Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
High. Learn. Res. Commun. Vol. 2, Num. 2 | June 2012
* Corresponding author (karen.gersten@laureate.net)
Suggested citation: Gersten, K. S. (2012). General education: Learning from the past, preparing for the future. Higher
Learning Research Communications, 2(2), 8-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v2i2.67
General Education: Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future
Karen S. Gersten*
Laureate Education, Inc., USA
Abstract: This article explores the widening gap between business and societal needs and
current general education curricula. Research is presented that documents gaps between
projected needs of industry and current practices in postsecondary education, especially in the
general education areas. Positive efforts to close the gap are highlighted. Changing regulatory
environments are also presented, some that support forward-thinking approaches to liberal
education and others that revert to traditional educational practices. With a focus on adaptability
and intentional teaching and learning, some recommendations are introduced for flexible
curriculum, intentional pedagogy, and a backwards approach to the teaching-learning enterprise
that begins with the authentic assessment of student learning.
Keywords: General education, assessment, liberal education
Introduction
Postsecondary education has expanded worldwide. More and more people around the
globe can access higher education through new educational modalities; today’s students can
choose from a dearth of fields of study ranging from the traditional liberal arts to applied fields of
study such as engineering and medicine; post-secondary education is available at various levels
from courses and certificates to doctoral degrees; postsecondary education is both credential-
bearing and non-credential-bearing; and students can choose from different types of educational
organizations including private, government funded, training schools, and non-profit and for profit
institutions. There seems to be something for everyone in the contemporary postsecondary
environment.
In spite of the progress in locations, modalities, access, and programs of study, a large
part of contemporary postsecondary education reflects education of the past—general education.
Many current educational practices grew from the earliest Greco-Roman education that focused
on oratory. Cicero widened the early concept of education based on public speaking by adding
the liberal arts, and further evolution included a view of culture (Pascal, 1984). The earliest
schools in England in the 600s were of two types: Song Schools were professional schools for
those who performed services, while grammar schools focused on general education and
targeted those preparing to be statesmen, lawyers, and civil servants (Gillard, 2011). Everyone
else received a more practical training experience if they received any education at all. Historically
in the United States, only the most elite received a liberal education (Eckels & King). Throughout
history, a liberal education was highly regarded and often available only to the elite.
High. Learn. Res. Commun. Vol. 2, Num. 2 | June 2012
General Education: Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future 9
Today, most postsecondary schools have some general education requirements based
on liberal education of the past. Indeed, some ministries of education, governmental bodies, and
regulators demand it. For example, in the United States, the Middle States Commission on Higher
Education’s Standard 12 requires that “students acquire and demonstrate college-level
proficiency in general education and essential skills, including at least oral and written
communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and reasoning, and
technological competency” (Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2006, p. 47). In
the August 2010 Guidelines for Preparing/Reviewing Petitions and Compliance Reports, the
president of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) notes increased “federalizing”
of higher education in the U.S. including federal government judgments about general education
requirements (Eaton).
Add to the problem that contemporary postsecondary education is designed to serve two
different and sometimes competing purposes: Education for good citizenry and preparing
graduates for the world of work. New Zealand, for example, includes the following two Outcomes
Indicators: 1) Graduates can gain employment…and/or contribute to their local and wider
community; and 2) learners acquire useful/meaningful skills and knowledge and develop their
cognitive abilities (including learning to learn and self-management) (New Zealand Qualifications
Framework, 2011). Similarly, the Framework of Qualifications for the European Higher Education
Area First Cycle Qualification includes outcomes related to professionalism and lifelong
learning: “…Can apply their knowledge and understanding in a manner that indicates a
professional approach to their work or vocation….” and “have developed those learning skills that
are necessary for them to continue to undertake further study with a high degree of autonomy”
(QF-EHEA, May 2005). The European outcomes stem from the Bologna Process that includes
lifelong learning and employability in its list of outcomes
(http://www.ehea.info/article-
details.aspx?ArticleId=11).
