About Sylff
Reflections on the Sylff Program (4 of 4)
Ellen E. Mashiko
Moving forward
The Sylff Program is not perfect nor a panacea for all ills. It is a living system and thus a work-in-progress that requires ongoing reexamination, fine-tuning and transformation if it is to strengthen, grow and mature. There are various mechanisms to reexamine and fine-tune existing programs and activity, such as self-study techniques. However, transformation in the context of higher education, and thus of Sylff, goes beyond the rational processes and substance of assessment and cost-benefit analyses. As Richard H. Hersh recently wrote, “Transformation is about intellectual deepening and broadening; …rigorous and humble introspection; …encountering the great human conversations as a means of learning how to construct meaning in far more defensible and rigorous ways. [And] learning―and the transformation it fosters―is never strictly cognitive….Learning is about being able to link thought and emotion, and all with action, in ways that are humane, caring and responsible” (The Chronicle of Higher Education, August 1, 2008, p. A64 ).
On the world stage, the Sylff family of fellows, universities and the foundations may be a modest company of actors in terms of numbers but together and through individual endeavors the clan can make a difference. A quarter century ago, scientist Lewis Thomas wrote in a collection of essays:
“Altruism, in its biological sense, is required of us. We have an enormous family to look after, or perhaps that assumes too much, making us sound like official gardeners and zookeepers for the planet, responsibilities for which we are probably not grown-up enough. We may need new technical terms for concern, respect, affection, substitutes for altruism. But at least we should acknowledge the family ties and, with them, the obligations. If we do it wrong, scattering pollutants, clouding the atmosphere with too much carbon dioxide, extinguishing the thin carapace of ozone, burning up the forests, dropping the bombs, rampaging at large through nature as though we owned the place, there will be a lot of paying back to do and, at the end, nothing to pay back with.” (Late Night Thoughts on Listening to Mahler’s Ninth Symphony, 1983, pp. 106-107).
What will the Sylff family choose to do in its third decade? Commit to further mutual learning, collaborative action and transforming challenges into opportunities? Do “good” but in seclusion or for self-serving purposes? Slip into indifference, complacency and inactivity? Do we have a choice?
