LiberalArtsOnline Volume 2, Number 7
by Mauri Ditzler
Dean of the College
Wabash College
Given the usual perception that bigger is better, I find it intriguing that so many small colleges trumpet size as one of their defining characteristics. Apparently these institutions are confident that being small makes them better, and that the link between smallness and quality will be obvious to even the casual reader of institutional literature.
For some, extolling low enrollment is simply making a virtue of necessity. Institutions that regularly miss their enrollment targets speak with pride of their intimate environment. There are, however, a number of small liberal arts colleges that are widely regarded as providing an excellent education. Given the tendency to associate liberal arts education with curricular breadth, the correlation of smallness with quality is counterintuitive.
There are many links between size and quality that are worth exploring. Lately I have been particularly interested in the fact that faculty and staff at small colleges are often asked to wear many hats. They tend to be or become generalists, rather than specialists.
Theoretical chemists teach labs, literature scholars teach introductory language courses or first-year composition. A specialist in Chinese history will teach a course on modern Japan.
Faculty members unable or unwilling to teach many different courses are unlikely to thrive in small departments. With six or more courses to teach some years, and with new courses arriving regularly, rigid specialists are unlikely to make a small college their academic home. Those who enjoy extending the classroom find many opportunities, those who shy away from co- and extra-curricular activities or avoid admissions and governance tasks are uncomfortable.
Earlier this year I asked a number of faculty to reflect on teaching at our institution of 850 students. One promising, articulate assistant professor explained with some regret that he was leaving to teach at a university where he could be part of a four-person team teaching the same content area that we asked him to cover by himself. He explained that he had enjoyed his teaching in all ways, except for the need to be a generalist. On the other hand, another faculty member entering his fourteenth year had the opposite experience. He noted that his enthusiasm for teaching arose from the excitement of continuous learning that accompanies new and different courses each year. By influencing one individual to stay and the other to leave, the institutional size shifted the collective faculty toward those who enjoy broad-based learning.
One might argue that a characteristic (like size) that gives a competitive advantage to faculty and staff who are comfortable in a broad range of situations will promote quality liberal arts education. The value of faculty who serve as mentors to students is widely accepted. And, it seems that a broad-based education is more effectively modeled by faculty who individually reflect that breadth, than by faculty who collectively provide breadth through their individual specialties. I recently heard the president of a fine liberal arts college define breadth as the distinguishing feature of his small college. Interestingly, that college does not have distribution requirements. Educational breadth there must be a way of life, rather than a mandate. It must reside in institutional culture and be transmitted through faculty to students.
At times, those of us in small colleges may lament covering so many tasks. We must regularly learn new skills and adapt to new situations. It seems that we often are distracted from pursuing those areas where we are most expert. However, these distractions, indirectly attributed to our size, may contribute to the evolution of a faculty and staff ideally suited to mentoring students in the liberal arts.
LiberalArtsOnline is an occasional email essay on the liberal arts, provided as a public service of the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts.
--------------------------------------
The comments published in LiberalArtsOnline reflect the opinions of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Center of Inquiry or Wabash College. Comments may be quoted or republished in full, with attribution to the author, LiberalArtsOnline, and the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts.