Schuman, Samuel. (2005) Old main: Small colleges in twenty-first century America. Reviewed by Matthew Church, University of Louisville

Schuman, Samuel. (2005) Old main: Small colleges in twenty-first century America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. 280 $39.95 (hardcover)   ISBN 8-8018-8092-0 Reviewed by Matthew Church University of Louisville June 20, 2006 The small college is the epitome of traditional American higher education. Dating back to the establishment of higher education in the United States, the bucolic setting of small colleges and the accompanying imagery projects a vivid picture. Characterized by verdant campuses, these institutions created bonds between students and faculty and institutions that lasted for lifetimes. As higher education has grown and increased in competition and accountability, the small college still exists as an attractive option to potential college students. While small colleges are still an option for many high school students, developments and advances in higher education pose a threat to their continued existence. Small colleges are burdened with concerns over finances, tuition, attracting students, maintaining class size, finding faculty, and general adaptation. These issues and a particular affinity for small colleges prompted the writing of this work. Schuman confesses his partisan viewpoint at the beginning of the work. He graduated from a small college, taught at a small college, and currently serves as chancellor of a small college. Despite this partisanship, he provides an excellent work on the role of small colleges in American higher education. According to Schuman, small colleges are the main thread of American higher education and exist as the defining core of postsecondary opportunities for young men, young women, and their families (Schuman, 2005, p. 1). Schuman notes that only 4-10% of American college students are enrolled in small colleges and there is a danger of schools being peripheralized to the point of irrelevance (Schuman 2005, p.1). The work presents a case for the future of small colleges. Schuman does not suggest that small colleges are necessarily better than larger universities, but does believe they are different and the best option for some students. For purposes of the work, small colleges are defined as an institution primarily awarding baccalaureate degrees and with an enrollment of five hundred to three thousand students. In order to present a strong case and profile for small colleges, Schuman mined the existing literature, reading all available published studies and close to one hundred fifty dissertations. In addition, he visited fourteen colleges and conducted interviews with the president, faculty, students, and governing bodies of the institutions: George Fox University, Westmont College, Southwestern University, Grinnell College, Minneapolis College of Art & Design, University of Wisconsin-Superior, Centenary College, Warren Wilson College, Morehouse College, College of New Rochelle, Colby-Sawyer College, and Wellesley College. These institutions provided a cross section of small colleges differing by student body, affiliation, mission, and geography. Schuman crafted his own assumptions and opinions into theses and tested these theses during the interviews. The work is divided into eight chapters and is written with several differing audiences in mind. The author intended the work for individuals at small colleges and the general reader. He wanted to supplement current higher education literature by addressing an institutional type lacking in contemporary scholarship. After a brief history of the small college in American higher education, Schuman proceeds to examine the similarities and differences among small colleges. Small colleges are differentiated by their size and enrollments. Another noteworthy characteristic involves the likelihood of faculty having colleagues in different disciplines. Schuman believes there is greater chance for a literature professor to develop a friendship with a geology professor at small colleges due to geographic proximity. This would be quite difficult at larger institutions. Most small colleges focus on liberal education, but many take different approaches. Some institutions focus solely on traditional liberal education, others on liberal education and religious education, and some of liberal learning and work. The small colleges have a common educational core but possess unique approaches to liberal education that manifest in differing ways. Another benefit of the size of small colleges, aside from cross disciplinary faculty relationships and liberal educational focus, is that their size allows for a higher level of social involvement on the part of students. Schuman would be remiss if he did not address finances in his comparison of small colleges and notes the only financial commonality in small colleges is that no small college thinks itself rich. The multitude of unique qualities of small colleges constitute a rich contribution to American higher education (Schuman, 2005, p. 73) After presenting a macro level analysis of small colleges, Schuman profiles people at small colleges. The first group discussed is faculty. The chapter begins with a quote from a small college employee stating that working at a small college is not a job but a passion (Schuman 2005, p.79). Faculty roles are different at small colleges when compared to larger universities. While research is the focus at larger universities, teaching is preeminent at small colleges. Teaching loads vary and faculty are expected to serve as academic advisors and club or organization advisors. Faculty at small colleges are occasionally expected to play a role in university governance and may have to adjust to certain religious and social expectations. Adjunct professors play a lesser role at small colleges than at larger universities. Students are the next group discussed, and Schuman cites the