The rapid change in today’s society and its economy presents new
challenges in preparing students for both professionalism and citizenship.
Preparing the Workforce of the Future
It is clear that the general components of postsecondary education have to consider
what today’s students need to be contributing citizens and sustainable employees. Regardless
of what students study, where they study, or for how long they study, all graduates around the
world face and will continue to face the same global challenges, most notably the ability to adapt
to an ever-increasing speed of change. Educators need to understand how the world of work is
changing and be proactive in providing the types of learning experiences for contemporary
students that will prepare them for an unstable professional future.
According to a survey of 479 senior executives conducted by the Economist Intelligence
Unit (2010), companies will be more global, information will flow across borders more frequently
and with greater speed, and companies will be flatter and more international in composition.
Employees will be given more decision-making power earlier in their careers, be expected to
travel more internationally, work in more diverse environments, and be more contract based
(Economist, p. 5). These respondents expect a workforce that will be more transient and more
diverse, and they see increased importance for what have been known in postsecondary
education as “soft skills,” especially communication, cultural awareness, relationship building,
problem solving, project management, and interpersonal skills. In terms of educational
preparation, these respondents believe that “international experience (whether through work or
school) will be highly regarded” (p. 18).
www.hlrcjournal.com Open Access
10 K. S. Gersten
Price Waterhouse Coopers, PWC, (2010) focused its research on talent mobility and
indications for the future. Trends similar to those identified in the Economist study—emerging
markets, new revenue streams, trade, and technology—will require a 50% increase in employee
mobility by 2020 (PWC, p. 8). This will increase the diversity of the talent pool and require
employees who are more transient and more adaptable to changing technologies, communication
formats, and diverse cultures. They also envision more contract employees to increase
organizational flexibility and note the likelihood of diminished organizational loyalty. Based on
these projections, today’s students can expect a professional life that is less stable and more
mobile.
IBM (2010) surveyed 1,547 corporate heads and public sector leaders across sixty nations
and 33 industries to understand their future leadership needs. In prior IBM global CEO studies,
coping with change was the most commonly cited challenge. In 2010, the most common
response was complexity. More than half of all respondents in this study doubted their ability to
manage the rapid pace of change. To counteract the complexity challenge, the majority of the
respondents (60%) stated that creativity was the most important leadership quality for success
in business, outweighing integrity (52%) and global thinking (33%). Representatives of the most
successful companies report co-creating products with their customers and simplifying processes
to increase organizational dexterity. The vast majority of respondents (88%) regardless of
industry or geography agree that customer focus is the top business strategy, outpacing people
skills, insight and intelligence, and enterprise model changes (IBM).
The results of the IBM, PWC, and Economist studies provide suggestions for
postsecondary education and especially for its general education component. If one goal of
postsecondary education is to prepare today’s graduates for the workforce of the future, it needs
to ensure that graduates are creative problems solvers who can adapt to rapid change, who can
work in an increasingly diverse society, and who can thrive in an unstable work environment. If
general education is the part of postsecondary education to which all students regardless of
academic discipline are exposed, it is critical that it addresses current needs and keeps pace
with anticipated future changes.
What Is General Education?
While the term “general education” has been used in academia in some parts of the
world for a very long time, confusion remains about its meaning. Carol Geary Schneider,
President of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), provides clarity
and suggests liberal education as the future of postsecondary education. Schneider distinguishes
between the commonly confused terms of liberal education, liberal arts, artes liberales, and
general education as follows (Schneider, 2003, p 2):
Liberal
Education:
A philosophy of education that empowers individuals, liberates the mind from
ignorance, and cultivates social responsibility. Characterized by challenging
encounters with important issues, and more a way of studying than specific
content, liberal education can occur at all types of colleges and universities.
Liberal Arts:
Specific disciplines (the humanities, social sciences, and sciences).
Artes
Liberales:
Historically, the basis for modern liberal arts; the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry,
astronomy, and music) and the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric).
