Draft: To first look at how UNE implements liberal arts education, we have to see why it is the best choice, rather than a career education. A liberal arts education entails many things, including learning how to read/write, think, and become a better citizen. Ungar states that liberal arts are the best form of education because it sets students up for any job, while Scheuer agrees, he believes that students want to get a career fast without debt but liberal arts aren’t the fastest way to do so, which I do not agree with. Any college that you go to will lead students into debt no matter what. Some careers may make up for this by paying more in the long run but the liberal arts system is not what is causing students to have debt, it’s deeper than that.  In the article “7 major misperceptions about the liberal arts”, Ungar exclaims that “It is far wiser for students to prepare for change…than to search for a single job track that might one day become a dead end” (Ungar 1). Ungar claims that being prepared for multiple career tracks sets students up for anything. Rather than the alternative of being ready for a career that may die out in 10 years. This makes a lot of sense and feels like the smartest option for any student going to college. Scheuer on the other hand doesn’t agree that liberal arts set students up for a better future. He believes that STEM majors in liberal arts are not the same as with other colleges. Scheuer states in “Critical Thinking and Liberal Arts” that “Liberal arts colleges seem an endangered species as curricula shift toward science, technology, engineering, and math—the STEM disciplines. Students want jobs, not debt, and who can blame them” (Scheuer 1). STEM disciplines are involved in many liberal arts educations and I feel as if they create a stronger student in those fields as they learn to write and think better.

Revised: To first look at how UNE implements liberal arts education, we have to see why it is the best choice, rather than a career education. A liberal arts education entails many things, including learning how to read/write, think, and become a better citizen. Ungar states that liberal arts are the best form of education because it sets students up for any job, while Scheuer agrees, he believes that students want to get a career fast without debt but liberal arts aren’t the fastest way to do so, which I do not agree with. Any college that you go to will lead students into debt, no matter what. Some careers may make up for this by paying more in the long run but the liberal arts system is not what is causing students to have debt, it’s deeper than that.  In the article “7 major misperceptions about the liberal arts”, Ungar exclaims that “It is far wiser for students to prepare for change…than to search for a single job track that might one day become a dead end” (Ungar 1). Ungar claims that being prepared for multiple career tracks sets students up for anything. Rather than the alternative of being ready for a career that may die out in 10 years. This makes a lot of sense and feels like the smartest option for any student going to college. Scheuer on the other hand doesn’t agree that liberal arts set students up for a better future. He believes that STEM majors in liberal arts are not the same as with other colleges. Scheuer states in “Critical Thinking and Liberal Arts” that “Liberal arts colleges seem an endangered species as curricula shift toward science, technology, engineering, and math—the STEM disciplines. Students want jobs, not debt, and who can blame them” (Scheuer 1). STEM disciplines are involved in many liberal arts educations and I feel as if they create a stronger student in those fields as they learn to write and think better. This is connected to how UNE feels about implementing sciences into their curriculum. In the core handbook, it states, “Scientific literacy, including an understanding of scientific along with quantitative and qualitative approaches to comprehending the universe, is also central to our educational mission. ( Core Handbook ). This shows how science courses being implemented into a curriculum could only help the knowledge of a student.

The revised paragraph gives more detail in the explanation and seems more complete.

1. while Scheuer agrees, he believes that students want to get a career fast without debt, but liberal arts aren’t the fastest way to do so. (I like this conjunction because it shows the emphasis on liberal arts schools giving students degrees to make them successful in their lives.
2. Ungar can help develop why liberal arts education is practical and critical to today’s society (The addition of critical allows readers to understand that liberal arts are important for reasons.)
3. UNE is acknowledging that students need to understand where they live now, but about other places on this earth, too. (The emphasis in this sentence is on the end about thinking about other places besides where a student may live.
4. Liberal Arts prepare students for multiple careers as most kids don’t have it all figured out and know exactly what they want to do. (This subordination emphasizes “as” explaining why students should choose liberal arts schools. They can try out many things that they may not have thought about and enjoy it.)
5. Ungar states that liberal arts are the best form of education because it sets students up for any job (This is an important use because as it allows readers to know why Ungar believes liberal arts are the best form of education.)

First Draft: The liberal arts curriculum is popular among colleges and universities, especially in America. Although taught in different fashions, they all have the same concept in mind; to teach students how to think critically and become better citizens of the world. The liberal arts started with just seven subjects: “the trivium of classical antiquity, consisting of grammar, rhetoric, and logic, combined with the medieval quadrivium of arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy. (Scheuer 1)” These seven have now been reformed into more than that, now with more STEM and Humanities disciplines involved. 

Revised: The liberal arts curriculum is popular among colleges and universities, especially in America. Although taught in different fashions, they all have the same concept in mind; to teach students how to think critically and become better citizens of the world. The liberal arts started with just seven subjects: “the trivium of classical antiquity, consisting of grammar, rhetoric, and logic, combined with the medieval quadrivium of arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy. (Scheuer 1)” These seven have now been reformed into more than that, now with more STEM and Humanities disciplines involved. The University of New England is a liberal arts school that practices these concepts. Using texts from Scheuer will allow for a better understanding of what for of liberal arts UNE uses in their curriculum. Ungar can help develop why the liberal arts education is important and critical to today’s society. The liberal arts help people learn from more than their one disciplinary, giving them more experience. Employers are looking for people who know how to do more than one thing, and this is exactly what students get from a liberal arts education.

Explanation: In the revised introductory paragraph, I established my position in the bigger picture and how I will be using the texts to understand what UNE uses and how they implement it.

1. A liberal arts education entails many things, including learning how to read/write, to think, and become a better citizen. Ungar states that liberal arts is the best form of education because it sets students up for any job, while Scheuer agrees that students want to get a career fast without debt, which is something that liberal arts does not offer, which I do not agree with. In the article “7 major misperceptions about the liberal arts” Ungar exclaims that “It is far wiser for students to prepare for change…than to search for a single job track that might one day become a dead end” (Ungar 1). Ungar claims that being prepared for multiple career tracks sets students up for anything. Rather than the alternative of being ready for a career that may die out in 10 years. This makes a lot of sense and feels like the smartest option for any student going to college. Scheuer on the other hand doesn’t agree that liberal arts set students up for a better future. He believes that STEM majors in liberal arts are not the same as with other colleges. Scheuer states in “Critical Thinking and Liberal Arts” that “Liberal arts colleges seem an endangered species as curricula shift toward science, technology, engineering, and math—the STEM disciplines. Students want jobs, not debt, and who can blame them” (Scheuer 1). STEM disciplines are involved in many liberal arts educations and I feel as if they create a stronger student in those fields as they learn to write and think better.
2. The UNE liberal arts education takes on one of the most formally known conceptions in America according to Scheuer. UNE includes all types of disciplines including the STEM ones. This means that students must take classes from sciences to humanities. UNE states in the handbook, ” students will develop foundational knowledge and critical thinking skills that are necessary for understanding and assuming their roles in natural, social, humanistic, and other environments” (Handbook). This says that students will learn about a more than just their specific major in order to prepare them for more. This resembles one of Scheuers models of the liberal arts. According to Scheuer, in the article “Critical Thinking and Liberal Arts”, the liberal arts “embraces the ideal of the integrated curriculum, encompassing virtually all nonprofessional higher learning” (Scheuer 1). This shows that UNE uses this type of curriculum because there are many different higher learning subjects being taught.
3. The liberal arts are said to bring about better citizens and a better understanding of the world. UNE’s core curriculum prepares for students to become better citizens with the ability to think more critically, as Scheuer would agree, this is a necessary component to any liberal arts education. I believe both UNE and SCheuer are right in emphasizing the understanding of the world and becoming a better citizen. In the core handbook, UNE states, “Living in the interconnected world today demands an understanding of a variety of cultures, people and the environment… Students must also be prepared to enter the world engaged as local, national and global citizens and professionals” (Handbook). UNE is acknowledging that students need to understand where they live now, but about other places on this earth, too. I have to agree that it is very important to understand how others are living so we can help situations if need be. Scheuer would agree with UNEs goal in their curriculum as he believes “The liberal arts have traditionally been defended as instrumental to two key elements of democracy: critical thinking and citizenship” (Scheuer 2). Scheuer is highlighting the importance of critical thinking and citizenship that should be withheld in any liberal arts education.

1. Misconception #1 states that “A liberal-arts degree is a luxury that most families can no longer afford. “Career education” is what we now must focus on” (Ungar). Ungar would respond to this by saying students need to prepare for more than one job in the future, as the world changes every day. Kids need to be able to adapt to situations that may occur, which is what a liberal education allows for. This relates to how the UNE handbook does not talk about why liberal education is better than a career education. I know a handbook won’t straight out say that the education system is better than others, but they could mention why being ready for more than one career is important.
2. English 110 is a good example of advancing students’ abilities of critical thinking. As Scheuer states, “The assimilation of facts, ideas, and conceptual frameworks, and the development of critical minds, are equal parts of a liberal education” (Scheuer). Liberal education is supposed to broaden the ability to think about different situations critically. In Eng 110, that’s exactly what is happening. We have to look at different topics and challenge one another ideas and discuss them. This allows students to have opinions on topics and discuss them in the future, particularly with a boss about a project they could be working on. As for being a better citizen, I would say Sociology would be a great example of enabling better citizens. “Students will thus acquire disciplinary knowledge, develop critical thinking skills, and expand their expressive capabilities, while they expand their understanding of their place in the world” (Core Handbook). As implied in the handbook, Sociology will develop students’ skills overall, which will enhance their citizenship once out of school.
3. In our Handbook, there is a lot of discussion of how it will enhance critical thinking abilities. This is a concept that Ungar and Scheuer seem to believe in as well. “It [curriculum] asks them [students] to integrate and apply their acquired knowledge and skills to problems and decisions within their major and professions” (handbook). There are important classes that students take in their first two years that are applied to each individual major, to allow for analytical thinking. Ungar agreed that liberal educations have found to emphasize more developed thought. Ungar states that “An astounding 89 percent said they were looking for more emphasis on “the ability to effectively communicate orally and in writing,” and almost as many urged the development of better “critical thinking and analytical reasoning skills” (Ungar). Most employers are looking for students with liberal art backgrounds because they know what comes with a liberal education.

UNE uses the first nested conception of liberal arts education that “embraces the ideal of the integrated curriculum, encompassing virtually all nonprofessional higher learning” (Scheuer). By doing this, they give a wider range of disciplinaries that are necessary for students to get involved in. It also allows students to have more options in their lifetime of things they might want to pursue. For example, a student may like a class they took but was completely different from their major; this may lead to a change in major. As society changes rapidly, UNE sets out the goal to enhance decision-making within students to live more thoughtful lives. They don’t want their students to get stuck if something bad may occur in the world. They use critical thinking as their edge to get students to be more creative. One of the four main objectives in UNE’s handbook describes the implementation of how they want students to be able to effectively communicate. This relates to when Ungar dismissed misconception #2 and says ” An astounding 89 percent said they were looking for more emphasis on “the ability to effectively communicate orally and in writing,” (Ungar).

When looking at Appendix A in the student handbook, english composition was nailed on the spot for goals to be achieved in the class. For myself so far, I feel like I have gained some sort of knowledge or my Professor has given the ability to gain the knowledge listed on the Learning Outcomes. More than I ever have, we focused on revising our drafts and using peer edits to further our writing. This was completely new to me, but something that I feel helped me a lot. Something I do not believe occurs is when the handbook specifies professors using “directed and engaged learning”. With my experience so far, I haven’t had the most directed learning towards myself. Students have to go out of their way to get directed learning which is something I think should be applicable, but putting that as one of the methodologies doesn’t make sense if it isn’t applied. I am still a freshman, so this could change as I get into more focused classes on my major but as of now, I don’t believe this has occurred for me.

There seems to be a misconception that spreads around the liberal arts. People see it as outdated and because other countries aren’t using it, we shouldn’t. This isn’t so true. Ungar, the author of “7 major misconceptions about the liberal arts” says, “Further, in recent years delegations from China have been visiting the United States and asking pointed questions about the liberal arts, seemingly because they feel there may be a good reason to try that approach to education.” More countries are starting to look at liberal arts and see its benefits as it generates leaders in the world today. Scheuer, the author of “Critical Thinking and the Liberal Arts”, agrees with Ungar by elaborating that “nations around the world are beginning to embrace the liberal arts idea that American education has done so much to promote, even as we question it.”

Some people believe that liberal arts are only for democratic/liberal people. This is not the case at all. As Scheuer points out, liberal arts are not named for their political matter, ” Like the term liberal arts, it’s more comprehensive and systemic: a social ecology involving a range of activities symbiotic with democratic communities.” It shows us all viewpoints and assesses every situation/problem using multiple reasonings. Ungar would say that “A liberal education, as properly defined above, has nothing whatsoever to do with politics”. They both point out that it is more focusing on establishing leadership and citizenship within the students, which makes a lot of sense and is something people need to understand.

1. This article could potentially be about how liberal arts colleges produce critical thinking students or vice versa. Liberal arts is the study of many different things but by the title it could mean how to teach students to think critically.1
2. This first section is telling us what the liberal arts are. “Originally there were seven liberal arts: the trivium of classical antiquity, consisting of grammar, rhetoric, and logic, combined with the medieval quadrivium of arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy.” These seven original arts have developed in to many more and a way of learning. It has become the most renown way of learning in the US.
3. The next section is about why we need liberal arts education. It seems like it’s necessary because it brings communities together and develops our society as a whole. “The overall goal is to foster vibrant and prosperous communities with broad and deep participation, in public conversations marked by fairness, inclusion, and (where critical thinking comes in) intellectual rigor.” It also focuses on fairness and inclusion which are becoming very relevant in todays world.
4. Critical thinking is described as “the intellectual engine of a functional democracy: the set of mental practices that lends breadth, depth, clarity, and consistency to public discourse.” Theres a lot that goes into critical thinking and how it is developed. A couple things that comes from thinking critically is the ability to share to the public, develop higher education, and many more.
5. “these concepts include truth, nature, value, causality, complexity, morality, freedom, excellence, and—as Wittgenstein understood—language itself, as the principal medium of thought.” The concepts talked about in the quote are the concepts that unify the liberal arts curriculum. Liberal arts is important for our democracy to run. We need problem solvers and team workers, which is what liberal arts is said to develop.

In “The Coddling” by Lukianoff and Haidt, they say, “But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life”

In “The Coddling” by Lukianoff and Haidt, they say, “ Vindictive protectiveness … prepares the [students] poorly for professional life”.

In Carol Dweck’s “The power of believing that you can improve” she says, “their intelligence had been up for judgment”

In Carol Dweck’s “The power of believing that you can improve” she says, “their [fixed mindset people] intelligence had been up for judgment”.

Dweck on the other hand, in her Ted Talk, says, “But if you get the grade “Not Yet”, you understand that you’re on a learning curve” (Dweck para.1).

According to Carol Dweck in her Ted Talk: The Power of believing that you can improve, “if you get the grade “Not Yet”, you understand that you’re on a learning curve” (Dweck para.1).

 In Lukianoff and Haidt’s “The Coddling” they voice, “Don’t teach students what to think; teach them how to think” (Coddling para. 7).

 In “The Coddling” the authors establish the importance to not ” teach students what to think; teach them how to think” (Coddling para. 7).

Original: I don’t agree with Lukianoff or Haidt when they say that colleges are setting students up for failure. Dweck would say that Lukianoff and Haidt are suffering from a growth mindset. In “The Coddling” by Lukianoff and Haidt, they say, “But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life” (para 8). I completely disagree with this quote because most of the people who are being protected from these sensitive subjects have already had to deal with the sensitivities outside of college. It’s not like they would be hearing these words for the first time, but having these protections can lead others by example, especially the work industries. Many students who are in college are already struggling with anxiety and depression because this is the time where they finally get to understand themselves and who they truly are. It’s not like having these protections up can do more harm, if anything it should cause less stress. This relates to how Dweck talks about fixed mindsets. In Carol Dweck’s “The power of believing that you can improve” she says, “their [fixed mindset people] intelligence had been up for judgment” (Dweck para. 2). I believe what Dweck is saying is that people with this mindset have a hard time changing their perspective and agree to something new. That is why Lukianoff and Haidt are struggling to understand this new way of thinking in colleges and other institutions. They are used to an older way of thinking and believe that everyone has to experience difficulties, instead of hoping that this could lead to less for everyone.

