The First Five Years

An Appraisal of "Great Issues"

IN his article On Educational Policy in the November number of the ALUMNIMAGAZINE Professor Raven mentioned that one item on the agenda of the Committee on Educational Policy was a study of the Great Issues Course. He expressed the hope that the study would be completed this fall and indicated that the Committee planned to publish the results in an early issue of the MAGAZINE.

Professor Raven dealt briefly with the reason for the study at this time and alluded to some of the sources of information available to the Committee. To save the reader the trouble of back-reference to his article some repetition will be helpful. This study has not resulted from any Faculty request, nor from any impression on the part of the Committee that Great Issues has failed to justify its place in the curriculum. But, since it was introduced as an experiment and is now in its sixth year of operation, the time seems appropriate for an appraisal of both its place in the curriculum and its operation. At the request of President Dickey, three former Directors of the course, Professors Ballard, Jensen, and A. M. Wilson, have written a report summarizing the first four years of its operation. Their report was largely historical and descriptive; although it did point out some weaknesses which successive Steering Committees have sought to remedy, it made no attempt at appraisal of the course as a whole.

Several other sources of information and help have been available. Last year Henry Nachman Jr. '51, a Tuck student, with the collaboration of David A. Drexler '52, completed a well-conceived and well-executed survey based upon interviews with a representative sampling of the students taking the course. To obtain a wider sampling of opinion a subcommittee of the Committee on Educational Policy, with the assistance of President Dickey and the former Directors of the course, prepared a questionnaire which was mailed in February 1952 to some 2,000 alumni who had taken Great Issues, and distributed to members of the class of 1952 at about the time they were completing the course last May. Additional efforts to obtain enlightenment have included a meeting with President Dickey, a joint meeting with the former Directors and the Steering Committee, an invitation for faculty reaction by interview or by letter, and a study of various documents (lecture schedules, bulletins, project directives, reading lists, and copies of past examinations) provided by Professor Foley, the present Director.

I wish to take this opportunity to express on behalf of the Committee on Educational Policy much appreciation to President Dickey and to all those at any time associated with the course who have generously given us the benefit of their experience and their advice. We desire also to extend sincere thanks to the many alumni who have taken the time and the trouble to answer the questionnaire. The answers to our questions, and particularly the comments, have been most helpful. Thanks are also due to Dr. Clark W. Horton, Consultant in Educational Research, and to Professor Hastorf of the Psychology Department for a most effective and timeconsuming analysis of the questionnaire returns. I desire also to acknowledge my indebtedness to Professor Raven for aid in the preparation of this article. I have read and to some extent copied from his preliminary draft of the Committee on Educational Policy report to the Faculty; anyone reading both his report and my article will recognize the extent of his help.

Before reporting on the results of our study or the conclusions reached, a few notes in regard to the questionnaire are appropriate. To avoid the need for a description of this document a copy of the vital portion is published as an appendix to this article. In addition, as of interest to those alumni who have read the questionnaire, and to the alumni in general, a summation of the tabulated results is included. To satisfy the curiosity of some alumni who took Great Issues yet received no questionnaire, it should be explained that they were unintentionally skipped when the College address lists were used without taking into account the fact that some recent graduates have class designations prior to 1948, the starting point in the survey of the Great Issues classes. Our apologies go to any of the alumni who were disappointed, if it is possible in these days to imagine any man suffering disappointment over his failure to receive one more of these useful but all-too-prevalent documents.

IN carrying out its study the Committee on Educational Policy has adopted the general principle that the evaluation of any course should be based upon a consideration of (1) the course objectives, (2) the means used to attain these objectives, (3) the extent to which the objectives are achieved, and (4) the fundamental question as to whether the objectives, even if fully achieved, justify the inclusion of that course in the curriculum.

The basic objectives which have guided the Great Issues Course from its inception were formulated by President Dickey and others. The Committee on Educational Policy accepted these as appropriate objectives for the course and used them as the basis for the questionnaire under the general heading: "The Great Issues Course as an experiment in general education has three fundamental objectives." To save the bother of frequent reference to that document a statement of each of them is quoted below at the point where it is discussed.

