Let me be clear: professional preparation must be a central component of what we do. Like preparing students to be active civic agents, preparing students for the jobs of the future is an integral component of our work. It must drive our curriculum development, our pedagogy, and our co- and extra-curricular activities. But we must remember that professional preparation and civic agency are not the heart of what we do. At our core, we are about transforming students’ lives, their families’ lives, and their communities. This transformative project is not about producing widgets to fit into a corporate machine. It is about nurturing the growth of human beings—of offering opportunities that allow our graduates to become more fully themselves, realize their deepest, most profound potential, and flourish as whole and integrated human beings in healthy and whole communities. In The Heart of Higher Education , Parker Palmer and Arthur Zajonc connect teaching and learning to this more profound project. They note that “the ideals of a liberal education include integration across disciplines, connection to community, and alignment of one’s studies with the inner aspirations that give direction and meaning to one’s life” (7). What is truly at the heart of teaching and learning, as Palmer and Zajonc note, is “an education that embraces every dimension of what it means to be human, that honors the varieties of human experience, looks at us and our world through a variety of cultural lenses, and educates our young people in ways that enable them to face the challenges of our time” (20). To shift the teaching and learning experience towards a focus on the development of an integrated and whole human being would be radical—and natural, for it is truly how we, as a university, are different from other universities. Indeed, in 1898, Principal W. E. Wilson, the third leader of our historic institution, reported that Ellensburg Normal School was about more than training teachers; it was more fully about the “cultivation of the abilities and habits of the scholar” (Mohler 61). Under Wilson’s leadership, the curriculum was designed for “the strengthening and sharpening of the intellect, for the enlarging and liberalization of the mind, for the enrichment and invigoration of the whole life” (Mohler 62). As we offer a curriculum that advances the “whole life” of our students, can we do this work intentionally, and strategically, and developmentally? As Palmer and Zajonc note, “Our colleges and universities need to encourage, foster, and assist our students, faculty, [staff], and administrators in finding their own authentic way to an undivided life where meaning and purpose are tightly interwoven with intellect and action, where compassion and care are infused with insight and knowledge” (56). Can we develop a Central Experience that weaves together our curriculum and co-curriculum to foster an integrated and whole life? And do so through the lens of equity in order to build a community of belonging? Page 7
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs