Global Issues

NUMBER 52, SUMMER 2008

The Humanities and Social Sciences in Asia: Endangered Species?

Philip G. Altbach
Philip G. Altbach is Monan University Professor and director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College.

Most observers agree that the humanities and social sciences—the soft sciences—are an integral part of any university, indeed that a real university must have strength in these areas. These disciplines are important in their own right, and are a central core for any general education program. The humanities and to a lesser extent the social sciences are in crisis in many East Asian universities. Few students are choosing to focus their studies on the humanities—fields such as philosophy, history, and cultural studies. Linguistics and language studies, other than practical English programs, are also in decline. The social sciences, particularly such disciplines as economics and a few others that relate to management or policy studies, fare somewhat better. A conference held recently at Harvard University and sponsored by the Harvard-Yenching Institute brought together leaders of key East Asian universities and Harvard scholars to examine the "crisis of the humanities and social sciences" in East Asia.

A "Perfect Storm" of Problems for the Soft Sciences
Many universities, in a rush to become "world class" by emphasizing the hard sciences and other easy to quantify disciplines, have let the soft sciences languish. As governments and universities worldwide have emphasized the "private good" aspects of higher education more than the "public good," universities and public funders generally support fields that will yield income or that are in student demand. The traditional public good roles of universities—providing education in all branches of knowledge, cultural analysis and critique, the integration of science and culture, and the preservation of knowledge—have been largely pushed aside. Students find that the sciences and especially professional fields such as management and law provide more secure and remunerative careers, causing enrollments in the humanities and some of the social sciences to plummet. Jobs outside academe are easier to obtain and more remunerative with training in professional fields and the sciences; even within academe, salaries are higher in these fields. The rise of private universities—the fastest-growing sector in higher education worldwide and the dominant force in such East Asian countries as Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines—has meant in some cases an emphasis on fields that are in high student demand.

Mass higher education brought immense pressures on higher education systems everywhere and has been particularly damaging for the soft sciences. First generation university students typically choose fields that will yield easy employment after graduation—seldom the soft sciences. Budgetary pressures caused by massification meant reduced funding for fields not in high demand.

The Soft Sciences and General Education
Most East Asian universities, as is common worldwide, provide a specialized curriculum with a vocational or disciplinary focus, and students must enroll in specific faculties. General education is, by and large, absent, although exceptions do exist—such as the University of Tokyo, which requires a year of general education. A reconsideration of this specialized professional curriculum has recently begun, with critics arguing that it stifles creativity and forces students to confine the focus of their studies. Moreover, the specialized curriculum may be irrelevant for the more fluid job market of the 21st century.

As the idea of general education and an interdisciplinary approach to the curriculum strengthens, the role of the humanities and social sciences becomes more central. General education never provides an exclusively science-based curriculum, and in most cases the soft sciences are at least as significant as the hard sciences and professional subjects. With declining strength in the soft sciences, the development of innovative and effective general education programs will be difficult if not impossible.

A related concern in many East Asian universities is the development of critical thinking skills as part of the academic curriculum. As with general education, any innovative effort in this direction must involve the humanities and social sciences.

Current Realities
With enrollments down and funding cuts, humanities programs have been reduced or even eliminated. In countries such as Japan and Korea, private universities that traditionally stressed the soft sciences are in jeopardy because of enrollment declines in a difficult demographic environment. Fewer doctorates are being produced in most of these disciplines, reflecting student preferences; fewer academic positions are available; and salaries have not kept up with other fields. The professoriate is aging and often not being replaced.

At the same time, a new recognition that the soft sciences are needed to support academic programs exists—as well as a growing concern to ensure critical thinking for first-degree students and in fledgling general education courses.

Challenges
Ensuring appropriate strength in the humanities and social sciences is complex. Both academic institutions and government must recognize that the soft sciences are important for the university—and funding made available. Some academic departments of high quality that can produce top humanities and social science scholars are a basic necessity. Not every university needs to have the capacity to produce doctorates, but the system must. Unlike some fields in the hard sciences, where it does not matter where a scientist is trained, advanced education in the humanities and some social sciences fields at home is in most cases valuable because the national context is important and expertise is unlikely to exist abroad. In such fields as national and local history, national culture and language, and related subjects, local expertise as well as sources and documentation is often quite good at home. In academic systems that value foreign degrees, this may place the humanities at a disadvantage.

The humanities particularly are often relegated to a distant and low prestige part of the university. The soft sciences must regain their places at the center of academic life. These fields must themselves reintegrate into the mainstream of the university by emphasizing interdisciplinary work, their contributions to general education, and their importance to understanding contemporary society. New fields such as bioethics and environmental science, if they are to be effective, need significant expertise from the humanities and social sciences. Business programs require a strong element of the social sciences and the best ones include a consideration of ethics. Too often, humanities scholars are content to stick to their narrow disciplines—they must convince others of the relevance of their expertise. If general education and creative thinking are to become part of the curriculum, expertise in the humanities and social sciences is absolutely necessary.

Several key challenges are evident: to improve the image of the soft sciences at every university; to provide capacity in a country to educate scholars at a high level in the various soft science disciplines (all universities of course need not offer a full range of specialties); to integrate the humanities and social sciences into interdisciplinary programs in professional and other fields; and to have capacity in these fields to contribute to general education.

The humanities and social sciences are not only an essential part of the idea of the university; they are at the core of understanding contemporary society. History, sociology, philosophy, and other disciplines interpret today's key challenges. The university, as the central institution providing careful analysis and interpretation of society, requires the soft sciences as never before.

[Online] Available: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/Number52/p4_Altbach.htm