The first objective is "to provide for allDartmouth graduates a better transitionfrom their last year of liberal arts education in conventional classroom forms andtexts to the forms and reading sources of acontinuing adult education; in otherwords, to provide an experience in applying and carrying on one's general education. The means provided by the Great Issues Steering Committee for the achievement of this objective have been principally (1) the experience of seeing in action and hearing many outstanding men of affairs, (2) the daily reading of either The New York Times or New York HeraldTribune as a textbook, (3) a project required of every student calling for a written paper to include a discriminating day-by-day analysis of the treatment by three newspapers, regarded as stereotypes of left, right, and center in attitude, of some topic of sufficient current interest to have received prominent mention over a period of several days. In addition, the project calls for a comparison with the treatment of the same topic either in newsmagazines or by radio or television newscasters. (4) A project, introduced for the first time with the 1951 class, requiring each student to keep a journal as a record of the lectures, of news items which have impressed him as relevant to the subject matter of the course, of assigned readings, and of exhibits in the Public Affairs Laboratory; these entries to be concerned not so much with the subject matter but rather to constitute a record of the writer's reactions and to serve as a device for self-integration. Projects three and four are both subject to careful reading by members of the Great Issues staff or the Steering Committee, and much of the course grade is based upon them.

Examination of the replies to the question as to the extent to which this objective was realized reveals that over 65 percent of the respondents felt that the course had actually contributed either considerably or greatly to their individual attainment. of the objective, and an additional 27 percent indicated that it had made at least some contribution to their continuing adult education. The Committee on Educational Policy considers this evidence convincing, particularly since it was confirmed in many of the written comments. Further evidence of the impact of the course is adduced from the answers to question D which show that over 76 percent of the men who replied evaluated the contribution of the course as greater than that of any other course taken in college. Still further testimony appears in the answers to questions in other parts of the questionnaire; for example, in the response to question H, part g, approximately 75 percent felt that they had received either very much or considerable benefit from the course as an experience in applying values in judging men, publications, and affairs as adult citizens; and in part h under the same question over 80 percent signified that they had realized either considerable or very much benefit from the opportunity to hear and to appraise men playing important roles in the national life.

Specific evidence of the value of the projects in the attainment of this first objective is to be found in the tabulation for a number of the questions. It seems unnecessary to summarize these results; examination of the percentages under question F, as well as j and k under question H, will demonstrate that the news analysis project contributed either greatly or to some extent to an increased discrimination in respect to news handling by newspapers or by other media of communication, and an examination of the answers to question G shows that over 75 percent realized either moderate or great value from the projects in general. Evidence from the Nachman survey adds strong confirmation in respect to the news analysis project, with the conclusion by the authors that it was one of the most worthwhile features: of the course. In respect to the journal project, their conclusion was that, while highly thought of, it was not felt by the 1951 class to be so effective as the news project. However, this conclusion was qualified by the admission that the answers suffered from a lack of objectivity since during the period of their interviews the news project was viewed in retrospect whereas "the heat was on" for the journals, and many of the answers may well have reflected the feeling of this pressure.. On the Nachman survey the questions relative to the lectures elicited replies which the authors concluded showed general satisfaction with both the visitors and the faculty lecturers, but some general dissatisfaction as to the topics presented and considerable feeling that the course might with advantage be broadened by the selection of speakers with more divergent views both to the right and the left.

On the questionnaire there was no question bearing directly on the journal project inasmuch as none of the alumni had at that time experienced that requirement. As far as the journal project is concerned, perhaps the best estimate of its value comes from the members of the Steering Committee who: have done the journal reading. The writer shared this task the first year of that project and recalls that there was general agreement on the Steering Committee that the journals showed sufficient evidence of carefui thinking, discriminating analysis, and thoughtful integration to indicate that this was probably one of the most valuable of any of the projects which had been experimented with up to that time. And there was no question then as to the wisdom of its continuation.

In the course of its study the Committee on Educational Policy has been particularly impressed by the evidence of the success of the project on news treatment. We are in unanimous agreement that under the present curricular setup it is a very appropriate project for Great Issues. But in our discussions the thought has constantly recurred that much might be gained by its transfer to an earlier year; that the senior year seems unnecessarily late for work of this sort. One advantage of such a transfer would consist in freeing some time which might be used profitably for other purposes in Great Issues. But, as we examine the curriculum as a whole, we feel strongly that an even greater value would accrue from the earlier development of interest and skill in using sources of information which could benefit the student in many courses throughout his undergraduate years. The Steering Committee would also favor such a change, and the problem of finding a suitable place for the kind of training inculcated by such a project is one of the items on the pending study of the first two years by the Committee on Educational Policy.

THE second objective of the course is "to give all seniors, regardless of theirmajor and elective studies, a common intellectual experience so as to stimulateout-of-class discussions which are an important part of self-education and of developing maturity." The figures on the questionnaire (question B) indicate that over 90 percent felt that this objective was achieved either to a considerable or a large extent. The Committee looks upon this evidence, considered in conjunction with many comments pointing in the same direction, together with favorable conclusions expressed by the authors of the Nachman survey, as satisfactory testimony that this objective is being attained. But we do have some reservations as to the universality of the common intellectual experience and we feel that constant effort should be maintained to increase it.

