Why Choose the Liberal Arts?

by Mark William Roche

In a world where the value of a liberal arts education is no longer taken for granted, Mark William Roche lucidly and passionately argues for its essential importance. Drawing on more than thirty years of experience in higher education as a student, faculty member, and administrator, Roche deftly connects the broad theoretical perspective of educators to the practical needs and questions of students and their parents. Roche develops three overlapping arguments for a strong liberal arts first, the intrinsic value of learning for its own sake, including exploration of the profound questions that give meaning to life; second, the cultivation of intellectual virtues necessary for success beyond the academy; and third, the formative influence of the liberal arts on character and on the development of a sense of higher purpose and vocation. Together with his exploration of these three values―intrinsic, practical, and idealistic―Roche reflects on ways to integrate them, interweaving empirical data with personal experience. Why Choose the Liberal Arts? is an accessible and thought-provoking work of interest to students, parents, and administrators.

Genres: Education, Nonfiction

198 pages, Paperback

First published August 30, 2010

Reviews

[Jeff Delisle · Rating 5 out of 5]

written by my freshman room mate. I taught him everything he knows, ha ha.

[David Layton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Roche is an expert in German literature and philosophy who has held just about every kind of academic position there is. Roche makes a case not just for keeping liberal arts programs in universities, but also for bolstering these programs and actively seeking students to get liberal arts majors. Roche's argument in favor of the liberal arts follows two paths. One is to counter the argument that universities should supply narrowly focused degrees for the sake of instrumental value, and the other is to highlight what Roche believes are "higher" intrinsic values that the liberal arts have which career-oriented programs do not have. Roche makes a compelling case that the common idea that a degree in English or something like it is "useless" and leads only either to teaching or low-end employment is just plain wrong. He cites many studies showing exactly the opposite, that plenty of businesses are actively seeking liberal arts graduates and that when liberal arts graduates enter business and the professions, they tend to do better in the long run than their business-major counterparts, even if the liberal arts majors have a lesser start. Roche's main focus, however, is on the "higher" intrinsic value of liberal arts education. Here, he is on somewhat shakier ground. Roche argues that a well thought-out liberal arts program provides students with meaning and value in their lives that narrow-focus degrees not only do not provide, but actively seek to avoid. Roche argues that in directing students to ask the "big questions," getting them to think critically, and increasing their sensitivity to the personal and social obligations that come with university education, the liberal arts programs give students necessary lessons in character formation. That all seems reasonable enough. However, Roche in the latter stages of the book when he is pitching his case to the fullest in these areas, adds to all this a religious dimension. It becomes clear that Roche, a strongly believing Catholic, firmly thinks that only a religiously based liberal arts education can accomplish all this. He falls for the fallacy that religion inherently provides a moral base, indeed in his mind the only legitimate moral base, from which character can develop. If students are not "spiritual" and not correctly oriented toward believing that "God" is the ultimate end of all endeavor, then, according to Roche, they will lead lives of "alienation" without meaning and purpose. This Catholic dogma injects hogwash, as far as I am concerned, into what otherwise would be a sound approach to thinking about what liberal arts education might do. Roche also provides many anecdotes and ideas about what his ideal liberal arts education might be like. All of it sounds great, if the program is taught fully and exclusively by full-time professors who live on or near the campus. He completely ignores the problem that increasing numbers of courses are being taught by low-paid part-timers who receive little to no support or guidance from the university or department, and have neither the time nor the luxury to invite students to their homes for informal conversations. While these two deficiencies, the "it must be religious (specifically Catholic)" orientation and the complete disregard of adjuncts, strike me as significant, the overall ideals Roche describes are great goals to work for. Roche does make a strong case not only that the liberal arts have a meaningful place in contemporary higher education, but also that they should have a much more prominent place.

[Elkaza · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was O.K, but felt at times, the author was repeating things. Even so, it had a few very good points, that claim the Liberal Arts has more value that modern society maintains. Since, the Liberal Arts, is the only education form that gives an individual an overall instruction on what it means to be human and our human experience. However, it feels like a boring text book, one is forced to read at college.

[Drew Sutton · Rating 3 out of 5]

Definitely opened my eyes as to what a liberal arts education can offer. I found Chapter One to be the most interesting and substantial. The idea of the intrinsic value of an education I find fascinating. Learning for its own sake is important enough, even if it isn’t preparing you for a career after school.

[olga · Rating 2 out of 5]

If this reading was not for a class, it would be a 1 star :( My class had good discussions that stemmed from this book so I moved it up in rating based on the book being a vehicle for important conversations.

[Ivan · Rating 5 out of 5]

FIRST LINE REVIEW: "What can my child do with a major in philosophy?" With this classic question, Roche begins one of the more important 21st century books on the value of a liberal arts education. He focuses on three major benefits of the liberal arts. The intrinsic value found through gaining a love of learning, the practical value found in the ways in which liberal arts students find direct application of their studies in the job market, and the character formation gained by the liberal arts that help students chart their moral compass in this world - so vital to helping make the world a better place. I found the book to be profound and compelling. It should be read by every educator, every parent whose child will be going to college and every student so they better understand and appreciate the vital role that a liberal arts education can play in their lives. I plan to read this book again and again so that I am better prepared to support the case for this critical educational model.

[Allison · Rating 2 out of 5]

I did not enjoy this book, perhaps partially because I was asked to read and annotate it for class. However, I do have to admit that, even though I don't agree with all of Roche's points, particularly those about a liberal arts college as the prime location of a student's moral development, he is excellent at structuring an argument. All of his points are clear and clearly supported, with numerous bits of evidence to back each of them. I personally hope to never read any of this book again, but still have quite a bit of respect for the clarity and purpose with which it was written.

[Pamela J · Rating 4 out of 5]

Roche preaches to the choir, if I'm the choir. Thoughtful and affirming read for those in Higher Ed.

[Rob · Rating 3 out of 5]

Roche does a good job articulating the answer to this question, and provides a thoughtful perspective on the importance of having a liberal arts education.

[Pscheuring · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well-intentioned polemic.

[Christina “6 word reviewer” Lake]

Inspiring promotion of academe's best side.

[Mills College Library]

378.012 R673 2010