General
Education:
The part of a liberal education curriculum shared by all students. It provides broad
exposure to multiple disciplines and forms the basis for developing important
intellectual and civic capacities.
High. Learn. Res. Commun. Vol. 2, Num. 2 | June 2012
General Education: Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future 11
Current Practice and Future
Needs
General Education as defined above is indeed general. In fact, it may be so general that
it fails to meet the needs of today’s students, tomorrow’s graduates, or the future workforce. On
behalf of AAC&U, Peter D. Hart Research Associates (2006) surveyed 305 executives whose
companies have at least 25 employees and report at least 25% of new hires holding
baccalaureate degrees; they also interviewed 510 recent college graduates. In addition to the
interviews, three focus groups were conducted with CFOs, CIO, and CEOs of private companies
that employ primarily college graduates. The purpose of the study was to uncover what
employers and college graduates see as guiding principles in contemporary postsecondary
education. Since AAC&U promotes liberal education as the contemporary replacement for
traditional general education, this study sought to confirm or negate this position.
Results of the Hart study agree with the IBM, PWC, and Economist studies about
perceptions of the workforce of the near future. “The context in which today’s students will make
choices and compose lives is one of disruption rather than certainty, and of interdependence
rather than insularity” (Peter D. Hart Research Associates, 2006, p. 2). They concur that the
general education offered in most postsecondary institutions is not working. Of the business
executive respondents, 63% agreed that too many college graduates do not possess the
skills to be successful in the global economy (2006, p. 6). While half of both employers and
recent graduates believe graduates of U.S. postsecondary institutions are well-prepared for entry
level positions, a decreasing percentage see graduates as prepared for the changing global
economy, 49% and 39%, respectively (2006, p. 7).
Both employers and recent graduates emphasize the importance of providing
opportunities for students to apply skills in real world situations (Peter D. Hart Research
Associates, 2006, p. 2), and employers emphasize the importance of integration between skills.
What employers report as the most important factors in hiring—teamwork skills, critical thinking
and analytical reasoning, and communication—are not the skills most recent graduates present.
Simply put, there is a disconnect between what employers need and what recent college
graduates can do. Many experts attribute this in part to few opportunities for students to practice
skills they learned in the classroom.
New Views of Liberal
Education
Employers, university graduates, and many educators around the world agree that
educational practices of the past are not preparing business leaders of the future, nor can they
produce evidence that graduates understand the responsibilities of global citizenship.
Additionally, in 2004 AAC&U analyzed desired student learning outcomes across professional
accreditors including AACSB for Business, ABET for engineering and technology, CCNE/AACN
for Nursing, and Boeing to represent global business needs. The analysis revealed widespread
consensus about outcomes for postsecondary education:
Strong analytic, communication, quantitative, and information skills
Deep understanding and hands-on experience with the disciplines that explore the
natural, social, and cultural realms
Intercultural knowledge and collaborative problem-solving skills
Civic, social, and personal responsibility
Integrative thinking and the ability to transfer knowledge from one setting to another
(AAC&U, 2004, Taking responsibility for the quality of the baccalaureate degree).
www.hlrcjournal.com Open Access
12 K. S. Gersten
The 2007 Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) for postsecondary education
provides consistent yet flexible guidelines for postsecondary education including vocational,
training, and higher education. The AQF is outcomes-based; its developers considered multiple
audiences in developing its framework including employers and employees; curriculum
developers; professional associations and unions; accrediting bodies; and the public including
students and parents (AQF 2007, p. 3). Bachelor degree outcomes are consistent with outcomes
identified by business leaders in previously cited studies. They include communication and
problem-solving skills; ability to comprehend and evaluate new information from a range of
sources; application of knowledge in new settings, especially in a professional context; self-
directed and lifelong learning; interpersonal and teamwork skills (p.9).
