Oprah inspires the world in many ways. She encourages people to dream big and to follow life paths. Here is a quote from the One: “I’ve come to believe that each of us has a personal calling that’s as unique as a fingerprint – and that the best way to succeed is to discover what you love and then find a way to offer it to others in the form of service, working hard, and also allowing the energy of the universe to lead you (O Magazine, September 2002).”
Oprah’s outlook embodies the values of post-materialism. Coined by Inglehart, post-materialism refers to a shift in cultural values from an emphasis on “economic and physical security” to values that emphasize “self-expression” (Inglehart 2008, 130). This shift permeates life decisions such as marriage and careers. Society encourages us to think with our hearts and to prioritize emotional satisfaction. Parents advice the young that money can’t buy happiness, and our educational institutions attempt to provide a well-rounded education to feed the spirit and not just the mind.
I live my life by this post-materialist adage, and it seems to work for me, but does it work for everyone?
According to the Gallup Well-Being Index, life satisfaction hovers below 50%. This dissatisfaction is also evident in the work force. According to Amabile and Kramer (2011), workers generally feel unhappy with their job and feel unmotivated. For a post-materialist society, this is a social failure. Part of the problem is that abstract advice such as “follow your life path” triggers an emotional awakening, but it also expands choices. One is given unlimited choices without concrete ideas on how to turn abstract goals into a profession. People are confused.
I currently teach an upper-level sociology course, wherein a majority of the students are sociology majors. When asked about their career goals, about 80% want to be social workers and their motivation is that they like to help people. I am encouraged by the fact that so many students want to lead a life centered on assisting other people, but disturbed that the group has such a limited view of exactly what it means to help society.
Does each person have a calling? Yes, but it takes more than abstract ideas for the calling to materialize. It’s time for our social institutions, from family to schools, to provide specific examples to abstract ideas. I envision a conversation at home or in school to go like this:
Advisee: My calling is to help people.
Advisor: Good, there are many ways to help. Let me tell you about these people, their professions, and how they changed the world: Jonas Salk, Gandhi, Nicholas Kristoff, Aun San Suu Kyi, Oprah…
Work Cited:
Amabile, Teresa, and Steven Kramer. 2011. “Do Happier People Work Harder?” The New York Times, September 3. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/opinion/sunday/do-happier-people-work-harder.html).
Inglehart, Ronald F. 2008. “Changing Values among Western Publics from 1970 to 2006.” West European Politics 31(1-2):130–146.
The internet is redefining what it means to be learned and how one acquires knowledge. The DIY university movement shows that with diligence, there is enough information online to acquire academic knowledge, comparable to a college degree. The quandary however, is accreditation. How can one prove that they took the class and that they learned something. Who is going to issue a diploma?
MITx seems to partly address this issue, but with all of the innovations happening in online education that expands educational access, institutions still dominate teaching. The world’s teacher, Salman Khan has showed us that not only is learning fun, but that sometimes, the best teachers are not in education, and that what matters are good teachers working in various industries, more than prominent institutions.
Decentralizing the teaching aspect of education allows for more flexibility, specialization, and the opportunity to enrich our pool of teachers. It gives those who have experience and are currently working in an industry to train and instruct–an apprenticeship if you will.
In a credentialist society, aside from major, a school’s ranking and prestige dictate the value society places on a degree. My experience as a teacher and a student in post-secondary institutions showed me that not all Ivy League professors can inspire, and that great professors can at times be found in lower-ranked schools. Yet, our system of valuation focuses on university clout and ignores quality of instruction.
The internet has the power to expand the reach of great teachers, without institutional affiliation. Who you learn from matters more than the institution that offered the course.
Recently, I wrote a post arguing that the social sciences have a place in a post industrial economy. Part of the solution is to not only present theoretical material, but to make students realize the practical skills they can gain from our courses. Hoping to enforce this pedagogical outcome this term, I structured my Sociology of Marriage and Family course as an internship opportunity that allows for adaptive learning.
Students have to choose a “role” to fulfill, from being a demographer to a marketing and advertising executive. Every paper they have to write for the course has to be from the point of view of their role. To gamify the course, the top papers will be posted online and shared through social networking sites. I told the students to think of themselves as interns rather than students.
For the past few years I have been teaching a marriage and family course, and most students tell me that they take this course in order to better understand their personal relationships and that they “find it interesting.” Valid reasons, but it’s exactly these perceptions that downplay the practical relevance of the social sciences.
So far, the first week seems promising. I’ll be blogging about my experience, student comments, suggestions, and outcomes.
