INTRODUCTION
Let me begin by thanking ACE for inviting me to speak
today. It is a special honor, both given the theme of this year's
annual meeting – "The Access Imperative" – and knowing
Bob Atwell's abiding commitment to access. The more we reflect on
this imperative, the more we realize its complexity and that the
term "access" has different meanings to different audiences. Language
used in the conference program conveys the range of issues related
to access – from "Enhancing Diversity and Inclusion"
to "Advancing Women Faculty [in] Science and Engineering."
This year's meeting focuses essentially on the question, "What
are we doing as leaders' to ensure both student access to our institutions
and success within them?"
[1]
When we think about college access, three questions
frame the issue: (1) Do students have the information they need,
and sufficiently early, to plan for college?
(2) Are they academically prepared to gain admission and
to succeed? (3) Do they have the necessary funds to support their education?
As we focus on access for different groups, it's important
to look at the particular circumstances of each – from low-income
and first-generation college students to students of color, women
in science and engineering, older non-traditional students, students
from other countries, and even young men, whose college participation
rates have been steadily declining.
One of our challenges is to avoid the risk of pitting one
group against another, because supporting one group can sometimes
be viewed as not supporting others.
It is important that we appreciate not only the challenges
these groups face, but their potential to contribute to the public
good and the costs of failing to give them the opportunity to do
so.
Understandably, many discussions about access focus
on the underrepresentation of students from low-income families.
At the same time, recent events in Michigan have refocused
attention on questions of race- and gender-based affirmative action.
My remarks today address two broad areas: first, access for
low-income students and for students of color; and second, lessons
learned about access involving the production of minority and women
scientists and engineers. These lessons are significant, in part,
because they apply to students in general, and they can be used
to increase access of underrepresented groups to "the top"–
a term used in the College Board study, Reaching the Top,
[2]
on high academic achievement among minorities. In short, how do we make sure that students from different
backgrounds not only enter college, but excel? Finding answers – indeed creating answers – to
this question, especially in the light of transforming demographic
shifts in America, is clearly in the nation's interest. Our challenge is to recruit and support students from all backgrounds.
While the focus of my talk is on success for students, another
one of our goals should be preparing some of these students to become
members of the professoriate and senior administrators so that our
campuses will reflect the face of America.
My thinking
on higher education's role in preparing such leaders is rooted in
the idea of 'the Talented Tenth,' expressed just over a century
ago by African American scholar W.E.B. DuBois.
While some consider the notion elitist, I am convinced that,
more than ever, when the popular culture suggests that it is not
"cool" to be smart, American society needs to increase
substantially the numbers of students of all types who excel academically.
Those of us in leadership roles have a special responsibility
in this regard. In his 1903 treatise, The Souls of
Black Folks, DuBois wrote,
Can the masses of the Negro people be in any
possible way more quickly raised than by the effort and example
of this aristocracy of talent and character?...[I]t is, ever was,
and ever will be from top downward that culture filters. The Talented Tenth rises and pulls all
that are worth the saving up...this is the history of human progress...How
then shall the leaders of a struggling people be trained and the
hands of the risen few strengthened?
There can be but one answer: the best and most capable
of their youth must be schooled in the colleges and universities
of the land...
[3]
Needless to say, America's demographics have changed
dramatically over the past century and will continue to shift.
[4]
By 2050, white Americans will represent
just half the population compared to approximately 70 percent today. Hispanic-, African-, Asian-, and Native
Americans will, of course, account for the other half, with Hispanics representing nearly a quarter
of all Americans.
We made substantial progress in American society during
the 20th century. Since World War II (and especially following
the Higher Education Act of 1965), increasing numbers of Americans
of all races have entered colleges and universities. In fact, in almost any American audience, we still find substantial
numbers of people who were the first generation in their families
to go to college, including many of us here today. Between 1947 and 2005, the percentage of African Americans
25 years old and over with college degrees increased from only three
percent to 18 percent, and the percentage of whites the same age
with college degrees rose from six to 28 percent.
[5]
Over the past three decades, from 1974
to 2005, the percentage of Hispanics with college degrees increased
from six to 12 percent.
[6]
While this progress is encouraging, more
than 70 percent of all adults in these groups do not hold college
degrees today. Moreover,
the educational attainment data on Native Americans have not been
reported by the Census Bureau because the samples have been too
small.