Revised: I don’t agree with Lukianoff or Haidt when they say that colleges are setting students up for failure. Dweck would say that Lukianoff and Haidt are suffering from a growth mindset. In “The Coddling” by Lukianoff and Haidt, they say, “But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life” (para 8). Protecting students from certain sensitivities is not setting them up for failure. Students are still learning, becoming adults as they grow to be the most prepared for their job of interest. Most of the people who are being protected from these sensitive subjects have already had to deal with the sensitivities outside of college. It’s not like they would be hearing these words for the first time, but having these protections can lead others by example, especially the work industries. Many students who are in college are already struggling with anxiety and depression because this is the time where they finally get to understand themselves and who they truly are. It’s not like having these protections up can do more harm, if anything it should cause less stress. This relates to how Dweck talks about fixed mindsets. In Carol Dweck’s “The power of believing that you can improve” she says, “their [fixed mindset people] intelligence had been up for judgment” (Dweck para. 2). I believe what Dweck is saying is that people with this mindset have a hard time changing their perspective and agreeing to something new. That is why Lukianoff and Haidt are struggling to understand this new way of thinking in colleges and other institutions. They are used to an older way of thinking and believe that everyone has to experience difficulties, instead of hoping that this could lead to less for everyone.

In this paragraph, I revised my view after the Lukianoff and Haidt quote. Instead of going right into my opinion without meaning, I changed it to an opinion that supports my claim and where I stand on the topic.

Original: I believe that Dweck has a very optimistic approach to learning, but I agree with Lukianoff and Haidt about how to teach critical thinking. In Lukianoff and Haidt’s “The Coddling” they voice, “Don’t teach students what to think; teach them how to think” (Coddling para. 7). This quote says that students need to engage in beliefs that may challenge their own. They need to be able to understand both sides to then make a clear decision on which side they take. This will allow for a more critical way of thinking. This will cause discomfort to some students, but that can be a good thing, as long as it isn’t harsh or triggering. Dweck on the other hand, in her Ted Talk, says, “But if you get the grade “Not Yet”, you understand that you’re on a learning curve” (Dweck para.1). She seems to be on the right path when thinking about students and their sensitivities, but when it comes to critical thinking, I don’t believe this method is the way to go. Yes, this may give students more confidence which is always a great thing, but how can these little changes in wording allow students to develop the skills they need when older. A lot of the time a student’s boss will not give leeway if they do something wrong. If students get too used to this “not yet” learning, they may become sensitive to people who treat them differently. This approach seems to be borderline childish which is not what students necessarily need. They do need some sort of structure and confidence in their own opinions to make it in the world.

Revised: I believe that Dweck has a very optimistic approach to learning, but I agree with Lukianoff and Haidt about how to teach critical thinking. In Lukianoff and Haidt’s “The Coddling” they voice, “Don’t teach students what to think; teach them how to think” (Coddling para. 7). This quote says that students need to engage in beliefs that may challenge their own. They need to be able to understand both sides to then make a clear decision on which side they take. This will allow for a more critical way of thinking. It may cause discomfort to some students, but that can be a good thing, as long as it isn’t harsh or triggering. Dweck on the other hand, in her Ted Talk, says, “But if you get the grade “Not Yet”, you understand that you’re on a learning curve” (Dweck para.1). She seems to be on the right path when thinking about students and their sensitivities, but when it comes to critical thinking, I don’t believe this method is the way to go. Yes, this may give students more confidence which is always a great thing, but how can these little changes in wording allow students to develop the skills they need when older. A method that shows students they aren’t quite there yet, could be good for younger students. If students get too used to this “not yet” learning, they may become sensitive to people who treat them differently. As a young adult, hearing “not yet” may just frustrate them even more. People need some sort of structure and confidence in their own opinions to face whatever challenges may arise.

In this paragraph, i cut out some unnecessary sentences that didn’t show which side I was supporting. I also gave some examples that may become apparent if students get too used to the “not yet” learning method. I think that it could be good for younger students but not older.