George Packer’s The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America was written during a recent period when we could hear the chant “We are the 99%” in the background. I read the book weeks ago, and as I talk with students on campuses across the country, I imagine that they come from families represented by the people Packer profiles in one of the most enlightening books I’ve read on our diverse and “multi-culture.”
Packer probably would not want his book described with terms such as “diverse” and “multicultural,” as those who only think of people of color who have been historically underrepresented in the middle class and in higher education when they hear these terms might turn away.
When I’ve spoken with educators about the cocurriculum and learning outside the classroom and suggested that civic learning, democratic engagement, and social justice would be natural themes for collaboration between academic and student affairs, some immediately become defensive and talk about how there is already enough attention given to diversity and social justice through special programs and clubs for underrepresented students. They follow this with the lament that students who are either less academically and/or financially able get all the attention and support, while students in the middle are neglected and left out.
What I like about Packer’s book is that if we think of students in the way each person is profiled – those representing struggling farmers who want to be entrepreneurs, Wall Street fund managers, factory workers, workers in Walmart, and billionaire executives in Silicon Valley – we might have a more accurate profile of our students and their real diversity. This is a diversity that defies stereotyped groupings and calls on educators to get to know students as individuals as well as part of the group with whom they choose to identify.
Gwen Dungy 
I just read your latest blog and found it interesting. I was also left with questions, like: 1) Where are students profiled as you suggest; 2) Where do educators get the kind of training (and experience), given many are them are profiled or profiles of groups, not knowledgeable or amenable to accepting the student category suggestions you suggest; 3) How might students respond to educational pathways, based on the profiled characteristics.
I just left from a visit with Kevin yesterday and we spent some time talking about how education might be changed, particularly in light of the importance of required core courses and how those courses could be acquired more cheaply and not as part of the 4-year college curricula. We debated removing them from the curriculum at college course costs, perhaps relegating them to community colleges or any avenue with less costs than traditional four-year colleges. Kevin argued with the view of preparing students for those kinds of profiles you reference in your blog, without spending so much loan money on things like English, history, math, etc. WE did not agree on how this could be done, but did agree that there needs to be a more productive, less costly way to really prepare students for what they choose, at that time in their lives, to be their life’s work. Keep in mind Kevin is still paying for college loans and will continue to pay for them for some years to come. His premise is that students should not have to pay so much for a college education.
I am curious what you might think about ways to reduce the cost of a college education (perhaps less than 4 years and less courses), while making the education more effective from a career point of view.
Something for you to think about, maybe.
Positively, Hazel
Hazel, thanks for taking the time to read the blog and respond. You raise interesting and important questions. Before responding, I’d like to know who you are in order to better understand your perspective.
Gwen