Australia is not alone. In the United Kingdom, the QAA is the Quality Assurance Agency
for Higher Education. The QAA publishes reference points and guidance, most recently reflected
in the UK Quality Code for Higher Education launched in December 2011. The Quality Code sets
expectations for all UK higher education providers and guides individual institutions on
appropriate internal policies and processes for quality assurance. Although still in development,
the QAA is moving in the same direction as AAC&U and the AQF. According to the UK Quality
Code for Higher Education: A Brief Guide, its key values are enabling students to shape their
learning experiences and providing formative feedback to improve success, transparency, and
external involvement (The UK Quality Code, 2011, p. 4).
Private organizations also are guiding postsecondary education. The Assessment of
Higher Education Learning Outcomes (AHELO) Feasibility Study is attempting to assess the
possibility of measuring and comparing undergraduate student outcomes on an international
basis. This effort focuses on three areas of study: Generic Skills (general education), Engineering,
and Economics. Nine countries participated in the first part of the Generic Skills feasibility study.
They include Columbia, Egypt, Finland, Korea, Kuwait, Mexico, Norway, the Slovak Republic,
and the United States (AHELO, 2012). The Feasibility study concluded that “It is not yet possible
to determine whether international consensus has been reached on a Generic Skills
Assessment Framework as development work has only recently commenced” (p.6). Initial efforts
used an adapted version of the Collegiate Learning Assessment, but it is too early to draw
conclusions about its reliability and validity for AHELO’s stated purpose. AHLEO is in its
preliminary stages, but the effort indicates a need to define and measure common outcomes
for postsecondary education worldwide.
The Lumina Foundation (2011) is taking a different approach. They have presented a
qualifications framework —The Degree Profile (TDP)—to illustrate what students in the U.S.
should know and be able to do upon completion of their associate, bachelor, and master’s
degrees. Similar to efforts in New Zealand and Australia, Lumina does not recommend
standardizing degrees, curriculum, or teaching methodologies. Rather, “the Degree Profile
describes student performance appropriate for each degree level through clear reference points
that indicate the incremental and cumulative nature of learning” (Lumina, p.1). The Degree
Profile focuses on outcomes that apply to all fields of study and on the unpredictable demands
of the workplace of the future. Lumina’s Degree Profile emphasizes analysis, adaptation, and
application across occupational fields and the liberal arts (p. 3). To accomplish this, the Lumina
model considers both specialized and broad/integrative knowledge, intellectual skills, applied
learning, and civic learning (pp. 8-9). Professional success and civic responsibility are apparent
in the Lumina model as they are in most contemporary models of postsecondary education.
High. Learn. Res. Commun. Vol. 2, Num. 2 | June 2012
General Education: Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future 13
The Future of General Education and Integration with Outcomes Assessment
Many models exist and are emerging. Examples of best practice in shifting from general
to liberal education and from passive to intentional learning abound. First year experiences,
problem-based learning, integrative learning, and learning communities are just some of the
current practices that have shown positive results. These efforts represent great progress,
especially in an academic world known for its reluctance to change. Progress is good, but it is
neither good enough nor fast enough to cope with changes in the world around us.
Most current and recommended best practices focus largely on curricular change. They
shift the locus of control from a single general education department to shared control between
liberal education departments and the disciplines; they focus on application of learning rather
than just factual knowledge; they implement authentic assessment instead of relying on indirect
measures of learning. While all these changes are positive and are moving postsecondary
education in the right direction, most changes are static. Institutions are replacing an existing
curriculum with another set curriculum that will require another significant amount of time to
change when the economic, technological, and social environments shift again. In other words,
academia always will be behind the needs of business, political, and social environments. It’s
time to change the approach to postsecondary education and especially to its foundation in
liberal education.
Organic Integrative Curriculum
The next step in liberal education has to be a real understanding of, belief in, and
commitment to integrative learning. This would result in an integrative curriculum where faculty
across departments and levels of study share responsibility for essential elements of learning.
