 |
 |
|
||
|
||
|
|
|
An overemphasis on individual achievement can lead, however, to self-indulgence. College students are daily bombarded by messages from television, cinema, etc., that encourage them to pursue only their own self-interest. The contemporary college campus is awash with student values that challenge accepted concepts of community. For the purposes of this paper student values are defined as those strongly held beliefs that influence their behavior and world perspective. These values have been formulated and shaped through incessant contact with the media, i.e., television, video games, pulp publications, and the cinema. If any of the billions of messages conveyed by the media have a common theme, it is one of self-indulgence, physical adventure, and expressions of sexuality. Possibly due to the media exposure, today’s college students socialize differently and reportedly have experienced more emotional trauma than their predecessors (Levine & Cureton, 1998). The precursor to this theme could be heard in the Isley Brothers music almost thirty years ago: “It’s Your Thing, Do What You Want To Do” which boldly became the anthem for public and private thought and action. Simultaneously, formal education, both public and private began to tout the importance of individual achievement and competitiveness in order to succeed in college and gain access to highly sought-after jobs. Thus today’s traditional-age college students value “traditional models of leadership” that extol the virtues of being an achiever, leader of women and men, someone who sets the mark by being out in front of their peers. Signs of “No Limits” are found as graffiti, written by students proclaiming that no one has the right to establish social boundaries or behavioral limits. At Penn State much of the student response to the outcry against dangerous drinking has been a student demand for freedom from social authority. Students have reached young adulthood hearing the treatise “Be A Winner or Survivor.” Should we be surprised that many of today’s students lack an appreciation of the call by university administrators for building community and the formation of a more civil society. Etzioni (1993) fervently challenges this country to abandon its emphasis on individual achievement at all costs. As a communitarian, Etzioni calls for a balance in our dominant political and social value systems. The balance is one in which the concerns for community bridle rampant individualism. Communitarians regularly call for a new social consciousness that elevates community and the welfare of the whole above that of individual autonomy and personal success. Extreme individualism is a threat to the future of our democratic way of life. The emphasis on individual rights and entitlements may also be a threat to the concepts of community advocated by our institutions of higher education and the larger communities in which we reside. To paraphrase a statement by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks about Britain, a university is more than an institution of individuals living disconnected lives in pursuit of self-interest; we are a people united by a sense of purposefulness, intellectual curiosity, and tradition (Sacks, 1996/97). Moreover, those of us in higher education are bonded together, bonded by more than a contract; we are inspired to serve our campus communities and re-invigorate the founding principles of teaching, service, and inspiration for social uplift in the larger society. According to Sacks, it is this moral bond of community that sustains us, rather than contracts and laws alone. College students need to understand that meaningful personal choices, i.e., personal advancement and success, depends upon a healthy community where a significant majority promotes the flourishing of all its members (Lind, 1998). Surveys show that nearly half of all Americans believe that being responsible citizens in a community is “very important.” What does “responsibility” mean in a climate that places so much emphasis on esteeming, actualizing, realizing, and affirming the self? What does it mean in a university environment? Responsibility means encouraging student understanding and engagement in the “civil society” envisioned by the nation’s founders. It means changing the college culture from one of self-gratification to concern for others. The concept of a civil society is one in which individuals and groups sustain continued involvement in community services that undergird basic human needs, e.g., basic social services, spiritual needs, and concern for the welfare of our towns and cities. Most importantly, Communitarians would probably agree that community involvement intended to address the common good, is not “value free.” This writer contends that community involvement should embrace aspects of the “beloved community” articulated by Martin Luther King Jr. (Ansbro, 2000). Dr King identified values gained through unselfish service to others, respect for human dignity, concern for the common good, and a search for spiritual fulfillment as values of the highest order. Student involvement, when value driven and reflective, i.e., individuals digesting the personal, social, political, and economic implications of their service, has the potential for deep personal growth and self-discovery. Moreover, the service and involvement experiences may reaffirm family values and personal perspectives learned prior to college. The associational and communal life of college students must be nurtured and encouraged as a counter to our “individualistic” competitive ethos so common in public and private discourse. Campus environments must change from what communitarians believe is an exclusive focus on individual fulfillment to one that focuses on community well being (Eberly, 1998). Changing academic pedagogy to include academically based community service and an emphasis on applications of classroom concepts in community settings can be powerful antidotes for the incivility seen on our nation’s campuses. Campuses that seek to address the conflict between individual autonomy and public virtue should examine communitarian perspectives. New energies should be devoted to associational life found in school and community organizations, the team-work required in corporate internships, and the enriched personal life gained by identification with religious and spiritual institutions. These foundations of learning strengthen genuine civic responsibility (Wolf, 1997). The Centers for Community Education at Penn State seek to promote student awareness and engagement in an “associational life” that challenges disengagement, lethargy, and isolation that have significant roles in the lives of today’s students (Flacks & Thomas, 1998). The Center for Ethics and Religious Affairs, the Paul Robeson Cultural Center, and the Center for Women Students function as a cohesive unit intended to nurture civic responsibility, spiritual awareness and an appreciation of diversity experiences. Initiatives by these Student Affairs units are even more appropriate when joined with faculty conceived efforts to form a campus environment that is caring, purposeful, and disciplined, values that counter the egocentric culture common to many contemporary students (Boyer, 1990). The potential for value-driven community involvement to explore, define, and address a new sense of community values is very promising and worthy of significant investment by higher education. Faculty members within all disciplines are challenged to initiate value driven community involvement that reflects the foundations of their academic roots and institutional mission. Our nation’s higher education institutions will gain new public respect and relevance as millions of students experience integrated, institutionally driven, collaboratively conceived, value based learning that is focused upon visions/experiences of a common good. References Ansbro, J.J. (2000). Martin Luther King Jr. Nonviolent strategies and tactics for social change. Lanham: Madison Books. Boyer, E.L. (1990). Campus Life: In search of community. Princeton, New Jersey: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Eberly, D. (Fall, 1998). Civil Society: Attacked from All Corners. The Responsive Community, 8, 66-71. Etzioni, A. (1993) The spirit of community: The reinvention of American society. New York: Simon & Schuster. Flacks, R. & Thomas, S.L. (1998, November 27). The Chronicle of Higher Education. Levine, A. 7 Curton, J.S. (1988, March-April). What we know about today’s college students. About Campus, 4-9. Lind, J. (Fall, 1998). Liberty, community and framers’ intent. The Responsive Community, 8, 13-23. Sacks, J. (1996/97). Rebuilding civil society: A biblical perspective. The Responsive Community, 7, 11-20. Wolf, A. (1997, Fall). Is civil society obsolete. The Brookings Review, 9-12. |
|
|||
|
|||
|