We believe that the provision of a common intellectual experience, formerly lacking for seniors, is one of the most important contributions of the Great Issues Course. To such an extent are we impressed with the importance of this objective that we are in unanimous agreement that the course should be required of all seniors, including those in the Associated Schools; in fact especially for the men in the Associated Schools, who are somewhat detached from the rest of the senior class.

In our discussion with the Steering Committee and in our own deliberations we have given much thought to the most effective means for increasing student discussion in order to promote this objective. The Tuesday morning question period with the speaker of the previous evening presents some opportunity for active participation by means of audience questions. Even so, in an audience of 600 students there are always some who lack the interest to participate either by asking questions or by thinking about the answers, and there are others who are eager to ask questions but cannot be given the chance because the number of questions which can be discussed during a 50-minute period is limited.

Many alumni in their questionnaire comments suggested a need fop increased student discussion, and the Nachman survey reflected dissatisfaction with the Tuesday morning session. One remedy might be the use of small group discussion meetings. This fall the Steering Committee has experimented with voluntary meetings of this sort with very disappointing results in attendance. The possibility of using the regular Tuesday or Thursday periods has been explored, but such a scheme presents some distinct disadvantages and many difficulties. If small sections were substituted for the Tuesday period, the opportunity to question the Monday speaker would be lost; to use the Thursday periods would involve the abandonment of the faculty background lectures which have a distinctive purpose. Administrative difficulties involving faculty schedules, teaching load, size of sections, and classroom availability are self-evident. Over and above these considerations, however, attention should be called to the statement in the objective that it is the "out-of-class discussions" which are desired as "an important part of self-education and developing maturity." Great Issues differs from most courses in the extent to which it leaves the student to his own resources, and the spontaneous "bull session" fits such a scheme of operation better than a formal discussion section.

Another aspect of the "common intellectual experience" which has been the subject of much discussion by the Committee on Educational Policy is the question as to whether the issues presented are always as great as might seem desirable. In one of the earliest lectures of the course Mr. Archibald MacLeish defined a great issue as one which has historical depth,current timeliness, and projection into thefuture. In the Ballard-Jensen-Wilson report is the statement that during the year of preliminary planning the conclusion was reached that the great issues of our generation or of any modern generation could be grouped under three main heads: "The achievement of a just social andeconomic order within the nation, thebuilding of a durable peace between nations, and the preservation and extensionof those values that make for the enrichment of individual human lives."

The Committee on Educational Policy is very well satisfied with these statements as definitions and descriptions of the nature of great issues and of the areas in which they are to be sought. We are urging that successive Steering Committees keep them constantly in mind as ideals in selecting topics for the course program. We are impelled to stress this point because it is our impression that sometimes the greatness of the issues presented has been subject to question particularly in relation to "historical depth and the preservation and extension of those values that make for the enrichment of individual human lives."

Actually the argument above, although distinctly related to the second objective of the course, is fully as pertinent to the third: "to develop among all Dartmouthseniors a sharp awareness of the values involved in great issues which confront mentoday, thereby promoting a heightenedsense of public purpose and individualpublic-mindedness." In the questionnaire the evidence for the attainment of this objective is somewhat contradictory. The tabulation under question A indicates that 'the course achieved this objective either to some extent or to a great extent for over go percent of the men who replied, and the answers under question E showed, not so clearly yet to a very respectable extent, an increase of active interest in public affairs. Nevertheless, if the answers to the subquestions under H are arranged in the order of the percentages as an indication of the extent of benefit in respect to the specific items it is revealed that "an increased desire to participate actively in public affairs" (b) ranks last with a low 29 percent, and some of the other benefits which might seem desirable as "carry-overs" into adult living fail to rank much higher. Even allowing for the possibility that some of the questions may have implied something different to the questionnaire readers than they meant to the Committee on Educational Policy, the evidence for the attainment of this third objective is unquestionably less convincing than that for the other two. This has tended to confirm our judgment that efforts to achieve this objective should be strengthened.

We suggest that these efforts should be directed toward (1) extreme care in the selection of topics with the MacLeish and the Steering Committee definitions always in mind, and (2) the briefing of the lecturers with sufficient care to be certain that they understand what approach is desired. The Committee makes these suggestions with full realization that perfection in none of these directions is possible. We understand that, even with a nearly perfect list of topics, it is not always feasible to secure the most desirable man at the most apposite time, and that, despite the most careful briefing, lecturers may not always fulfill the expectations of the Steering Committee. We believe, however, that some improvement in briefing might be attained if the Steering Committee were to prepare for the benefit of prospective lecturers a leaflet describing the pattern and the fundamental interests of the course with some advice as to the approach desired.

