Note: Submitted on behalf of the Queer Student Alliance.
As the committee discusses possibilities for changing Furman’s curriculum and perhaps considers adopting less Western-centric approaches to education, the Queer Student Alliance would like to emphasize that national borders are not the only dividers. Instead of focusing solely on preparing students to cope with a global society, perhaps the committee should also consider preparing students to cope with society in America more fully. Ignorance manifested in racism, sexism, classism, and homophobia are the antithesis of what a liberal arts education is founded on and should be discouraged. Avoidance of queer themes and feminist issues is the embodiment of the encouragement of homophobia and patriarchy.
With that in mind, we would like to propose that Furman needs to start asking questions about the ways in which courses are configured and taught with regard to gender and sexuality issues. Why are feminist themes relegated to Women’s Studies courses? And, why do Women’s Studies Courses not focus more heavily on queer themes and the intersection of misogyny and homophobia? Why are same-sex desire and the issues attending it not made central to courses on the ancient world, including the Biblical world? Why is feminist political thought ignored in political theory classes? Why are the influences of queer persons overlooked in theatre, art, and music classes? If art students leave Furman without knowing that Michelangelo apparently had same-sex relations and the ways in which those relations affected his art, then Furman has failed its students. Why do English courses so often by-pass same-sex relations and valorize heterosexual ones? Why do history courses not address gay and lesbian history? Imagine if Furman had an American History course that ignored issues of women and racial minorities. Science courses should ask, how does a heterocentric perspective and male domination skew scientific research? These are just a few questions we should be asking.
We do not want Furman professors to proselytize any one particular viewpoint, but rather we are asking professors to challenge their students to look critically at their world in regards to gender norms and sexual stereotypes. Some professors may think that Furman students will not be able to digest or understand concepts dealing with anything queer. This is an insult to students’ capabilities and hurts them in the long run. Furman has several professors and certain women studies courses that address gender issues, queer theory, and gay and lesbian studies; however, these few professors and courses cannot be expected to take up all the angles of these vexed and complicated subjects.
Our Proposal
On a basic level, Furman professors should be aware of queer thought and gender issues and integrate these theories into their existing classes. This should be an intentional, coherent, and widespread effort on the part of Furman professors.
Furman should also expand the Women’s Studies program and install Gay and Lesbian Studies and Queer Theory courses into Furman’s curriculum. The Women’s Studies department currently offers only 12 courses, and none of them specifically focus on Gay and Lesbian Studies or Queer Theory. If Furman’s aim is to foster a diverse community, then it needs to provide courses that appeal to a diverse group of students. An outstanding number of schools that are similar to and competitive with Furman are moving toward the inclusion of gay and lesbian studies into their curriculums. We have attached a list of other programs, which are more comprehensive than that of Furman.
Larger Schools:
Schools of our Size:
Associated Colleges of the South:
Information and computer literacy, in the conventional sense, are functionally valuable technical skills. But information literacy should in fact be conceived more broadly as a new liberal art that extends from knowing how to use computers and access information to critical reflection on the nature of information itself, its technical infrastructure, and its social, cultural and even philosophical context and impact – as essential to the mental framework of the educated information-age citizen as the trivium of basic liberal arts (grammar, logic and rhetoric) was to the educated person in medieval society.The proposal goes on to assert, “Information skills are not the same as technological skills, although there is considerable overlap.”
I would make the latter statement even stronger. Information fluency as defined in the previous proposal is without doubt a critical concept to be incorporated into our curriculum. I would argue, however, that it actually represents a subset of an even larger collection of outcomes that Furman should strive for all students to achieve. A rich collection that I will claim embodies the very essence – critical thinking, reflection, problem-solving – of the liberal arts. I don’t have a catchy name for the collective set of outcomes that I will discuss below. (“Technology fluency” doesn’t seem to capture it.) For the purposes of this essay, I will merely say that my intention is to expand upon the definition of the term information fluency. As such, I would like it to be considered as a postscript to proposal #56. Perhaps even a friendly amendment…
A key point to emphasize is that we must be careful not to be dismissive of technological skills (or “fluency”) in this discussion. An uncritical reading of the first quote (particularly the highlighted phrase) could lead the unwary reader to the conclusion that “knowing how to use computers” is perhaps somewhat passé and not worthy of serious academic study in the liberal arts. On the contrary, however, the quote goes on to list the technical infrastructure of information as an important objective.
