The Perpetual Dream: Reform and Experiment in the American College

by Gerald Grant, David Riesman

Evaluated is a decade of campus experiments that began in the 1960's, as volatile a period of college reform as the country has ever witnessed. An overview is provided of the diversity of undergraduate education in the United States, and two general types of changes are identified: telic reforms, which redefine the goals of higher education, and popular reforms initiated in response to specific social and political developments. Three colleges that underwent telic reforms are highlighted: St. John's College, Kresge College; and the College for Human Services. Three illustrations of popular reform are made in the New College in Florida, the University of California at Santa Cruz, and the state colleges in New Jersey.

Genres: Education

474 pages, Hardcover

First published April 1, 1978

About the author

Gerald Grant is Hannah Hammond Professor of Education and Sociology, Emeritus, at Syracuse University.

Reviews

[Matt Ely · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps the most shocking this about this engaging book is that it was written 50 years ago. The authors were so aware of trends in higher education that they managed to diagnose many of the same issues we're still seeing surface today. Composed of extended profiles of several non-traditional colleges in the US, the authors show some of the typical patterns of education reform in their time. Many of these same impulses (structured, Socratic rigor on one side; absolutely student-directed inquiry on the other) are still guiding reform today, though their observation of T-group encounter sessions exudes a uniquely 70's vibe.

What I loved most about this book is that it takes seriously the personalities of those involved in reform. What do they want to reform from? What are their afraid of becoming if they don't pursue education reform? Do students respond to it? Do we only pay attention to the ones who do? It's asking the kinds of questions that anyone interested in reform needs to ask about motives and outcomes.

Ultimately, the authors honor the attempt. They want to shine a light on people that care enough to fail at something new. Novelty is not necessarily an improvement, but the diversity of academic structure in US higher ed allows for unique sorts of curricular innovation. This is a text that gives that impulse its due. Anyone interested in the topic will find something to latch on to here.