A Historical and Global Perspective on Liberal Arts Education

Abstract

Debates about higher education’s purpose have long been polarized between specialized preparation for specific vocations and a broad, general knowledge foundation known as liberal education. Excluding the United States, specialized curricula have been the dominant global norm. Yet, quite surprisingly given this enduring trend, liberal education has new salience in higher education worldwide. This discussion presents liberal education’s non-Western, Western, and u.s. historical roots as a backdrop for discussing its contemporary global resurgence. Analysis from the Global Liberal Education Inventory provides an overview of liberal education’s renewed presence in each of the regions and speculation about its future development.

From ancient times and in a range of cultures, there has been a conflict between two postsecondary educational philosophies: one that provides a broad, general knowledge foundation and one that focuses on vocational preparation. Both approaches to the tertiary curriculum have typically played a role in national education systems and in the thinking of individual postsecondary institutions—and both have typically been part of the curriculum. In the past several centuries, however, vocationalism and specialization have become the dominant element in much of the world. This is particularly true in the industrial age as advanced scientific and technical knowledge has driven the workforce and prosperity of individuals, initially in the European countries that pioneered the industrial revolution, and increasingly throughout the world. Perhaps the main cause for the great expansion in higher education enrolments, a phenomenon of the 20th and current centuries—known as massification—is the labor market demand for higher-level skills. As a result, postsecondary education is recognized as a necessity for individuals and a key for successful economies and societies in the 21st century.

Most would agree that in the struggle between specialization on the one hand and liberal education on the other, specialization has won. In much of the world, higher education study is organized to prepare people for the workforce and most often for specific jobs or occupations. A few countries have maintained some commitment to the idea of education for general or broad knowledge—a primary tenet of liberal education. Underlying this tenet is the belief that students will gain critical thinking skills and that this approach will contribute to educating the “whole person.” The most notable modern example is the United States, where liberal arts was from the beginning a key part of the curriculum—and it retains at least some of its impact on the higher education system as a whole. Japan, influenced by the United States following the Second World War, also retains an element of general education in undergraduate studies. But even in the United States, specialization and a focus on career preparation has become a central part of contemporary higher education. Terms like “workforce development” are commonly used by both policymakers and education leaders as a way of ensuring that postsecondary education directly contributes to the economy and produces jobs for graduates immediately upon completion of study.

Yet, quite surprisingly given these long-term trends, the idea of liberal education, a philosophy that uses an interdisciplinary curriculum to cultivate holistic skill and knowledge acumen, has taken on new salience in the global higher education debate. This has occurred for several reasons. A globalized economy with rapidly increasing knowledge-based careers requires a more flexible, globally competent, and critical labor force in both developed and developing regions. There is increasing recognition that educated people require “soft skills” as well as vocationally relevant content-based knowledge. These skills include the ability to think critically, communicate effectively and efficiently, synthesize information from various academic and cultural perspectives, and analyze complex qualitative and quantitative concepts, among others. 1 Further, the 21st century knowledge economy no longer ensures a clearly defined career path. University graduates face a diverse and volatile job market. The traditional specialized curriculum is no longer adequate in preparing people for the new economy. 2 There is also recognition that the educated person requires a broad understanding of knowledge areas, and of disciplinary perspectives—perhaps a revival of the “artes liberales” underlying the European medieval universities. So far, the modest resurgence in liberal arts education globally is largely but not exclusively concentrated in the elite sector of higher education, although there is considerable variation among institutions.

While it is unlikely that this is a turning point in higher education thinking globally, the increased interest in liberal arts education in places where it did not exist earlier is one of the more interesting developments of the last two decades. What is clear is that for the first time in recent history the debate about the essential purpose of undergraduate higher education and its curriculum is being taken seriously in many quarters. This debate comes, perhaps not coincidentally, at the same time that criticism for traditional pedagogy—the lecture model as a primary way of delivering content and organizing learning—has become increasingly salient in the global arena. In short, a combination of circumstances may be contributing to fundamental discussions about the purposes of undergraduate education, the curriculum appropriate to achieve that purpose, and the best approaches to teaching and learning that suit the 21st century academic environment. In this discussion we focus on the history, current global status, and future of liberal education, often called “liberal arts and science” or “general education,” as a central element in this debate.

A Few Definitions

Debate about the purpose of education, and the philosophy of liberal education in particular, is replete with similar-sounding terms that are often used interchangeably by scholars and practitioners. Confusion is compounded when many countries and programs like those in China, India, and Mexico, for example, use the term “general education” to describe what is, based on our research, actually liberal education. In order to consider how liberal education has developed in a historical and global context, it is important to establish a baseline understanding of the related vocabulary. In contemporary higher education dialogue, because liberal education is commonly recognized as a uniquely American approach, 3 our discussion leverages some carefully delineated definitions from that tradition.

Liberal education’s central philosophical tenet is to empower learners with a mind and skill set that enables them to be critical members of society prepared to address complexity, diversity, and change. 4 Despite many variations and debates about the definition of liberal education, its essence depends on three components. First, liberal education is interdisciplinary. It provides broad exposure to the arts, humanities, social and natural sciences in a way that illustrates multiple and interrelated ways of knowing and questioning. Second, liberal education has a “general education” component. That is, within a given program, the broad curriculum approach is required of all or most students. Finally, it strives to engender elemental skills that include critical thinking, problem-solving, analysis, communication, global citizenship, and a sense of social responsibility.

One of the most important distinctions made in this definition is between liberal and general education. General education, or the shared part of the curriculum required of all or most students, is indeed a part of liberal education. General education, however, can and often does exist in programs that do not follow a liberal education philosophy as it is defined here. A general education curriculum may be multidisciplinary and require all students to take courses from a variety of disciplines (sometimes called “distribution requirements”). Alternatively, students in general education programs may be required to take one, two, or more prescribed courses (often a national history or, in some countries, a political thought or ideology course, as in the case of China). We subscribe to the view, however, that liberal education is more interdisciplinary and deliberately synthesizes different ways of knowing as a means for, among other things, developing a broader set of writing, analysis, and critical thinking skills.

Most researchers associate the definition of liberal education with Greco-Roman philosophy. It stems from two Western traditions: Socrates’ belief in the value of “the examined life,” and Aristotle’s conviction for “reflective citizenship.” 5 An education that is “liberal,” Martha Nussbaum explains, “liberates the mind from bondage of habit and custom, producing people who can function with sensitivity and alertness as citizens of the whole world.” 6

In order for liberal education to “liberate the mind,” it requires the multitude of perspectives, ways of thinking, methods, and knowledge content anchored in a variety of disciplines. It requires its students to study beyond a single subject or within one family of disciplines (and beyond the humanities). Doing so not only illuminates the reality of “complexity, diversity, and change” (from the definition noted above), it lays the foundation for learning how to interpret, interrogate, or to make new knowledge framed in the constructs of various fields.

An International History of Liberal Education

Non-Western Higher Education Traditions

Throughout history, there has been an enduring tension between vocational education focused on providing specialized, career-oriented knowledge and skills, and the education that exposes students to broader knowledge from a variety of disciplinary views—a kind of liberal education. In many cases, the two seemingly opposing perspectives were effectively combined. It is worth noting how a few of these higher education philosophies manifested in different cultural contexts throughout history. This discussion only illustrates several key examples.

Perhaps the earliest example of an education philosophy akin to contemporary liberal education comes from China where the Confucian tradition for much of its history emphasized general education and a broad approach to knowledge. Two key Chinese education traditions, the Confucian Analects, dating back 2,500 years, and traditional Chinese higher education that dates back to the Eastern Zhou dynasty (771-221 bce), both have elements of what might be called liberal education. 7 The Five Classics featured books that covered many “fields of knowledge,” as they were known then. At the same time, Confucian higher education prepared students to take the imperial examinations for the civil service—examinations that were based on a general, non-specific education, although some changes were introduced over time. Thus, the Chinese higher education tradition emphasizes the concept of a broad understanding of knowledge while adhering to the Confucian ethical and philosophical tradition. 8 While little discussed, there are some similarities in basic approaches to the philosophy of education found in Western antiquity and in Confucian ideas. 9 Confucius believed that humans were inherently good and thus the purpose of education was “to cultivate and develop human nature so that virtue and wisdom and ultimately moral perfection would be attained.” 10 While institutional forms, curriculum content, and the purpose of higher education no doubt differed from the contemporary understanding of liberal education, an argument can be made that a commitment to developing students with aptitudes across a broad array of knowledge foundations links Chinese higher education to modern ideas about liberal education.

In a different context and with different intellectual roots, Nalanda University flourished in northeastern India for almost a millennium until 1197 ce. 11 Working in both the Hindu and Buddhist traditions, Nalanada hosted lectures by the Buddha himself, and at its height had more than 10,000 students and 1,500 professors. While the curriculum was focused on religious texts, broader knowledge was also taught and the university welcomed students and scholars from many intellectual traditions. Buddhist philosophy defined education as a means of “self-realization” and a process of “drawing out what is implicit in the individual” by gaining knowledge that would free a person from “ignorance and attachment.” 12 Like the Confucian tradition, Nalanda is another example of a curriculum philosophy with a specific focus, in this case on religious knowledge, but with an understanding that meaningful education simultaneously requires a broader disciplinary perspective.

The oldest continuously operating university in the world is the Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt. Established in 975 ce, the university has been among the most important centers for Islamic thought since its founding. From the beginning, Al-Azhar not only focused on Islamic theology and sharia law, but also on philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy as they related to Islam. In the 1870s, the university added science faculties as well. At other post-secondary institutions in much of the Islamic world, the curriculum was based on Islamic concerns but often included other subjects in the sciences and arts, recognizing that a comprehensive perspective on knowledge was necessary for an educated person, and often reflecting a unified philosophy of education. 13

As illustrated here, in many classical non-European higher education traditions, institutions and educators were committed to a curriculum that included a fairly wide range of disciplines and knowledge orientations—reflecting an understanding that education requires a broad perspective. While the foci, organization, and specific requirements of the curriculum varied significantly, these traditions illustrated a commitment to various knowledge realities and their intellectual integration for students.

Western Tradition

Since most contemporary universities today are modeled after various Western traditions, the development of the curriculum and the idea of liberal education in the West are of great relevance. Even in China and India, where other education philosophies similar to liberal education developed, contemporary liberal education initiatives most often cite Greek and Western traditions as their founding model. 14 It is possible to look back as far as Socrates and Aristotle’s focus on self-reflection, citizenship, and the Athenian democracy—where a non-specialized education was provided to male citizens, with references to specific vocational goals.

The advent of universities, first in Italy and then in Paris starting around 1100 ce, began to define knowledge and the curriculum. Debate about the purpose of higher education was inherent from the beginning and vacillated between vocation-specific and general curricula. The earliest universities, at Bologna and Paris, and somewhat later at Oxford, Cambridge, and elsewhere in Europe, had a clear vocational purpose. In Italy, medicine was the key subject, while in Paris, theology and law were at the center of educating young men for the clergy and the legal profession. Yet, underlying these vocational foci were the trivium and quadrivium—the first with purposes at least somewhat similar to the contemporary concept of the humanities disciplines with a focus on logic, grammar, and rhetoric, and the latter emphasizing what was considered the most important knowledge at the time—arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy. These were considered the seven liberal arts.

Prior to the Humboldtian academic revolution in Prussia in the early 19th century, universities were not much involved in research, and in general the intellectual and scientific discoveries prior to the mid-19th century did not take place in universities. It is significant, however, that while European universities were greatly influenced by the major religious, social, and scientific movements of the periods—the Reformation, Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the scientific revolution, nationalism, and others—the debate about the nature of the curriculum and recognition of the importance of broad knowledge remained part of the discourse.

The United States

Because the American academic system is influential globally and because the United States is home to the most important modern liberal arts tradition, it is worth focusing attention on the evolution and current status of liberal education in the United States.