[7]
In contrast, 50 percent of Asian Americans
25 years old and over have college degrees.
[8]
In many ways, the challenges today are as great, if
not greater than they were years ago, particularly for poor people
of all races. Just this past week, ETS released a new report that underscores
the urgency of "the access imperative." America's Perfect Storm
[9]
focuses on the
national impact of three converging forces: disparities in the education
and skills levels of our population; a restructuring of the nation's
economy; and changing demographics.
The report, which echoes themes from the National Academies'
Rising Above the Gathering Storm,
[10]
says, essentially, that if current trends continue
over the next quarter-century, increasing numbers of educated professionals
will leave the workforce and millions of native-born Americans,
who will be less qualified for these jobs, will find themselves
vying not only with one another and recent immigrants to this country,
but also with other better prepared workers earning lower pay throughout
the world. Without
our intervention, large numbers of Americans will continue to be
left behind.
ACCESS AND INCOME
Two recent studies on access – one by Mike
McPherson
[11]
and colleagues, the other by Bill Bowen
[12]
and his colleagues – focus on inequities
in American higher education in relationship to social inequality
and the challenges institutions face in attracting and supporting
students from low-income families. At the nation's most selective schools,
for example, only three percent of the students are both first-generation
college students and from families in the bottom income quartile,
in contrast to 20 percent of college and university enrollments
nationwide.
[13]
Educating students from a variety of socio-economic
backgrounds is vital to the nation's future and helps many and
their families move out of poverty.
[14]
Indeed, institutions across the country
have been developing strategies to increase the numbers of such
students on their campuses.
It is difficult, however, to generalize about what can
be done in this regard because, quite honestly, most campuses
– public and private – face financial challenges as
they work to balance their interest in recruiting these students
against their need to admit paying students. It is especially troubling that even high-achieving low-income
students are much less likely to attend college than more advantaged
students. Among students
with high test scores, nearly 20 percent from low-income families
do not go directly to college compared to fewer than five percent
of students from families in the top income quartile.
[15]
An even larger scale problem is that low-income
students are disproportionately underprepared academically for
college and tend to score poorly on standardized tests. In fact, only seven percent of high school
students in the bottom family-income quartile (under $25,000)
score 1200 on the SAT compared to more than 20 percent in the
top quartile (over $75,000).
[16]
Regardless of our thoughts about test
scores, arguably the most critical issue we face involving students
from low-income backgrounds is that the vast majority of them
are not receiving an adequate education.
We know, for example, that for every 100 9th
graders, only 67 graduate from high school in four years, only
26 are still in college after two years, and only 18 graduate
from either a two-year college within three years or a four-year
institution within six years.
[17]
In my work with state associations of school boards,
I have not found one state where there is not an achievement gap
between poor children and middle- and upper-class children, in
general, and between white children and children of color, specifically. Unfortunately, the data bear this out
all too clearly. While
the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) report
showed gains by African American school children, for example,
in the 1970s and early 1980s and a narrowing of the achievement
gap, by the late 1980s that gap had ceased to narrow. Most alarming today, the achievement gap
in the nation's high schools is distressingly wide, with African
American and Hispanic 12th graders performing at the
same level as white students in eighth grade.
[18]
America's community colleges, which account for
nearly 40 percent
[19]
of all college enrollments today, play a critical
role in educating students from low-income families and students
of color. In addition, we know that Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCUs) continue to produce approximately 20 percent of the nation's
African American college graduates.
[20]
Those of us at four-year, predominantly white institutions can
learn much from our community-college colleagues and from the
experience of HBCUs and other minority-serving institutions, which
have a rich history of educating many of America's leaders.
The relationship between students' socioeconomic
backgrounds, their level of academic preparation, and the probability
that they will attend college is not surprising.
Students from low-income backgrounds have grown up in environments
less conducive to high academic achievement – from attending
poorly funded schools to living in homes and communities that
place less emphasis on education and have fewer resources to invest
in education beyond the school day. Much too frequently, low-income children
live in homes without many books and where television watching
and playing videogames are much more prevalent; they are simply
far less likely than students from affluent backgrounds to excel
and to see higher education as accessible and a means to economic
success. For these reasons, the recently announced national campaign,
KnowHow2Go, which encourages
low-income students to plan early for college, is a much-needed
and promising initiative.
