大學(xué)真正的價(jià)值

 

大學(xué)真正的價(jià)值

What’s the most transformative educational experience you’ve had?

在你的教育經(jīng)歷中，對人生產(chǎn)生最大影響的是什么?

I was asked this question recently, and for a few seconds it stumped me, mainly because I’ve never viewed learning as a collection of eureka moments. It’s a continuum, a lifelong awakening to the complexity of the world.

最近我問了自己這個(gè)問題，一時(shí)找不出答案，這主要是因?yàn)?，我從來沒有把學(xué)習(xí)當(dāng)做一個(gè)個(gè)醍醐灌頂?shù)乃查g。學(xué)習(xí)是個(gè)持續(xù)的過程，是畢其一生去領(lǐng)悟這個(gè)世界的復(fù)雜性。

But then something did come to mind, not a discrete lesson but a moving image, complete with soundtrack. I saw a woman named Anne Hall swooning and swaying as she stood at the front of a classroom in Chapel Hill, N.C., and explained the rawness and majesty of emotion in “King Lear.”

然而，我很快還真的想到了一些東西，它并非可以獨(dú)立出來的一課，而是一段運(yùn)動的畫面，配有音軌。我看見一個(gè)叫安·霍爾(Anne Hall)的女人站在北卡羅來納州教堂山的一間教室前，陶醉地?cái)[動著身軀，講解《李爾王》(King Lear)中情感的本真和莊嚴(yán)。

I heard three words: “Stay a little.” They’re Lear’s plea to Cordelia, the truest of his three daughters, as she slips away. When Hall recited them aloud, it wasn’t just her voice that trembled. It was all of her.

我聽到三個(gè)字：“等一等。”("Stay a little.")那是他在哀求即將離世的科迪利婭，他的三個(gè)女兒中最忠誠的一個(gè)?；魻柛呗暷畛鲞@三個(gè)字，顫抖的不只是她的聲音。還有她的全身。

She taught a course on Shakespeare’s tragedies: “Lear,” “Macbeth,” “Othello.” It was by far my favorite class at the University of North Carolina, which I attended in the mid-1980s, though I couldn’t and can’t think of any bluntly practical application for it, not unless you’re bound for a career on the stage or in academia.

她開了一個(gè)莎士比亞悲劇課程，包括《李爾王》、《麥克白》(Macbeth)和《奧瑟羅》(Othello)。那是我在1980年代中期就讀北卡羅來納大學(xué)(University of North Carolina)期間最喜愛的課，雖然無論當(dāng)時(shí)還是現(xiàn)在，我都想不出修這門課有任何顯而易見的實(shí)際意義，除非你打算以戲劇為業(yè)，或進(jìn)入學(xué)術(shù)界。

I headed in neither direction. So I guess I was just wasting my time, at least according to a seemingly growing chorus of politicians and others whose metrics for higher education are skill acquisition and job placement.

我最終沒有往這兩個(gè)方向發(fā)展。所以我想，我只是浪費(fèi)了時(shí)間吧，至少我從越來越多的政客和其他人士口中聽到的是這樣，他們都認(rèn)為，高等教育的衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是技能獲取和就業(yè)安置。

Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin and a likely presidential candidate, signaled his membership in this crowd when he recently proposed a 13 percent cut in state support for the University of Wisconsin. According to several reports, he simultaneously toyed with changing the language of the university’s mission statement so that references to the “search for truth” and the struggle to “improve the human condition” would be replaced by an expressed concern for “the state’s work force needs.”

威斯康星州長、有望成為總統(tǒng)候選人的斯科特·沃克(Scott Walker)近日的言行表明，他也是這么想的，他提議對威斯康星大學(xué)(University of Wisconsin)削減13%的州府撥款。據(jù)多方報(bào)道，他同時(shí)還在考慮改變該大學(xué)的校訓(xùn)，要把“尋找真相”和勉力“改善人類狀況”等表述換成滿足“州內(nèi)勞動力之需”這樣的具體擔(dān)憂。

I’m not sure where “Lear” fits into work force needs.

我不知道《李爾王》該如何滿足勞動力的需求。

The debate over the rightful role of college goes a long way back. Michael Roth, the president of Wesleyan University, documented as much in his 2014 book, “Beyond the University: Why Liberal Education Matters.” He noted that Thomas Jefferson exalted learning for learning’s sake, while Ben Franklin registered disdain for people who spent too much time in lecture halls.

關(guān)于大學(xué)該發(fā)揮何種作用的爭論，很久之前就已經(jīng)展開。衛(wèi)斯理大學(xué)(Wesleyan University)校長邁克爾·羅斯(Michael Roth)在2014年出版的著作《大學(xué)之外：自由主義教育之必要》(Beyond the University: Why Liberal Education Matters)中做出了相關(guān)闡述。他提出，托馬斯·杰斐遜(Thomas Jefferson)對為學(xué)習(xí)而學(xué)習(xí)的觀念十分推崇，而本·富蘭克林(Ben Franklin)則對那些花很多時(shí)間在演講廳的人表示不屑。

Ronald Reagan did, too. In 1967, just after he became the governor of California, he moved to slash spending for the University of California system and its eclectic menu of instruction, announcing that taxpayers shouldn’t be “subsidizing intellectual curiosity” and that “there are certain intellectual luxuries that perhaps we could do without.”