From the establishment of America’s first college, Harvard in 1636, which was patterned after the Cambridge colleges in England, higher education followed curricular patterns based on concepts of liberal education, although with a strong religious influence. 15 Various Protestant denominations were responsible for much of the expansion of American colleges until the early 19th century. Although there were many differences among the colleges, ideas about the curriculum evolved. While an influential report by Yale College in 1828 16 resulted in many institutional curricula reforms, the basic commitment to liberal education continued in a variety of configurations.

As America began to industrialize in the 19th century, the combined impact of von Humboldt’s German research university idea and the establishment, beginning in 1865, of the land grant universities elevated a national commitment to practical knowledge and science. 17 However, the liberal arts-focused undergraduate colleges prospered, and even the new universities provided a liberal arts focus in their undergraduate curricula. Thus, throughout the many changes, and the dramatic expansion that has taken place in American higher education over the last two centuries, liberal education or at least general education (as we have defined it here), has remained in the curricula of most colleges and universities. It may be especially surprising that even in many community colleges, the “open door” two-year and largely vocational institutions, some general education courses are taught—and in many cases are a required part of the curriculum.

Over time, however, the curriculum has dramatically changed in American higher education. The “classical” approach brought from England, with its emphasis on Greek, Latin, and other traditional knowledge themes was gradually altered, marked officially by the 1828 Yale Report as a significant milestone. Similarly, the substantial influence of theology and other religious subjects that characterized early universities decreased, and in the secular public colleges and universities, largely disappeared. 18 The underlying liberal arts and general education curricula focus has often come under attack, only to be defended and to a significant extent survive. 19

Debate about the content and value of liberal education continues in the United States to this day. With massification, financial problems for many colleges and universities, and increased demand for specialization and vocationalism among both students and institutions, the usefulness of liberal education in the undergraduate curriculum is under considerable scrutiny. Many question its relevance, while others point to lower average salaries for students who major in the arts, humanities and some of the social sciences. It is certainly the case that the number of undergraduate students focusing on traditional liberal arts disciplines has declined, and in many institutions, especially those serving a mass clientele, the liberal arts “core” has been deemphasized. Yet, for many postsecondary institutions, the core remains. While an important distinction between general and liberal education prevails, the presence of a liberal education philosophy and its relationship to developing citizens in a participatory democracy still underpins American education—even outside of the liberal arts colleges—more so than in any other nation. Virtually all u.s. post-secondary institutions require some exposure to liberal arts and science disciplines (even if within a general rather than liberal education curriculum) by every student.

It is also fair to say that a commitment to liberal education and a meaningful core curriculum based on the liberal arts is particularly strong in the elite sector of American higher education. In these institutions, the idea that a disciplined exposure to the core fields, and a curriculum that emphasizes skills in writing, logic, and independent thought, retains its value—even if it does not result in immediately remunerative employment. Of course, graduates of prestigious liberal arts colleges and research universities, in the American system, benefit from the status of the institutions.

The Current Global Landscape of Liberal Education

We would certainly not argue that liberal education is becoming the dominant force in postsecondary institutions globally. The tremendous impacts of massification and vocationalism are powerful pressures against liberal education. In some ways, the rise of massive open online courses (moocs) pushes higher education in a more vocational direction as well. Yet, at the same time, there is a clear interest in liberal and general education worldwide. This interest forms a stark contrast to the situation in the u.s. where despite a surge of debate, America is still considered the contemporary “home” of liberal education.

Based on analysis of a new worldwide catalog of liberal arts programs called the Global Liberal Education Inventory (glei), the following overview provides a sense of where interest exists and the characteristics of liberal arts and science education programs that have expanded globally. Criteria for the inventory relates very closely to the definition provided above. The inventory includes programs that self-labeled themselves as offering a liberal education. For programs that did not use the “liberal” title explicitly, they were included in the glei if they a) illustrated a multidisciplinary/interdisciplinary curriculum; b) had a “general” education component, that is, required that multidisciplinary curriculum of all students in the program; and c) focused on combination of transferable skills (communication, analysis, synthesis, critical thinking, quantitative literacy, creativity, etc.), social responsibility, global citizenship, and student-centered or holistic development. 20

Despite its rarity, liberal education programs now exist in 58 countries outside the United States and on every continent with postsecondary institutions, a declaration that could not be made just a few decades ago (based on 2013 data). 21 The escalation of global interest in liberal education and the development of several new programs is a recent phenomenon. While remnants of the education philosophy have existed in the Confucian, Hindu, Buddhist, and Islamic traditions as noted earlier, 59% of the 183 programs identified for the glei began since 1990. A remarkable 44% of all liberal education programs outside the u.s. were founded since the year 2000.