research of theorists such as Astin and Chickering touting the benefits of small colleges for student development. The size of small colleges allows certain educational benefits for students. Schuman even discusses small college presidents and identifies how the expectations for small college presidents can differ markedly from the presidents of larger institutions. Small college presidents experience expectations for visibility and presence. Included in these expectations is the need to know all faculty by name and to respond to all e-mails. Schuman concludes that small colleges are about people. Schuman notes that small colleges stress their ability to foster community. Community is fostered through the refining of institutional mission. He defines community as living with others to pursue common ends. This is possible at small colleges since the possibility exists for everyone to come together and discuss the mission. In addition to the larger community generated by small colleges, they serve as great locales for the construction of social capital. Social capital derives from the internal community of small colleges and benefits external concerns as well as internal ones. Schuman defines social capital through the conceptual framework outlined in Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone. Putnam holds social capital to be a network of interpersonal connections (Schuman 2005, p.120). This network is, in Putnam's view, linked to philanthropy and volunteerism. The size and community of small colleges promote greater student involvement and participation in political activities, voluntary organizations, and service groups. Essentially, social capital can be equated with civic learning and responsibility. These two traits can be learned or enhanced by participation in the aforementioned activities, for which ample opportunities exist at small colleges. While the potential for social capital and civic learning is more applicable to students, Schuman comments on faculty communities at small colleges. He divides scholarly communities into communities of specialized scholars and the community of scholars across disciplines. The latter community is characteristic of small colleges and allows for faculty from different backgrounds to develop collegial relationships. There are drawbacks to teaching at small colleges, most notably a lack of privacy and the tendency to fall behind in one's discipline. Finally, the social and cultural activities at small colleges are less extensive than those at larger institutions. Schuman believes small colleges offer better images and experiences of diversity than larger institutions. On the surface, this view seems faulty. Larger institutions have much more diverse student bodies. However, Schuman observes that there is a tendency for minority groups at larger institutions to isolate themselves and not interact with other groups. At small colleges, there is an enforced community. Enforced community involves the necessary interaction and coming together of different groups on campus. Small college students’ curricular, co-curricular, and extracurricular activities are woven together, and it is impossible for students not to interact with each other. This weaving together allows for self-examination, world citizenship, and multicultural imagination. All groups in small colleges interact with each other and this allows for greater experiences of diversity. Surveys found that small college students were more likely to have worked on a project that integrated ideas outside of class, worked with faculty members on activities outside of class, put together ideas from different courses, discussed work with instructors outside of class, worked with faculty members on activities outside of class, have given high marks to advising they received, worked on a research project with a faculty members, studied abroad, worked for pay on campus, participated in extracurricular activities, felt their college provided good support, attended campus events, and have good relationships with others (Schuman, 2005, p. 157). These qualities and the striving to achieve an experience where all educational facets are woven together can create a moral integrity at small colleges. While the numerous successes of small colleges are apparent, Schuman notes an odd development in higher education, viz., blurring. Small colleges and larger colleges, in the author's opinion, have undertaken actions to mimic each other. Small colleges have entered into cooperatives and consortia to allow them to offer services typically offered at larger institutions. In his research, Schuman noted that he did not visit one college that was not a member of a consortium. As smaller colleges attempt to band together to offer parallel services to those of larger institutions, larger institutions endeavor to offer a simulated small college experience through honors programs and learning communities. While keeping their size and mission, larger institutions found certain aspects of small colleges they believe are beneficial to their students as well. This mimicry of small colleges by larger institutions shows the benefit of small colleges and their approach to higher education. Schuman notes the main difference is that larger institutions can create learning communities while smaller colleges are communities. In the final chapter, Schuman addresses the future of small colleges. At the end of each chapter, he includes true short stories of small college life. These short stories depict the various qualities and benefits of small colleges. Schuman polled staff, faculty, and administrators about the future of small colleges in American higher education. The main concerns were financial. All interviewees were concerned with rising tuition and the availability of financial aid. Additionally, many respondents noted there is not enough money to address numerous facilities in disrepair. Faculty believed there is