The campaign addresses the enormous disparity
[21]
between the percentages of students from high-
and low-income families who finish college by the age of 24:
75 percent versus nine percent, respectively. Over the next two years, the campaign will use public service
announcements, an interactive website, and community partners
throughout the country to encourage students, with the help of
parents and other supportive adults, to take the necessary steps
to attend college. Now is the time when we, as leaders, can
work with the media to support this initiative. Our voices have considerable influence in our communities.
ACCESS, INCOME AND RACE
In addition to focusing on low-income students,
we must also address the challenges faced by students of color.
The Truman Commission on Higher Education, created in 1946,
was both courageous and visionary in highlighting, and I quote,
"barriersÉto equalizing and expanding educational opportunity"
[22]
and "data, research, and commentary on
such monumental, unresolved, and contentious issues as race, class,
and the proper role of the Federal government in promoting and
implementing national educational policy..."
[23]
Sixty years later, America is still grappling
with questions of equality of opportunity for students from different
backgrounds. Most
important, focusing on socioeconomic status cannot take the place
of providing special attention to minority students.
If institutions took affirmative measures based exclusively
on socioeconomic status, minority enrollments would decline by
approximately half – from 17 percent to eight percent at
public institutions and from nearly 13 percent to seven percent
on private campuses.
[24]
Recent election results in Michigan approving a
state constitutional measure prohibiting race- and gender-based
affirmative action in public education have already provoked a
flurry of legal activity, including a Federal appeals court ruling
requiring the University of Michigan to discontinue consideration
of race and gender in admissions decisions.
With similar referenda likely in other states, Michigan
voters are the first to challenge the U.S. Supreme Court's 2003
rulings reaffirming the importance of diversity in college admissions
by allowing the "narrowly tailored use of race in admissions
decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational
benefits that flow from a diverse student body."
[25]
We've read former Justice O'Connor's
powerful statement on diversity, that, "in order to cultivate
a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry,
it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to
talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity."
[26]
Should the Court's 2003 rulings ultimately
be reversed or substantially modified, the current enrollment
gap between white students and those of color would surely widen,
further jeopardizing access and equity in American higher education
and, consequently, in American society.
In fact, the term "affirmative action"
elicits strong emotional responses, both for and against, and
can be polarizing and divisive.
One of our challenges is to find language that focuses
the national discussion on the goals of affirmative action –
perhaps without using the term itself.
Perhaps we should use such terms as "inclusiveness"
and "fairness" in these discussions. Most Americans, I venture to say, believe
that everyone should have a fair chance. But we need honest and unemotional dialogue on what it means
in America to have a fair chance.
TRANSFORMING CULTURES: INCREASING ACCESS AND STRENGTHENING ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE
As we think about transforming our campus cultures,
we would be wise to reflect on the words of Albert Einstein, who
seemed more enlightened regarding issues of race than many of
his peers at the time, perhaps because of his own background. Sixty years ago, in an article entitled,
"The Negro Question," he wrote the following:
A large part of our attitude toward things
is conditioned by opinions and emotions which we unconsciously
absorb as children from our environment. In other words, it is tradition –
besides inherited aptitudes and qualities – which makes
us what we are. We
but rarely reflect how relatively small, compared with the powerful
influence of tradition, is the influence of our conscious thought
upon our conduct and convictions.
[27]
For the past 20 years, my colleagues and I have
worked to change our campus culture, creating opportunities for
many more underrepresented and low-income students to excel, particularly
in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (often referred
to as STEM disciplines).
Before the late '80s, we had been more successful in educating
minority students in the social sciences, particularly sending
on students to graduate school and law school, than in STEM fields. The catalyst for this transformation has been the Meyerhoff
Scholars Program, created in 1988 with strong faculty leadership
and major support from Baltimore philanthropists Robert and Jane
Meyerhoff. The program's overriding goal is to produce well prepared minority
stem graduates who go on to earn graduate and professional degrees
and become leading researchers.
Special attention has been given throughout to minority
males, who are especially underrepresented in higher education. Ten years ago, we opened the program to all students, regardless
of race, with an interest in the advancement of minorities. These students are unusual because they
have the chance to think and talk regularly about access-related
issues.