Asia

Today, surprisingly, Asia—not Europe—has a greater prevalence of liberal education programs than any region beyond North America. Based on the glei, Asia accounts for 37% of liberal education initiatives outside the u.s. Combined, three-fourths of all Asian programs are in China, India, and Japan. While they do not contribute substantially to Asia’s liberal education statistical profile, the programs in Bhutan and Afghanistan, and the two programs in Bangladesh, particularly the Asian University for Women, are notable because they are in developing countries, a rare occurrence for liberal education.

Despite the Confucian and Buddhist educational traditions and their commonalities with liberal education discussed above, until recently, liberal education has not been part of the dialogue or objective in modern Asian postsecondary systems. Much of this region, especially China, India, Japan, and Korea, is known for having highly competitive universities focused on technology and science with rigorous admissions and graduation exam systems. These characteristics conventionally hinge on an agenda of utilitarian curricula and career-oriented postsecondary training. Such generalizations make Asia seem like an unlikely location for liberal education to emerge . . . but it has.

In 1995, the Chinese Ministry of Education instituted a policy of “cultural quality education” (approximately the equivalent of “liberal arts education” according to Jiang) 22 in order to counterbalance its historically specialized higher education curriculum. 23 As a result, liberal education in China has been a predominately public initiative that illustrates central government interest in improving critical thinking and creativity as a contrast to the country’s traditional curriculum. Also in the region, an unprecedented system-wide mandate for liberal education is taking place throughout Hong Kong’s public higher education institutions. General and liberal education initiatives, along with changes to the degree cycles, are being implemented across the public higher education system.

Europe

In Europe, which accounts for 32% of programs outside the u.s., liberal education can be loosely distinguished between developments in the Western and Eastern subregions. In the West, liberal education reforms are often affiliated with the changes initiated by the Bologna process and the need to better define the content and purpose of first-degree (bachelor-level) undergraduate education. New programs like those in the Netherlands, for example, were created to diversify higher education, encourage an echelon of excellence in an otherwise egalitarian system, and to attract international students. 24 In the United Kingdom, among other places, liberal education has been leveraged as an education reform to delay specialization and allow postsecondary students more time for career exploration.

Conversely, liberal education is often, though not always, more closely related to shifts in political power and post-Cold War emerging democracies in Eastern states, which are home to one-third of the European initiatives. Experiments with new educational philosophies are gaining acceptance in Poland and Russia, for example. Programs like Smolny College in St. Petersburg and a consortium of programs associated with the University of Warsaw represent ground-level education movements that have spurred broader education policies allowing for additional liberal arts and science curricula to develop in the future.

Middle East and Arab States

In the Middle East and Arab countries, liberal education is commonly called “American-style” education, a term often mistaken as synonymous with “high quality” in the region. The market success of “American-style” as a naming convention, however, does not always denote liberal education nor does it reflect the frequent cultural challenges posed by gender segregation and prominence of religious law.

The region only accounts for 9% of the world’s liberal education initiatives, but it attracts much attention as an unusual destination for education that encourages critical thinking. The New York University-Abu Dhabi program, for example, will remain an international focus because of conflicts, mainly at u.s. institutions, about the viability of liberal education in places where academic freedom is not a universal right. According to glei analysis, while liberal education programs in the Middle East and Arab States are relatively new and have a greater propensity for partnerships with u.s. institutions than in other regions, that is not the only model. The American University in Cairo and American University of Beirut are rare institutions that have a long and important history of liberal education in the region. Shalem College in Israel is an independent new institution. It is the only program available in Hebrew and offers a carefully defined “Great Books”-type curriculum aligned with Jewish culture and religion.

Latin America, Africa, and Oceania

Liberal education is comparably less prevalent in Latin America (7 programs or 4% of those outside the us), Africa (4 programs or 2%), and Oceania (7 programs or 4%). Latin America’s liberal education initiatives are often located in Catholic universities, and unlike 81% of programs worldwide, none of them use English as their language of instruction. Given its potential impact on access and student academic outcomes, the only public program in Latin America, the Profis Interdisciplinary Program of Higher Education at the University of Campinas, may be one of the most important liberal education experiments worldwide. Profis uses a unique two-year liberal arts and science program to admit and prepare students from underserved secondary schools for Campinas, one of Brazil’s elite universities. While the current prevalence of liberal education in the region is relatively small, there is growing conversation around this curriculum philosophy and its potential, especially, to broaden the skill set of graduates before they pursue employment and specialized graduate study.

While small in number, African programs offer unique postsecondary opportunities where higher education is strained by demand and where institutional founders hope the philosophy will impact economic and social development. Since the 1990s four liberal education programs have emerged in Kenya, Morocco, Ghana and Nigeria. While the Ashesi University in Ghana has been criticized for its tuition-driven financial model, and therein more exclusivity to students who can afford such an education, its founders hope that it will be a catalyst for developing other such programs and future public leaders. 25 The need for graduates with a broad set of skills who can think critically about development challenges with a cross-disciplinary lens, is noteworthy. While the movement toward liberal education in Africa is small, the hope for its potential impact on society is significant.

In Oceania, Australia is the only country with liberal education initiatives. Unlike most regions where liberal education often emerges at lesser known institutions, some of the top universities in the country (and among the top-ranked globally) have implemented liberal education to reform their undergraduate curricula. Although the University of Melbourne caused much domestic controversy when it, the region’s highest ranked institution, moved to a liberal education curriculum, several other prominent universities have followed Melbourne’s lead by adopting variations on the “Melbourne Model.”

North America (Canada)

Finally, Canada has 21 liberal education programs, more than any other country excluding the u.s. On the whole, however, it seems to have little influence on the dialogue and activity around recent global liberal education developments. Canada has a longer history of liberal education than most countries, but less activity in recent decades; only 3 initiatives have emerged since 1990. Two of these, the U4 League, a consortium of four long standing liberal education institutions, and Quest University, which delivers a unique curriculum in a diverse academic culture, have potential to set new precedents for liberal education in Canada and could influence liberal arts reforms more broadly.

Beyond the Regions: Global Characteristics

While the comparative landscape of liberal education varies significantly from region to region, the worldwide characteristics of the growing phenomenon reveal notable comparisons with other higher education trends. For example, globally, liberal education programs are divided almost evenly between public and private initiatives (although significant differences exist when public/private programs are analyzed by region). Given the rapid growth of private education worldwide in the last decade, it is surprising that since 2000 there have been 20% more public liberal education programs than private. This figure is due in some part to system-wide mandates for more liberal and general education in China and Hong Kong.

Global characteristics related to the language of instruction and institutional affiliations add to an understanding of liberal education’s current landscape. English is used in the classroom by 81% of liberal education programs around the world and by 46% of the programs in countries where it is not an official language. Although many programs have institutional affiliations or formal partnerships, 57% of liberal education programs operate independently. Of those affiliated with another institution, the number of domestic partnerships (between two programs in the same country) exceeds cross-border relationships. Unexpectedly, only one-third of all liberal education institutional affiliations are with programs in the United States where liberal education has a steadfast presence despite ongoing curriculum debate.

Why the Global Resurgence of Liberal Education and Why Now?

Reasons for the increasing and renewed interest in liberal education vary from country to country and are multi-faceted. While not an exact science, the reasons can be organized into three areas: global rationales, national rationales, and local rationales.

Global rationales affect most liberal education initiatives and countries that host them. In some cases, like the Bologna Process in Europe, they apply to a region. The pressures of neoliberal “new realities” like globalization, massification, evolution from an industrial to knowledge economy, and privatization are impetus for higher education experiments, and particularly for liberal and general education initiatives. 26 This is because these contemporary pressures have reinvigorated dialogue about the purpose of higher education, and especially, the definition of undergraduate curricula. Questions are being raised about whether vocational-oriented curricula are producing human capital with the right kind of skills for the quickly evolving knowledge economy.

National rationales are generally state-specific, or occur at the state level. They range from a country’s desire to improve creativity and critical thinking in its labor force like the goals articulated in China, to system-wide internationalization objectives in Australia, to ambitions to diversify postsecondary opportunities in the Netherlands. National rationales can also come from outside academia. Poland’s shift to democratic governance exemplifies a rationale external to universities that became an impetus for the development of programs like the Collegium Artes Liberales at the University of Warsaw.

Finally, local rationales stem from the institutional, department, programmatic, or individual faculty/administrator level. Relationships between faculty or as a result of cross-border partnerships have been the impetus for many liberal education initiatives. Smolny College in Russia is a good example of a program ignited by faculty ideas and relationships. At the institutional level, local rationales often reflect a university’s strategic plan. The University of Melbourne’s decision to change its degree cycle making its graduate diplomas more compatible with those in the United States and Europe illustrates a broader university-level goal to improve employability and graduate school acceptances abroad. That strategic objective, a local rationale, prompted the “Melbourne Model” liberal education curriculum reforms. 27

Conclusion

We are convinced that liberal education, broadly defined, is salient for the future. Global rationales or reasons that we have identified for the current modest resurgence—the fluidity of the labor market in the global knowledge economy, the need for students to communicate effectively and write clearly (even in the age of texting and Twitter), the need to think independently and critically, and the benefit of having a broad knowledge of the basic academic disciplines—are powerful forces. Pressures emanating from the national and more local levels are similarly shared by universities in multiple contexts. We believe that these pressures—and liberal education as a potential reaction to them—will be increasingly influential in global debates about higher education.

There are, of course, many countervailing forces. These include the desire by both students and academic institutions to ensure quick employment for graduates—a force pushing toward applied subjects. Financial problems that are common worldwide, marked especially by decreased public funding for education, make it difficult to provide resources for liberal arts and science programs. Quality delivery of liberal education and commitment to achieving skill-based, interdisciplinary outcomes is more expensive than traditional vocational education. It frequently requires a student-centered approach to learning and teaching, smaller class sizes, and well-trained and committed faculty. When that cost is transferred to the student via tuition and fees, access and affordability become central issues.

Developing a relevant liberal education curriculum in new cultural contexts is not an easy task. Bridging the arts and sciences through interdisciplinary education is a challenge even in United States institutions where liberal education has a long and well established tradition. Further, in many countries, there are shortages of qualified professors to teach some liberal arts and science faculties. The rankings, with which many universities are obsessed, do not reward a focus on liberal arts.

Challenges are presented as well by the overall, though dissipating, rarity of liberal education in comparison to vocational higher education programs. With few exceptions like the Hong Kong university system and Melbourne University in Australia, liberal education’s development remains a phenomenon occurring on the periphery of mainstream, world-class higher education where attention, resources, and research and teaching knowledge are concentrated.

The number of programs and the number of students enrolled in liberal education are minute compared to traditional, professional postsecondary degrees. Only 2% of countries have more than 10 liberal education programs. The vast majority of countries with liberal education, nearly 80%, have just one to three initiatives in their higher education systems. “Crowding at the bottom” of the global distribution dilutes the potential for liberal education to influence its own perceived legitimacy or the mainstream postsecondary sector more generally.

The logic of the global knowledge economy and the increasing sophistication of national economies worldwide makes liberal education necessary both for the success of individuals as well as the effectiveness of social and economic development. Major global challenges like climate change and public health crises, cannot be resolved with disciplinary knowledge in a vacuum. Instead they require critical leaders, broad thinking, and problem solving strategies that can only be provided by a combination of disciplinary lenses. Liberal education contributes to the essential social and political skills necessary for democratic citizenship and participation. That very ideology, however, is a complex objective in non-democratic settings like China and Singapore (as discussed during the May 2015 Global Dialogue on Liberal Arts and Science Education that took place in Shanghai). Finally, it remains to be seen whether critical thinking and the development of graduates who will challenge conventional social and political norms is possible in places where academic freedom is not a protected right in higher education systems.