This means a curriculum that ebbs and flows with the needs of the contemporary and future
global society. That does not mean change for the sake of change, nor does it mean whimsical
change based on the preferences of a few. What it does mean is thorough, thoughtful, evidence-
based review of what graduates need to succeed in business and as productive, contributing
world citizens and the commitment to providing all students access to such an experience. It
does not mean curricula that sever the past. The “canon” became the canon for a reason; we
learn from the past and from themes that bind all of humanity. It does mean that as educators,
we need to choose what we teach for clear reasons, that our students know why what we
teach is important, and that we present the curriculum in meaningful ways that will impact future
generations and the world in which they live. Curriculum design, teaching, and learning all must
be intentional.
Curricula generally focus on content. Faculties ensure that the appropriate amount and
level of content is covered in each course so, upon graduation, students have been exposed to
the information they need to be knowledgeable in their chosen fields. Contemporary discussions
of liberal education, in contrast, emphasize the importance of intentional learning for all students
throughout the entire curriculum. This means curricula need to address the affective domain as
well as the cognitive domain. In addition to engaging students with content and increasing
opportunities for them to apply new information, curricula need to make clear to students the
purpose of the learning as they begin their programs of study and continuously through
graduation. The goal no longer is to ensure content knowledge; it is to ensure that graduates
understand the importance of learning, of why various content elements are important, and of
their need to plan to continue learning throughout their studies, careers, and lifetimes. These
curricular shifts mandate a change in both what students study and how they study it.
www.hlrcjournal.com Open Access
14 K. S. Gersten
Re-Visioned Pedagogical Practice
Changes in curricula are essential but not sufficient. Changed pedagogical approaches
are necessary as well. Intentional learning is as much about how faculty teach as it is about
what they teach. This requires a paradigm shift from a focus on teaching to a focus on learning.
From the initial curricular planning stages through classroom delivery, the focus needs to be on
the student experience and the learning outcomes.
The “backward approach” is one approach to a more student-centered curriculum. This
approach begins with the end—what the student knows, can do, and values at the end of the
academic program. It then assesses where incoming students are relative to each of those
outcomes. The curriculum design becomes a process of filling the gap, providing the learning
experiences from where the students enter the program to the program’s learning goals.
According to Wiggins & McTighe (2005), authors of Understanding by Design, current curricula
are not designed to ensure understanding. Their process works backwards from goal to process.
The authors describe the overarching guiding question: “How do we make it more likely—by our
design—that more students really understand what they are asked to learn?” (p. 4). All educators
are designers, whether intentional or not. Educators design curriculum and assessment
protocols. In the past, curriculum began with content. Wiggins and McTighe turn this process
around by focusing on the desired student understanding and then work backward to design the
appropriate student learning experience. This approach changes curriculum development from
a focus on content to a focus on what content the student knows, how the student can use that
content in meaningful ways, and how the program develops students at increasingly higher
cognitive levels. The process depends on a scaffolded approach to learning where new learning
builds on prior learning, increasing both amount of information and likelihood of retention. This
approach is not new. Applying it to pedagogy and intentional learning as well as to curriculum
design is.
Active learning is another essential of re-visioned pedagogy. Lectures, videos, slide
presentations no longer are the ideal ways of communicating information to students. Even the
current emphasis on social media as the only way of reaching the millennials is not the answer.
While a variety of media should be used when they are appropriate to the intended learning
outcomes and while faculty and curriculum developers must consider their intended audience,
communication channels alone will neither enhance learning nor increase intentionality because
they are passive media. Pedagogical approaches have to change if students are to be prepared
for the future and ready to learn with intentionality. Simply put, postsecondary education must
shift from traditional passive approaches to approaches where students actively engage in their
learning. Students have to do, not simply listen; they need opportunities to act in real contexts or
at least reasonable simulations; they need interaction with and feedback from expert practitioners
whenever possible. Students have to take responsibility for their learning if they are to become
intentional learners who continue learning and contributing to their professions and the world
throughout their lifetimes. Teaching methods have to demand increasing student responsibility
throughout postsecondary programs, and they have to teach with intentionality to do so.