羅納德·里根(Ronald Reagan)也是這樣。1967年就任加利福尼亞州長后，他對加州大學(xué)系統(tǒng)的財(cái)政支出和兼收并蓄的課程表進(jìn)行了大幅削減，宣稱不應(yīng)該讓納稅人“去資助知識分子的好奇心”，而且“某些知識奢侈品，就算沒了，對我們可能也沒什么影響”。

That was a pivotal moment in the discussion of higher education’s ideal benefits, after which “the balance started to tip toward utility,” according to a recent essay by Dan Berrett in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Titled “The Day the Purpose of College Changed,” it looked back at Reagan’s remarks. It also recalled President Obama’s, in particular a seemingly dismissive comment last year about art history degrees. Obama has called for a rating system that would take into account how reliably colleges place their graduates into high-paying jobs.

丹·貝瑞特(Dan Berrett)近日發(fā)表在《高等教育紀(jì)事報(bào)》(The Chronicle of Higher Education)上的一篇文章表示，這在關(guān)于高等教育理想益處的討論中，是一個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)折點(diǎn)，在這之后“天平開始向功利傾斜”。這篇題為《那一天，大學(xué)的目的被改變》(The Day the Purpose of College Changed)的文章回顧了里根的言論。奧巴馬總統(tǒng)去年就藝術(shù)史學(xué)位發(fā)表的那段看起來相當(dāng)輕蔑的看法，也在文中有提及。奧巴馬呼吁建立一個(gè)評分系統(tǒng)，把畢業(yè)生得到高薪職位的狀況作為大學(xué)問責(zé)的一項(xiàng)評估指標(biāo)。

Neither he nor Walker is wrong to raise that issue, given the high cost of higher education and the fierce competition in the world. Students shouldn’t be blind to the employment landscape.

他和沃克提出這個(gè)問題不無道理，畢竟高等教育的成本高昂，而且我們身處一個(gè)競爭極度激烈的世界。學(xué)生不應(yīng)該對就業(yè)形勢充耳不聞。

But it’s impossible to put a dollar value on a nimble, adaptable intellect, which isn’t the fruit of any specific course of study and may be the best tool for an economy and a job market that change unpredictably.

但敏銳而富有適應(yīng)力的才智，是很難用金錢來衡量價(jià)值的，它并非任何具體的學(xué)習(xí)課程的結(jié)果，但在一個(gè)瞬息萬變的經(jīng)濟(jì)和招聘市場里，它可能是最佳的工具。

And it’s dangerous to forget that in a democracy, college isn’t just about making better engineers but about making better citizens, ones whose eyes have been opened to the sweep of history and the spectrum of civilizations.

在一個(gè)民主社會，大學(xué)的用途不僅僅是培養(yǎng)工程師，而且要培養(yǎng)更好的公民，要讓他們?nèi)ヮI(lǐng)略浩瀚的歷史和多種多樣的文明。忘記這一點(diǎn)是很危險(xiǎn)的。

It’s also foolish to belittle what those of us in Hall’s class got from Shakespeare and from her illumination of his work.

去貶低我們這些霍爾的學(xué)生從莎士比亞那里學(xué)到的東西，以及她對那些作品的真知灼見，也是愚蠢的。

“Stay a little.” She showed how that simple request harbored such grand anguish, capturing a fallen king’s hunger for connection and his tenuous hold on sanity and contentment. And thus she taught us how much weight a few syllables can carry, how powerful the muscle of language can be.

“等一等。”她讓我們看到，一個(gè)簡單的要求里可以藏納如此宏大的痛苦，捕捉到一個(gè)落難的君王對情感聯(lián)系的渴望，和對正常神志與生活滿足感的脆弱把握。我們因此從她那里學(xué)到，寥寥幾個(gè)音節(jié)可以承載何等的份量，語言的力量何其之大。

She demonstrated the rewards of close attention. And the way she did this — her eyes wild with fervor, her body aquiver with delight — was an encouragement of passion and a validation of the pleasure to be wrung from art. It informed all my reading from then on. It colored the way I listened to people and even watched TV.

她向我們證明注意力的專注會讓你獲益匪淺。她的專注——她的眼神狂熱，顫栗的身體散發(fā)著喜悅——是一種激情的鼓舞，它證明我們可以從藝術(shù)得到怎樣的愉悅。自那以后，我的一切閱讀都遵循了這種方式。它甚至影響了我聆聽他人、觀看電視的方式。