Advocate Online

The Dialogue Question:
Should colleges and universities teach personal and social responsibility?

Yes, colleges and universities are the best hope for a society that needs more responsible citizens.

Should colleges and universities teach personal and social responsibility? I say yes! Our responsibility as instructors is to teach students not just how to accomplish work, but how to accomplish the work in a moral and ethical manner. In fact, ethics is one of the first subjects that is covered in my business class. 

Look around! We see corporate and government leaders more interested in their own agendas and paychecks than what is good for their constituents, employees, and the cities they work in. Consider the number of students who fail to show up for class, come to class late, use their phones during the class, or fail to do required work on time. Why haven’t these students learned how to be punctual, to do all the work, and respect others? I think many students don’t know the word responsibility. Too many feel entitled to everything without any responsibility.

We have all seen the parents who don’t instill in their children the need to show up for work, but simply skip work to do something else. And we’ve seen parents who believe their child must pass or have a perfect grade even though the child has not earned it. College is the last place educators have influence before these young adults enter life and the work force. 

Thomas L. Friedman, in his book The World Is Flat makes a clear point to educators. Unless we can teach our students to be better than the rest of the world, the world will pass us by in the next generation. Educators must start this change by teaching personal, social, and moral responsibility to students. If we are to compete in a global economy, we must first show our students what it takes to be the best. If we are not going to be the supporters of personal and social responsibility, who will?

* Richard Krueger graduated from Hope College in 1978 with a B.A. in History/Education and Central Michigan University in 1999 with an  MSA in Business Administration. He is currently an adjunct instructor of business at Schoolcraft College in Livonia, Michigan.

No, the personal and social development of students is not the province of the faculty.

Larry Rogers *

Many people who teach and work for the nation’s colleges and universities possess a strong belief in the power of their institutions to shape student development. Many of those people also believe in the power of student development theory (Alan Chickering, most notably) to give direction to their efforts. This is the belief that most student affairs professionals ascribe to.

But the same belief does not mark most faculty members. Maybe the difference exists because faculty members know that they, and what they teach and research, are of secondary importance to students, so they are not equipped to influence a student’s personal and social development.

According to Alexander Astin, whose What Matters in College is one of the best empirically based sources of information on the college experience, students’ peer groups represent the most potent influence on their development. The faculty-student relationship, while useful, ranks behind student organizational and social life as a force in student development.

Maybe the difference lies in the fact that faculty members meet students within the framework of their disciplines and, consequently, focus on their cognitive development. Faculty members generally recognize that they do not possess the kind of working knowledge of development that would let them deal with the whole gamut of student growth.

Many of us often wonder whether other elements within colleges and universities possess that knowledge either. Until we know a great deal more about what drives students, our developmental goals may be more well meaning than consequential.

* Larry Rogers, a professor of education, teaches educational foundations and social studies teaching methods at South Dakota State University. His writing interests include social studies instruction, rural education, and the history of educational reform movements.