In no way does this shift diminish the faculty role. Indeed, the faculty role is enhanced. In
this model faculty are much more than content experts. They are experts in learning theory and
apply what they know about how people learn to the delivery of their content. Their focus expands
from content goals to learning goals. They facilitate and mentor students and provide
opportunities for students to experiment and take risks. Faculty know this encourages students
to take responsibility for their learning and grow through their own attempts to understand,
High. Learn. Res. Commun. Vol. 2, Num. 2 | June 2012
General Education: Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future 15
apply, analyze, and communicate what they know, what they need to understand, and their
learning process. Faculty members in this model do so much more than pass on their knowledge;
they help shape the next generation of experts in their disciplines.
This sounds idealistic, but it is not. In What the Best College Teachers Do, Ken Bain
(2004) chronicles observations of faculty who consistently get the best results from their
students. Across disciplines and in all types of institutions, the best faculty engage the students
in their learning and push them to take responsibility for what they do. This pedagogical
approach is not new. It is Socratic and commonly used with graduate students, especially at the
doctoral level. Some undergraduate students experience this model and thrive in it through
learning communities and honors programs, but this approach is not widespread. Nor is it
intuitive. For this pedagogical shift to occur, institutions need to provide training and set
expectations for all their faculties. They also need to provide opportunities for faculty to
collaborate across disciplines and with non-academic units to create opportunities for faculty to
learn and grow. Only when institutions and their faculty embrace the liberal education philosophy
will postsecondary education evolve into a global system with a common goal: Prepare for work
but educate for life.
Authentic and Appropriate Assessment
The most effective curricula and pedagogies start at the end, and the end is assessment.
Everything in postsecondary liberal education focuses on student learning outcomes broadly
defined. Before conceiving a new program or designing a new curriculum, the end goal must be
clear. That means defining learning outcomes clearly and in measurable terms. Only then can
the faculty as content experts determine the content, modalities, and learning experiences most
likely to achieve those goals. Only then can programs and courses inform students of what they
need to know and how each step in their programs contributes to their goal attainment. Only then
can program leaders monitor student progress toward stated goals and, if needed, make
appropriate modifications as needed through a continuous improvement cycle.
Assessment is only as effective as its design, implementation, and use. Assessment
measures whether measuring program outcomes or course-level objectives have to match
intended learning outcomes. When they don’t—and they don’t more often than one would
expect—faculty and academic leaders act on misleading information that can have adverse
effects on their students and ultimately on their program’s reputation. Assessment, like
curriculum, therefore, must start at the end and must measure what students really need to
know, do, and value to be intentional and lifelong learners as well as content experts. Faculty
has to determine where measures of incremental growth will be notable and measurable, and
everyone has to invest in doing assessment right.
Responding to comments from industry leaders and recent college graduates,
postsecondary students need more opportunities to apply learning. This calls for more authentic
assessment where student learning is assessed as students apply their learning in real or realistic
simulated situations. This means assessment throughout the student experience and across the
curriculum to ensure appropriate progress throughout an academic program. This means robust
analysis of shared assessment data across disciplines and across time. Finally, this means
inclusive and shared assessment to gain varied perspectives about student progress across time
and, hence, program effectiveness.
www.hlrcjournal.com Open Access
16 K. S. Gersten
These themes are not new in literature about assessment of student learning.
Implementation, however, has been slow. It is much easier to give a test or a student satisfaction
survey than it is to assess actual performance of skills in authentic situations, judge application
of principles, determine the levels of analysis students should demonstrate at various points in
their programs. Assessment is hard work, but without it, institutions cannot validate the
appropriateness of their programs, nor can they assure their students that they will be prepared
upon graduation to achieve their intended goals.
Assessment is not magic. It is hard work. As with all work, the work of assessment is
easier when it is shared and validated. Collaboration across departments, support from
institutional research experts, and involvement of external experts distributes the workload and
provides opportunities for program validation. Most importantly, this is one place in academia
where sharing is appropriate. Much work has been done on authentic assessment of student
learning both in specific disciplines and for liberal education. While assessment has to be
tailored to specific program outcomes, assessment models can and should be shared across
institutions, across disciplines, and across levels of study.