In our study of the lecture schedules we have formed the impression that too often lectures have been devoted to subjects which appear to be concerned more with important current topics than with great issues. Naturally some such topics may frequently be very relevant to great issues. But we feel some need for more lectures on issues that may be called humanistic, moral or philosophic; that the importance of such topics as morality in both public life and private life, the social significance and the effect of science and technology, and in general the importance of cultural, religious, and moral values, should receive more emphasis than at present. In this again we realize some of the problems involved. Audience interest is a vital factor and there is no question but that it decreases in proportion as a lecture becomes more abstract, or if a topic is presented in too philosophic a frame. We hope that it will be found possible to strike some sort of happy medium.

SOME of the other features of the course which have received the attention of the Committee are the reading requirements, the examinations, the Public Affairs Laboratory, and the level of scholastic difficulty.

In respect to the reading requirements our only suggestion is that thought might be given to the occasional use of some of the great books in which can be found distinguished treatments of some of the social, political, philosophic, and moral values involved in many great issues. We question whether the newspapers, periodicals, and other assigned readings always represent a desirably high literary and intellectual standard.

As we have focused our attention upon the examinations we have been very favorably impressed with the essay examinations which have usually required a discussion of a quotation of a few sentences from some book or periodical, this quotation being distributed to the class a few days before the examination to allow each student an opportunity to discuss it with his classmates and to organize his own thoughts about it. This device stimulates both integration by the individual and informal group discussion, thus emphasizing the "common intellectual experience" aspect of the course. With the objective type examinations, used essentially to test for coverage of lectures, reading, and Public Affairs Laboratory exhibits, we have been much less favorably impressed. We feel that they can be much improved in the direction of testing for ability in analytical reasoning rather than for straight memory. Recognizing that the preparation of examinations of the more desirable type requires both long effort and rather special ability, we are recommending that someone with this required talent be appointed to the Steering Committee with no other committee responsibility than the preparation of objective examinations.

Our only recommendation in regard to the Public Affairs Laboratory is that constant effort be maintained to insure student recognition of its value. We believe that the exhibits arranged by the Great Issues staff deserve high praise as outstanding examples of the use of visual aids in education, and that the newspapers, periodicals and general reference material constitute a valuable adjunct to the course.

In considering the degree of scholastic difficulty of Great Issues we have thought of it in comparison with other courses of senior level. Are its requirements sufficiently exacting? Is it too easy? Our conclusion is that, although it is true as in almost any course that a passing grade can be obtained without great effort, Great Issues is sufficiently exacting for the student who carries out his assignments faithfully and conscientiously. In this connection, allowance must be made for the fact that for the Tuck and Thayer students it is a sixth course, and for the Medical School students a seventh. Furthermore, even though it is not an extra course for the other seniors, Great Issues should not be a burden heavy enough to interfere with desired accomplishment in a student's major. Closely related to this is the question as to whether a course aiming to provide a transition to adult living should dispense with such undergraduate devices as obligatory attendance and required projects with examinations and grades. A number of comments in the questionnaires suggested that such measures should not be necessary in view of the course aims. We admit that there is a certain amount of logic in this suggestion but we believe that it fails to give sufficient cognizance to the temptation for the student to yield to countless pressures, both academic and social, which tend to interfere with class attendance and the preparation of assignments. We feel sure that such a change would be a serious handicap to the success of the course.

General Conclusions

THE Committee on Educational Policy is convinced that the objectives of the Great Issues Course are commendably valid, that the means applied for their attainment are well chosen, and, with certain reservations which have been stated, that these objectives are being successfully achieved. There remains still the question as to whether these objectives justify the inclusion of the course in the Dartmouth curriculum.

In approaching this fundamental question it is logical to consider first the function which the course is intended to fulfill. In this connection it is appropriate to point out that the objectives, although fairly broad in their concept, indicate certain limits for the function of the course. They imply clearly that it is intended to supplement but not to stand as a substitute for a liberal education; that it offers the opportunity for the student to integrate some of the knowledge gained in his liberal education without supplying him with any sort of intellectual filing system to accomplish that task for him; that it makes no effort toward indoctrinating him with the answers for the problems involved in great issues but leads him to the all-important conclusion that for most great, issues there is no one right answer or best solution beyond all doubt and compromise. In any evaluation of the course these limits should be kept in mind, and we believe that they constitute one of the most valuable assets of its effectiveness as a transition to the period of adult life when it becomes necessary for each individual to make his own search for material and his own integration without the benefit of academic organization. Convincing testimony as to the success of the course in this respect is found in the frequent comments in the questionnaire to the effect that the greatest appreciation of the value of the course, and of its impact, was realized in the years following graduation. A comparison between the tabulations for questions C and D further substantiates this testimony.

