Can we talk about leadership? Specifically, can we talk about the relationship between leadership and undergraduate degrees?
I have a good deal of anecdotal evidence that the sort of student most likely to be a leader at school is the all-rounder, the student who is strong academically across a range of subjects but also plays sport or music – and frequently both – to a high level. They may not be absolutely the strongest in any one subject at school but typically they will be in the top 10% of the group in any subject and, as I say, their strengths lie in the breadth of their achievements, rather than any one more narrowly defined area.
Increasingly I read, too, that good business and political leaders are also likely to be all-rounders, able to empathise with all members of their teams or organisations. This is kind of obvious. A good leader of a complex organisation must be able to understand a wide range of knowledge and practice, see problems and opportunities in unexpected places, talk to people from all walks of life, and so on.
So strong all-rounders are valued at school and in the workplace. And yet: where are the undergraduate degrees that play to the strengths of these bright, interested and interesting students?
Are we in academia really to say: Ah well, the sort of person you are, the sort of strong all-round intelligence you possess does not fit with what we value as a higher education. When you come to university, you must put aside your many different strengths and narrow your interests to one area of the curriculum or another – something we define as disciplinary excellence. This is the only way you can say you have achieved academic excellence and this is the only sort of learning and academic achievement we can assess.
Put like this it seems to me, at least, that it is universities who are in the wrong, not the strong all-rounders who wish to study there. If such thinkers are valued for their many attributes at school and in the workplace, and if they are academically bright (as they invariably are) then it is up to us at universities to think about what we estimate to be valuable knowledge and what options we give such students so that they can progress in higher learning whilst retaining the very attributes we value in them.
Any objections?
Photo under CC license from Wikimedia Commons
Comments