Courses that are less “flat” please and better anchored in the contemporary world! The cry from the heart of the Quebec Collegiate Student Federation (FECQ), which called last week for a greater variety of courses in general education to titillate the interest of students, has the merit of putting the importance of training general at the cégep on the agenda. Is there a need to dust off philosophy and literature courses without distorting them?
The question is not light. For ages, general education at CEGEP, this common core of compulsory courses that includes classes in literature, philosophy, second language and physical education, has been the subject of bitter debate within the college network itself — and outside it. Also. Too many classes? Not enough ? Weak link in the course, where success does not blaze? Essential phase of acquisition of knowledge which forms the base of the general culture? The consensus does not exist, but the question posed by the FECQ deserves some attention.
Its president, Maya Labrosse, brandishes a survey that 53% of student respondents say that general education is not interesting. His request: that we offer a greater variety of course choices than the few same courses offered throughout the territory. For example ? To stick the contents to the preoccupations of the student fauna, that one adds a touch of science to the courses of philosophy, a wind of feminism to the classes of literature. The model already exists in Quebec on the Anglophone side. A quick overview of the course choices offered by English CEGEPs in the compulsory field of humanities makes it possible to understand that on their side, it is not uncommon for the choice of courses to be declined by… tens.
The students are right on several points: the general education courses have not been reviewed since 1993, when the ministerial plan was published Colleges for the Quebec of the XXIe century. They are also not wrong to point out the inequity that exists between the two French-speaking and English-speaking networks, where ministerial specifications do not offer French-speakers the same flexibility as their counterparts. They can of course claim that essential knowledge is in tune with today’s world – but the classics remain essential, if only to understand where one comes from, and they cannot be traded for substitutes sticking to fashion effects.
However, the students do not have everything true: the teachers did not remain frozen in 1993; on the contrary, they strive to make the subject and the course interesting, and to forge links with the contemporary world. Isn’t it proper to general education to allow us to understand in which universe we are evolving? In addition, the Ministry of Higher Education, concerned like other players in the college network by certain weak success rates, particularly in French, is expecting a report this summer that will allow it to “identify the issues related to the pitfalls of training general and mastery of the French language. It’s in his Action Plan for Success in Higher Education 2021-2026.
These reflections are not unique to Quebec but are shaking the whole world. UNESCO and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) did not wait for the FECQ to decree that the role of education had to be reviewed in the light of the ruptures of the contemporary world: a dazzling rise in digital and technology with multiple consequences; climate change that threatens the integrity of the planet and forces new human behavior; identity and anti-globalization movements that occupy the front of the news; a world of work in complete transformation. The students themselves are no longer made of the same wood as previous generations: their varied profiles complicate the perspective of “common” paths and the very definition of a “typical student”; an undeniable phenomenon of individualization feeds the tendency to want to design one’s own curriculum in a very personal way. So many arguments that militate in favor of a reflection on the nature of the content taking into account the students who will benefit from it, without however succumbing to the dangerous idea of building “à la carte” content. inspired by fashionable identity trends.
The noble aims of general education must remain, and not sacrifice the trend according to which all knowledge should be utilitarian. Democratic life, fragile in these times of social instability, demands critical, alert, open-minded citizens. All that remains is to find the perfect balance: knowing how to take advantage of such a renewable wealth as education, knowledge and learning, while taking into account current realities and the needs of students. The challenge is colossal but exhilarating.