Our success in producing minorities and others who
go on to earn STEM Ph.D.s and M.D./Ph.D.s at institutions nationwide
has led to our working with faculty and administrators on campuses
around the country. For example, over the past year, we have worked with approximately
80 institutions in symposia on Diversity in the Sciences sponsored by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and
the National Institutes of Health to discuss both the challenges
and effective practices in preparing minority scientists.
Too often in higher education, we assume that high-achieving
minority students do not need special support.
In fact, however, these students as well as women, particularly
in STEM fields, are underrepresented throughout the STEM pipeline.
Factors other than school preparation and interest are
at least partially responsible for this underrepresentation, including
academic and cultural isolation, low expectations, peers who are
sometimes not supportive, and discrimination, whether perceived
or actual.
[28]
We also have identified several critical components
of successful initiatives, including comprehensive financial,
academic, and personal support of students, coupled with high
expectations; active involvement of faculty with students in teaching,
mentoring, and research; community building and emphasis on group
study; and regular evaluation of practices and outcomes. Students also benefit from tutoring and
mentoring both college peers and k-12 students.
APPLYING THE MODEL
In recent years, lessons learned from the undergraduate
Meyerhoff model have guided our efforts to produce minority STEM
doctorates on our own campus and to support women faculty in STEM
disciplines. In fact,
our focus on producing minority doctorates has been helpful as
we have participated in the Ph.D. Completion Project sponsored
by the Council of Graduate Schools.
And through our NSF ADVANCE grant to increase the number
of women STEM faculty, we have listened to the voices of women
(and men) faculty and department chairs, and we have begun to
understand differences in both perception and reality about the
climate for women faculty.
We are focusing on the critical role of mentoring, the
importance of department chairs and senior faculty in supporting
women (e.g., offering guidance in creating individual faculty
development plans), the benefits of continuous program evaluation
(internal and external), and the value of having a strong community
among women faculty. The
data reflect how effective the model can be.
Since 1999, we have nearly doubled the number of women
faculty in tenure-track STEM positions (20 to 39), while the net
number of men in these positions has remained unchanged.
In fact, women now occupy nearly a quarter of all tenure-track
STEM positions (39 of 171) compared to only 13 percent in 1999
(20 of 152). Of course, we still have a way to go.
ACCESS AND LEADERSHIP
In recent remarks at the University of Massachusetts
Medical School's annual Martin Luther King Observance, Brit Kirwan,
Chancellor of the University System of Maryland, suggested that,
We would all like
to live in an America where race, ethnicity, and gender really
do not matter in the opportunities available to people in our
society. The sad truth is, however, that they still
do matter and in ways that are disproportionately harmful to minorities
and women... Now
presidential leadership in my view is often overrated.
Presidents tend to get credit for things they didn't really
influence and blamed for things they can't really control. But when it comes to change, and most especially change regarding
issues of diversity, presidential leadership and commitment are
crucial.
[29]
Brit is absolutely right.
With that said, what are some of the most important
lessons regarding leadership? Effective leaders are passionate about
their work; they have an active presence both on and off campus;
and they have the courage to speak the truth, focusing on both
the substantive and the symbolic.
They are constantly striving to create a climate for robust
dialogue that emphasizes the importance of listening and being
open-minded.
They demonstrate genuine curiosity (even when they
may be tired). They focus on the best ideas and help
to broaden and elevate others' thinking.
They encourage – even push – colleagues, and
themselves, to look in the mirror for self-examination.
They encourage ongoing interaction between their campus
and the external community – from corporations and school
systems to other colleges and universities.
One of our most exciting initiatives involves the Alex.
Brown Center for Entrepreneurship, which recently received a major
grant from the Kauffman Foundation. Entrepreneurship is becoming increasingly
important on all of our campuses. It has been interesting to observe the enthusiasm of our arts
faculty as they have participated in a special institute focusing
on infusing entrepreneurship into the arts curriculum. It also is significant that our efforts will include encouraging
more students of color and women to become entrepreneurs.
Leaders also show appreciation for the efforts and
accomplishments of colleagues and students.
They communicate priorities through both their language
and actions. They work to be supportive of others, including appreciating
the stories of students and colleagues.
