-23; Chad Wellmon, Organizing Enlightenment: Information Overload and the Invention of the Modern Research University (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2015).

[54] For more about the changing nature of religion in the research university, see Thomas Albert Howard, Protestant Theology and the Making of the Modern German University (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).

There still are universities today with religious affiliation where theology plays a prominent role, but most universities, particularly the most prestigious ones, are secular institutions. For example, see Hanna Rosin, God’s Harvard: A Christian College on a Mission to Save America (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2007); Alasdair MacIntyre, God, Philosophy, Universities: A Selective History of the Catholic Philosophical Tradition (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009).

[55] Bok, Derek. 2004.  Bok, Universities in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004); Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa, Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011); Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fall of Faculty: The Rise of the All-Administrative State University and Why It Matters (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011); Martin J. Finkelstein, Valerie Martin Conley, Jack H. Schuster, The Faculty Factor: Reassessing the American Academy in a Turbulent Era (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2016); Marilee J. Bresciani Ludvik and Ralph Wolff, Outcome-Based Program Review: Closing Achievement Gaps In- and Outside the Classroom with Alignment to Predictive Analytics and Performance Metrics (Sterling: Stylus Publications, 2018); also see Lee Trepanier, ed., The Democratic Discourse of Liberal Education (Cedar City: Southern Utah University Press, 2009); ed., Liberal Arts in America (Cedar City: Southern Utah University Press, 2012); “A Philosophy of Prudence and the Purpose of Higher Education Today”; Lee Trepanier, ed., Why the Humanities Matter Today; “The Public Value of Higher Education,” Expositions 12.2 (2018): 121-31; “The Character Model for the American University,” Expositions 12.2 (2018): 132-51; “Why Students Don’t Suffer” in Suffering and the Intelligence of Love in the Teaching Life: In Light and in Darkness, Sean Steel and Amber Homeniuk, eds. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019), 159-82.