Generous Thinking: A Radical Approach to Saving the University by Kathleen Fitzpatrick

Abstract

Reviewed by: Generous Thinking: A Radical Approach to Saving the University by Kathleen Fitzpatrick Jeffrey R. Di Leo Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Generous Thinking: A Radical Approach to Saving the University Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019, xvi + 260 pp. Academe is not particularly known for its generosity. While we encourage faculty to teach, research, and serve their university, they are not required to fulfill any of these tasks with "generosity." Excellence in teaching is usually determined by how well class material has been prepared and taught, not by the generosity of the professor. Moreover, professors who are characterized as generous are often the ones who routinely do things like raise borderline student grades, drop exams and assignments, and make exceptions for deadlines—a form of generosity that often has a negative ripple effect on colleagues who play by the rules and do not deviate from the requirements of their syllabus. In terms of research, being generous often amounts to looking for every possible way to find merit in the research of others. A student paper that is bad might be read generously by a professor as "not so bad" or even "pretty good" so as to not discourage a student in their future academic endeavors. But here too there is the potential for a negative ripple effect on colleagues who then get students who have a falsely-inflated sense of their research capabilities and expect a similar generous response to their work. The generosity of our faint praise of poor research thus damns both the student and professor. Finally, in terms of service, the characteristic of generosity is often afforded the colleague who agrees to serve on every committee for which they are asked. Unlike generosity in teaching and research, which more often than not has a negative ripple effect with ones colleagues (for example, the expectation of flexibility in grading and deadlines), service generosity has less of a negative ripple effect as it lightens the service demands of ones colleagues unless, of course, these are service tasks that one wants or needs but have been denied because of the generous professor. In short, generosity is something that we often see in academe though its consequences are not always good or desirable ones. To be tagged as the "generous professor" is often to be marked as a colleague who makes life harder on ones colleagues. Like a good-cop/bad-cop routine, the generous professor (viz., the good [End Page 364] cop) bends the rules for their students thereby making them happy, whereas the ungenerous professor (viz., the bad cop) who refuses to raise a grade or faintly praise a piece of bad writing is the recipient of student anger and complaints. The topic of generosity then in academe is an interesting one because of the way it can turn a virtue into a vice. The question of its role in the university is therefore a significant one if generosity is something that we want our students to both value and practice in society after graduation. No would argue that generous neighbors are a bad thing. However, just on the basis of the brief exercise above, generous professors are another matter entirely. In her new book, Generous Thinking: A Radical Approach to Saving the University, Kathleen Fitzpatrick argues that doubling-down on generosity in academe is one way to save the university. She views her approach as "radical" because foregrounding a positive role for generosity in the university goes against much of its current operating system. This operating system or "paradigm" as she calls it involves a continuous push for increasing levels of university prestige through competition. Universities are continuously comparing their achievements in not only teaching, research, and service, but also in areas such as fundraising, athletics, and job placement in a race to the top. Every institution of higher education in America measures itself relative to those on top or most highly ranked. Moreover, amidst all of this competition and comparison, no one seems to be listening to anyone else both within the academy and outside of it. Fitzpatrick argues that we just need to slow everything down and focus on listening to the opinions of others. For Fitzpatrick...