Like all aspects of teaching and learning, assessment is a process. It takes time, and it is
not linear. Assessment efforts provide information. As we learn from that information and its
intersections with information from other sources, we get new ideas for our programs and for the
ways we teach and our students learn. Assessment is the key to curricula and pedagogies that
evolve and that focus on preparing our future workers and citizens.
Conclusion
Liberal education, the education that “…empowers individuals, liberates the mind from
ignorance, and cultivates social responsibility… [and is] characterized by challenging encounters
with important issues, and more a way of studying than specific content” (Schneider,
2003) is not easy to achieve. It is much more than general education; it is liberating education. It
is education that prepares graduates for their professional, personal, and civic lives. It is
challenging for both students and faculty, but it is worth the effort. The general education (GE)
of the past needs to be replaced with a new GE—global education—that prepares people to
learn across their lifetimes, to adapt to rapidly changing environments, and to lead satisfying
personal lives in socially responsible and globally aware ways.
This is a massive change that requires global thinking, global support, and global
collaboration. This is an opportunity for postsecondary institutions around the world to model the
liberal education we espouse to our students as we work together to develop meaningful and
organic liberal education for all.
References
American Association of Colleges & Universities (2007). College learning for the new global century: A report from the
national leadership council for liberal education & America’s promise. Washington DC: USA: AAC&U.
American Association of Colleges & Universities (2004). Taking responsibility for the quality of the baccalaureate
degree. Washington DC: USA AAC&U.
AQF Advisory Board. (2007). Australian qualifications framework implementation handbook (4th ed.). Carlton South,
VIC: AQF Advisory Board.
Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: USA: Harvard University Press.
High. Learn. Res. Commun. Vol. 2, Num. 2 | June 2012
General Education: Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future 17
Eaton, J. S. (2011). Federalizing accreditation: A quandary for higher education. Inside Accreditation with the
President of CHEA, 7(1). Retrieved from http://www.chea.org
Eckel, P. D., & King, J. E. (2004). An overview of higher education in the United States: Diversity, access and the
role of the marketplace. Washington, DC: American Council on Education (ACE). Retrieved from
http://www.acenet.edu
Economist Intelligence Unit. (2010). Global firms in 2020: The next decade of change for organisations and worker
[White paper]. New York, NY: The Economist.
European Higher Education Area [EHEA]. (2010). The framework of qualifications of the European Higher Education
Area. Retrieved from www.ehea.info
Gillard, D. (2011). Education in England: A brief history. Retrieved from www.educationengland.org.uk/history
Peter D. Hart Research Associates. (2006). How should colleges prepare students to succeed in today’s global
economy? Washington, DC: USA: P. D. Hart Research Associates, AAC&U. Retrieved from
https://www.aacu.org
IBM. (2010). Capitalizing on complexity: Insights from the Global Chief Executive Officer study. Somers, NY: IBM Global
Business Services. Retrieved from http://www.ibm.com
Lumina Foundation. (2011). The degree qualifications profile. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation. Retrieved from
https://www.luminafoundation.org
Middle States Commission on Higher Education. (2006). Characteristics of excellence in higher education:
Requirements of affiliation and standards for accreditation (12th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: MCSHE. Retrieved
from https://www.msche.org
New Zealand Qualifications Authority. (2011). The New Zealand qualifications framework. W ellington, NZ: NZQA.
Retrieved from http://www.nzqa.govt.nz
Pascal, N. R. (1984). The legacy of Roman education. The Classical Journal, 79(4), 351-355.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3297030
Price, Waterhouse, Coopers. (2010). Talent mobility 2020: The next generation of international assignments. New
York, NY: PWC. Retrieved from http://www.pwc.com
Schneider, C. G. (2003). Practicing liberal education: Formative themes in the re-invention of liberal learning.
Washington, DC: USA: AAC&U.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. W ashington DC: USA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Design.
