ven more careful readers, wefear, will not take it to heart – or if they do, may not have much sense of what to doabout it – because the learning outcomes on which it focuses seem so abstractedfrom the daily life of teaching. Because of this gap between general skills anddisciplinary learning, each of us, while fascinated by Arum and Roksa’s powerfulresearch, has for different reasons found the results inAcademically Adriftsome-what at odds with her own experiences. We feel that it is important to take thisdissonance seriously, and would like to suggest that it arises from differences inwhere we look for student learning.
Heiland and Rosenthal agree a gap needs to be closed between general education skills and disciplinary skills but suggest we need to look for student learning in different places. I think experiential learning is one approach to creating learning opportunities that get both the student and the faculty engaged in assessment and the process of learning. Experiential learning within the disciplines could involve creating reflective writing assignments within the discipline that requires the student to examine their achievement within the discipline as well as the intersection of other general skills used in the learning activity. The authors suggest that faculty need to engage the general education skills within their own discipline through outcomes assessment efforts. I have observed faculty who have never received any training in this area or ever discussed it. Measuring the level of learning achieved by students using standardized tests seems very limiting and this is an area ripe for additional research. I think another approach to consider is how we get students and faculty to collaboratively measure the learning that they both know is occurring. It is interesting to note that as I reflect on the past year in this program I am experience the learning process but we rarely discuss it with each other or the faculty.