The fact is that rigorous study of information technology itself not only deepens and enriches the information gathering and analysis benefits described in proposal #56, but carries with it benefits that transcend information skills altogether. There was a time when the written word was considered something of a technology, and was regarded by many with suspicion and condescension as being “just a tool”, used only by the weak-minded to write down ideas that they couldn’t otherwise remember. In modern times we think of writing quite differently, of course. Far more than just a tool, it is a means of expression, of organizing thoughts and ideas. The very same idea can be conveyed well or poorly using the written word, and in the difference between the two lie lessons about critical thinking, reflection, efficiency, hierarchical structure, and even aesthetics. We regard the ability to write well as an educational benchmark, and rightly so. We also would consider it unthinkable not to emphasize writing in our curriculum.
I believe that all of these observations can be accurately made about information technology.
Make no mistake – basic skills that may be categorized as “knowing how to use computers” are critical for educated students in the 21st century. (Just as we would argue that basic grammatical skills are critical.) A sampling of these skills would include:
But what is even more important for our students to learn is the fundamental methodology that is the foundation for all of these skills and is the true focal point of the study of technology – an unquestionably fundamental liberal arts discipline. This methodology, based in critical thinking and problem-solving, is far more complex and far-reaching in its impact than the mundane mouse-clicks and button-pushing that the phrase “knowing how to use computers” typically equates to. It goes to the heart of how we think about problems of all kinds, even those unrelated to technology. It gives us insight into how we as human beings think about subjects of all kinds.
The following list highlights some of the significant outcomes of the study of technology – that I maintain all of our liberally-educated students should understand:
These are all fundamental precepts of the study of technology – yet select anything from the list and you will find an item of knowledge absolutely critical to success in any endeavor in any discipline. For example, consider the task of writing an essay. The best and most effective way to proceed is to begin with a high-level outline, which is successively refined with more and more detail until the actual task of writing the paper has been reduced to translating the outline into prose. In this one example we have design before implementation (the writing itself), hierarchical thinking and incremental refinement. Methodologies that have nothing intrinsically to do with technology, but that are the inevitable outcomes of studying technology.
This is the basis of my claim that information fluency (or information technology or technology fluency or whatever name we choose) is not only not lurking on the fringes of the liberal arts, as often perceived, but is absolutely central.
The social relevance and impact of information technology is another reason why the idea that I am describing transcends the technology itself, goes beyond the previous definition of information fluency, and should be a central part of Furman’s curriculum.
Again, a mere sampling of significant topics that all liberally educated people in 2004 should be conversant about:
In conclusion, I believe that the principles of information fluency that we must convey to our students includes not only the ability to gather, filter and assimilate information as described in earlier proposals, but also skills involving the creation of new information, an understanding and appreciation of the social impact of information technology and – most significantly – a firm grounding in the methodology of technology, which encompasses a wide spectrum of critical concepts and skills.
I believe that the Furman curriculum should prominently feature an emphasis on these principles – just as it necessarily features an emphasis on both writing skills and the critical thinking that the study of writing includes. Furthermore, it must be emphasized that these principles constitute a legitimate academic discipline in the liberal arts. We simply cannot accomplish the stated objectives through workshops and web tutorials – any more than we can teach students to write with such brief encounters. Such endeavors are excellent supplements to a prolonged, serious study, but are not a suitable replacement. We are not talking just about mundane skill training here – finding things on the web, making pretty pictures with a computer, etc. – but something much broader and deeper.
As the saying goes, give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him to fish and he eats forever. Re-stated, it might go like this: Teach a student which buttons to click they can successfully complete a specific short-term project. Teach them the underlying methodology and they can solve any problem they face. It’s the difference between knowing how to use, and simply knowing how.
For the reasons given above, I believe that information technology should be a prominent component of Furman’s new curriculum. My thanks to the CRC for its consideration of these remarks.