Here is a link to the resources for the first day of class, which includes the syllabus and a video that explains the course better.
Let me know what you think!
OCC SOC 110 Course Structure from Marianne Navada on Vimeo.
Course Video Album
In 2009, I decided to write my own textbook for my introduction to sociology courses, which I supplemented with scholarly sources in sociology. My students did not have to pay for the text and other materials. I learned that the process of convincing schools to use open textbooks finds the most resistance from bookstores and department heads.
The bookstore offered to make copies of the text and charge the students around $60. In another school, although my Chair was quite enthusiastic about the idea, other departments, resisted. The issues were: quality and fear of change. Some professors were afraid of the trend a free instructor-written textbook would start, and then my ability to write a textbook was questioned. Some people seem to be stuck with this idea that free is tantamount to sub-par. Here is the text and I will leave you to make that decision. Also, check out my syllabus to see the supplementary readings I assign.
The whole process made me feel uncomfortable even calling my work a book–it lacked an ISBN. I didn’t have a publisher. This is why I am so enthusiastic about iBooks Author. I understand the criticisms against it; for one, the user agreement gives Apple rights over your work, as Sascha Segan from PCmag.com adroitly explains. But iBook also empowers people to write and create. The program upsets the monopoly of textbook industries, and in turn empowers students. We will see more students demand affordable textbooks. iBook Author forces teachers to contribute to existing knowledge. Why would students go to class, if they can learn the same subject from an Ivy League professor?
iBooks will redefine what we qualify as legitimate books and legitimate authors. This reminds me of how in post-secondary education, we still question the use of blog posts in papers. Take this: Professor Robert Reich writes a column for the New York Times, and it’s fine to cite, but if that article is in his website, it’s not legitimate enough. It doesn’t make sense! An iBook will blur the lines between independent authors and established ones, exactly the decentralization education and the publishing industry needs.
For too long, we have allowed organizations to define the boundaries of knowledge. Technologies like iBooks Author gives individuals a chance to create and share ideas without conduits of organizational power. I am sure that iBooks Author competitors are already writing the code to compete with this software. If an open source alternative emerges, great, but for now, we have this beautiful technology that will inspire us to write, share, and be entrepreneurs. We needed a giant like Apple to question our ideas about what we consider books and who can write them.
In one of my lectures on culture, I talk about the concept of time and life trajectories in modern society. I ask the class to watch two TED conference videos: The Khan Academy and the 6th grader Thomas Suarez‘s presentation, on how at such a young age, he was able to develop software applications. As knowledge becomes easily accessible online, using time to regulate education only punishes those who want to work ahead and excel. Why should a typical lecture in college last for about an hour and thirty minutes? Why does a semester last 16 weeks? Why does it typically take four years to get a bachelor’s degree? These culturally constructed boundaries, in a post-industrial, fast-paced economy, only serve to retard learning and stymie professional careers.
The concept of lifelong learning challenges the idea that one has to wait after graduation to pursue professional goals. We can work while we learn.
After giving a lecture on education, a student of mine last semester asked what the future of education will be. My reply: I don’t think that the traditional 4-year college will become obsolete, but those who are unclear about their future goals will follow the “traditional” route and finish a 4-year college degree and then start a career. Those who are confident, driven, and certain, will pursue their careers, and still find other avenues to educate themselves. This applies, of course, to specific professions–I don’t think the American Medical Association is ready for DIY physicians, but for most career trajectories, this is the case.
Ask a freshman in college, and most are probably unsure of their major or what exactly they want to do in life. College has become, for most, a way to discover and understand the world. But with the internet and cheap plane tickets, it’s unclear if college can sustain this market.
As someone in the education business, this is not a clarion call to change career. Rather, this is a reminder, that I have to keep evolving and innovating. For my on site courses, I have to give my students reason to drive to school and come to class. I have to give them an experience, that currently, a virtual education fails to match. For my online students, I have to develop my OWN courses and not let publishers teach for me.
Instability and Child Development from Marianne Navada on Vimeo.
A short summary of Shannon E. Cavanagh, and Aletha C. Huston. 2008. “The Timing of Family Instability and Children’s Social Development.” Journal of Marriage and Family 70(5):1258-1270.
Race and Dating from Marianne Navada on Vimeo.
A short summary of: Feliciano, Cynthia, Rennie Lee, and Belinda Robnett. 2011. “Racial Boundaries among Latinos: Evidence from Internet Daters’Racial Preferences.” Social Problems 58(2):189-212.
This video provides a brief summary of Lareau, Annette. 2002. “Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black Families and White Families.” American Sociological Review 67(5):747-776.