Unquestionably, in its fulfillment of this function in this particular manner, in treating seniors as mature individuals about to face the problems of adult living, Great Issues has introduced into the curriculum a distinctive element which no other course can present in this particular fashion or to the same extent. We believe that to drop the course would leave a distinct void. For the men in the Associated Schools there would be nothing to take its place; for the men in the undergraduate college it would be replaced by courses in one of the majors or by electives. But it is clear that any course which aimed at the achievement of the same values would of necessity resemble Great Issues in its general pattern.

In reaching our favorable consensus as to the value of the Great Issues Course we have been impressed by a number of factors in addition to those already discussed. Of the 650 codable comments in the questionnaire 575 were distinctly favorable to the course and 94 of these referred to it as "one of the best." The very fact that 80 percent of the questionnaire respondents were sufficiently impressed to accept our invitation for comments is in itself testimony to the impact of the course, especially since these comments were overwhelmingly favorable to the course as a whole even when they were critical of certain details. Additional alumni response, on the whole highly commendatory, comes from such sources as letters stimulated by ALUMNI MAGAZINE articles, letters in the files of the Steering Committee, and reports of speakers who have visited Dartmouth alumni groups.

The fact that the Carnegie Corporation had sufficient faith in the Great Issues Course to support it by a grant of $75,000 for the first three years of its operation is a testimonial to its soundness as an experiment in General Education, and a wealth of material itemized in the Ballard-Jensen-Wilson report indicates that the course has attracted much favorable publicity which has naturally reflected upon the College. Also many of the guest lecturers have spoken or written gratifyingly commendatory opinions, and we know that many of them have spread their favorable impressions abroad.

Certainly one of the by-products of the course has been the creation of a great amount of good will for the College in many quarters. For this we believe that President Dickey, in whose mind the course was conceived and through whose efforts it was initiated, merits the gratitude of Dartmouth College for its inception, and also that the many members of the Faculty who have assisted in its initiation and its operation should share with him congratulations upon its success.

Based upon the clear evidence that the Great Issues course has left an indelible and a salutary effect upon those who have taken it, that it has added an outstandingly distinctive and valuable element to the curriculum, and that it has attracted the favorable attention of the American educational world, the conclusion of the Committee on Educational Policy is that it should no longer be regarded as an educational experiment but that it should be continued as a permanent fixture in the curriculum.

"A COMMON INTELLECTUAL EXPERIENCE" FOR DARTMOUTH SENIORS

THE MONDAY NIGHT LECTURES in 105 Dartmouth Hall, given by men and women prom:nent in national and international affairs, are a well-known feature of the Great Issues Course. Above Thurgood Marshall chief special counsel for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, is shown addressing the senior class on January 12.

THE PUBLIC AFFAIRS LABORATORY in Baker Library makes effective use of visual aids, as shown in the display above, and has been praised also for its comparative studies of news treatment.

GREAT ISSUES STEERING COMMITTEE: Clockwise are Rob:n Robinson '24, Professor of Mathe- matics; Norman K. Arnold, Professor of Zoology; Dr. Rolf C. Syvertsen 'lB, Dean of the Medical School; Joseph F. Marsh Jr., Instructor in Great issues; F. Cudworth Flint, Professor of English, who becomes Director of Great Issues this semester; Allen R. Foley '2O, Professor of History, retiring director; Mrs. Virginia F. Johnson, Great Issues secretary; Theodore D. Lockwood, Instructor in Great issues; George F. Theriault '33, Professor of Sociology; Robert K. Carr '29, Joei Parker, Professor of Law and Political Science; and John B. Stearns 'l6, Professor of Greek and Latin.

Professor Poole's article is the second in the series which the Alumni Magazine is presenting this year, in cooperation with the Committee on Educational Policy, with the aim of giving Dartmouth alumni a better understanding of the College's present educational program and of the plans and problems that are under study as part of the continuing effort to improve that program. Professor Poole gave up the greater part of his Christmas vacation to write this second report to the alumni, and the Alumni Magazine is deeply grateful to him. The third in the series of educational policy articles is being written by Prof. Charles L. Stone '17 and will deal with the curriculum.

PROFESSOR OF BOTANY