significant room for improvement in faculty salaries and all interviewees were concerned over class size. Faculty were further concerned with recruiting new professors. There is a worry that it is becoming more difficult to attract the best instructors to small colleges and finding instructors who want to teach at a small college. The recruitment issue is of dire importance since small colleges depend on quality instruction. The growing scholarly focus of younger faculty and legal fears have resulted in faculty being less involved in student lives. Another concern was the ability to find a niche in American higher education and to communicate the merits of small colleges to the public. There were two other concerns related to the student body. Growing student consumerism was cited as a problem, and this was described as students expecting twenty-four hour perks and facilities. This expectation makes it harder for small colleges to keep up with larger institutions. Students with psychological problems are another concern. More and more students are arriving at college under treatment for psychological problems. The combination of being away from home and in a small community could result in these students causing disruptions. As expected with any institution of higher education, those at small colleges are concerned about increased parental involvement. All of these fears are coupled with the growing legal issues and threats. While outlining several fears experienced by personnel in small colleges, Schuman is careful to convey their hopes as well. Many hope that the economy recovers, scholarship aid and applicant pools increase, and class sizes decrease. Essentially, small colleges want to be able to do what they have done in the past. One recent development is the attempt by many small colleges to foster greater ties to their cities. This has been undertaken to show a pride in place, to integrate the college with the community, and to attract favorable attention to the institution. This is particularly useful in showcasing the service learning element of the institution and fostering a sense of volunteerism among the college community. Small colleges are using developmental psychology and holistic learning to foster character development. Even though fear of possible change persists, small colleges hope to remain largely as they have been over the decades. After presenting the hopes and fears of small colleges, Schuman discusses what is needed for small colleges to achieve success. He maintains that every small college must discover its own path to survival and success. There is no panacea for success. Just as every small college is unique, so their path to success must be as well. They must have a clearly defined mission and stick to it. They must listen to their students. Many students interviewed during the research for this book emphasized their wish that classes stay the same size. Schuman also believes small colleges must embrace the philosophy that bigger is not always better and growth is not always necessary. Small colleges embody the value of human communities and provide the possibility of an undergraduate education of integrity. Schuman believes they are unique; and in them, one teaches, learns, and works with people one knows and cares about deeply. Learning permeates all aspects of small college life. Schuman provides an excellent history and evaluation of the state of small colleges in American higher education. They emerge as valuable communities of learning and character development, where students and teaching matter above all. All aspects of small college life are addressed and the short stories included at the end of each chapter vividly illustrate its benefits. Schuman's work raises several important issues about the future of small colleges. The first issue is their role in the current educational climate. With funding and accountability as a constant concern, some have wondered if small colleges are necessary. Schuman argues successfully that small colleges have proven to be quite necessary to the American education system. They provide individual attention and a faculty that loves teaching; many students need both. A second issue raised is that of the challenges faced by small colleges. They face constant struggles to maintain their identity while at the same time competing for students and faculty that fit the small college environment. A third related issue is that of institutional character. The mention of consortium forming on the part of small colleges and the existence of honors programs at large universities demonstrate the merit of small colleges. Small colleges must embrace their history and identity and strive to stay committed to liberal education and traditional values. Schuman is an ardent proponent of small colleges, and his devotion and passion are apparent in every chapter of this work. The work is also brilliantly written and thoroughly convincing. After reading this work, the reader will possess a new found appreciation for these institutions of higher education and an understanding of their vital role. Small colleges appear as a pure form of higher education dedicated to a love of liberal learning and teaching. This is not to claim that they are superior to large institutions. Both institutional groupings have their merits. By the end of Old main: Small colleges in twenty-first century America, it is hard not to appreciate the vital importance of small colleges. About the Reviewer Matthew Church is an Academic Counselor Senior with the College of Arts & Sciences Advising Freshmen/Sophomore Division at the University of Louisville. He is currently pursuing a PhD in Educational Leadership and Organizational Development with a concentration in Postsecondary Administration. Matthew has Bachelors in History from Bellarmine University and a Master's Degree in history from the University of Louisville. Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.