I close with three such stories; at the heart of each is
the issue of access.
The first involves a UMBC professor of biochemistry,
who has mentored more than a hundred undergraduates and dozens
of graduate students and post-docs, including many minorities
and women. About
half of the undergraduates have gone on to Ph.D. and M.D./Ph.D.
programs throughout the country, while more than a dozen of his
former graduate students and post-docs now hold faculty positions
at top schools, including one woman mentee who joined the faculty
at Harvard this year. My colleague, who earned his Ph.D. at Emory, was the second
member of his family to attend college.
After high school, he enrolled in a community college near
his home in Florida because, as he tells it,
I didn't know what I wanted to do, and my
parents had limited financial resources.
Also, I had a black science teacher in middle school,
who seemed so out of place in the white school, but was very
energetic, very smart, and left an impression on me. And when I went to the junior college,
I had an organic chemistry teacher who took enormous interest
in each student. So,
at critical transition points, there were teachers who paid
special attention to me and clearly had the interests of students
at heart. Both teachers had high expectations and looked for ways to
encourage their students.
Those sorts of interactions made all the difference to
me, and today I try to emulate the kinds of teachers I had.
We need great teachers at every type of institution.
This colleague, a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator
the past 12 years, has been honored for his commitment to diversity
and mentoring with the AAAS Mentor of the Year Award and the U.S. Presidential Award for Excellence
in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Mentoring because of his leadership in producing women and minority scientists.
The second story is about a mentee of my colleague's
and mine, a talented young African American UMBC graduate, who
recently finished her Ph.D. in biochemistry at a major institution
in California. She
did superbly in her doctoral program there, solving protein structures
using X-ray crystallography.
As she was completing her Ph.D., she seriously considered
leaving science. In
response, my colleague and I re-emphasized to her the shortage
of minority STEM faculty, and after considerable thought, she
wrote to us the following:
I had all but
completely given up on the idea of going into bench science
[and] didn't particularly want to engage in it any longer. I have found this road to be a particularly lonely one, and
I couldn't see myself walking it anymore.
[Our conversations] have reawakened my spirit, however. Although I have heard you tell me before
that science is a good way to get where I would like to go,
my bull-headed naivet wouldn't allow me to hear the wisdom
of your words. I suppose that my soul was hungry for
support, and your collective advice and encouragement have
really fed me. Each
day that passes allows me to reincorporate science into my future.
I can't thank the two of you enough.
Students need support at every level of their education
and beyond.
Finally, I was having a discussion with one of my
mentees, a young man who had just returned from studying abroad
in Moscow. I asked
him what I thought was a reasonable question – I said, "What
can you tell me about your parents?"
He reluctantly responded, "I'm a ward of the state"
– an expression I had never heard from one of my students
at UMBC. What he was telling me, essentially, was
that he had no family support; so, I asked him to tell me his
story. He told me that after living with his
mother on the streets of Baltimore, he was abandoned and lived
in a crack house at age 13.
After a social worker intervened, he was shuttled from
one foster home to another and finally to a group home while in
high school. Through
it all, he told me, he never stopped going to school because intuitively
he recognized the power of education to transform lives. He said that studying helped him forget
about all of the abuse he had endured.
He succeeded in high school, came to my campus where he
majored in modern languages, and today is a Fulbright Fellow studying
in St. Petersburg, Russia, where his research focuses on the plight
of orphans. His is a remarkable story and a testament to the importance
of access in empowering people and helping them beat the odds. We rarely know what students who come
to our campuses have been through, the inner strength they may
have needed to do so, or the extent of the support and strength
they may need from us.
Each of these stories affirms "the access imperative" Responding to this imperative means examining ourselves –
our values and our attitudes about students of all types, looking
to see not so much what is missing in them, but what they can
become. The recent AAC&U report, College
Learning for the New Global Century,
[30]
reminds us that our fundamental purpose is
giving all students a liberal education – one that prepares
them to think critically and act independently about such important
issues as access, which will define America at least for the rest
of this century.
For many Americans, this issue of access is not
new. Throughout the 20th century, many educators have
been champions of access – fighting for the education of
young Americans who have been historically underrepresented. One such visionary was Mary McLeod Bethune, who, in 1904, founded
the Daytona Normal & Industrial School for Negro Girls, which
later became Bethune Cookman College.
A friend of Eleanor Roosevelt, Mrs. Bethune did what many
of us today aspire to do – to speak for those who cannot
speak for themselves. I close with her words:
We burned logs and used the charred splinters
as pencils. For ink, we mashed up elderberries.
Strangers gave us a broom, a lamp, some cretonne to drape
around the ugly packing case which served as my first desk.
Day after day, I went to the city dump and visited trash
piles behind hotels, looking for discarded linen and kitchenware,
cracked dishes and shattered chairs. I became adept at begging for bits of
old lumber, bricks, and even cement.
Salvaging, reconstructing, and making bricks without
straw were all part of our training.
One day, a potential benefactor entered my
office, which was furnished with crates and broken down chairs
and asked: "Where is this school you want me to be a trustee
of?"
I answered, "In my mind.
In my soul"
[31]
It is this passion that drives us today.
Endnotes
[1]
American Council on Education "89th Annual
Meeting Program," 2007.
[2]
The College Board, Reaching the Top: A Report of the
National Task Force on Minority High Achievement,
1999.
[3]
DuBois, W.E.B., "The Talented Tenth," in The
Souls of Black Folks, A.C. McClurg & Co., Chicago, September, 1903.
[8]
U.S. Census Bureau, "Educational Attainment in the
United States: 2003," Figure 3, p. 5, June, 2004.
[9]
Educational Testing Service, America's Perfect Storm:
Three Forces Changing Our Nation's Future,
2007.
[10]
The
National Academies, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public
Policy, Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and
Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future,
2006.
[11]
McPherson,
Michael and Schapiro, Morton, College Access: Opportunity
or Privilege? College
Board, New York, 2006.
[12]
Bowen,
William, Kurzweil, Martin, Tobin, Eugene, Equity and Excellence
in American Higher Education,
University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, 2006.
[13]
Bowen,
et. al., Ibid., pp. 176-177.
[14]
Bowen,
et. al., Ibid., p. 177.
[15]
McPherson
and Schapiro, Ibid., pp. 5-6.
[16]
Bowen,
et. al., Ibid., p.81.
[17]
Kazis,
Richard, Vargas, Joel, and Hoffman, Nancy, editors, Double
the Numbers: Increasing Postsecondary Credentials for Underrepresented
Youth, Harvard Education Press, 2004.
[18]
Thernstrom,
Abigail and Thernstrom, Stephan, No Excuses: Closing the
Racial Gap in Learning,
Simon & Schuster, New York, 2003, pp.12-13.
[19]
American
Council on Education, Minorities in Higher Education: Twenty-Second
Annual Status Report – 2006,
Washington, D.C., 2006.
[21]
Mortenson,
Tom, Postsecondary Education Opportunity, June, 2005, reported
in press release by American Council on Education, Lumina Foundation
for Education, Ad Council, January 17, 2007.
[22]
Bowen,
et. al., Ibid., p.33.
[23]
Bowen,
et. al., Ibid., pp. 36-37.
[24]
Bowen,
et. al., Ibid., pp. 183-184.
[25]
Grutter
v. Bollinger et al., U.S.
Supreme Court, No. 02-241, June 23, 2003.
[27]
Einstein,
Albert, "The Negro Question," in Pageant,
January, 1946, in Einstein on Race & Racism, Fred Jerome & Rodger Taylor, Rutgers University
Press, 2005, p. 141.
[28]
Maton,
Kenneth and Hrabowski, Freeman, "Increasing the Number
of African American Ph.D.s in the Sciences and Engineering:
A Strengths-Based Approach," American Psychologist,
pp. 547-556, American Psychological Association, September,
2004.
Summers, Michael and Hrabowski, Freeman, "Preparing
Minority Scientists and Engineers," Science, Vol. 311, pp. 1870-1871, .March 31, 2006
[29]
Kirwan,
William E., Address, University of Massachusetts Medical School,
19th Annual Celebration of Dr. Martin Luther King,
Jr., January 10, 2007.
[30]
Association
of American Colleges & Universities, College Learning
for the New Global Century: A Report from the National Leadership
Council for Liberal Education & America's Promise,
Washington, D.C., 2007.
[31]
Bethune,
Mary McLeod
back
to top
|
