Starring Justin Long, Jonah Hill, Lewis Black, and Blake Lively, Accepted was released in 2006, coincidentally days after I began my senior year of high school. The storyline follows the quick-talking, entrepreneurial, tech-savvy, and resourceful high school senior Bartleby Gaines (Long) who invested his talents in areas not valued by traditional colleges (areas such as making and selling fake IDs, which is where the film begins). As such, he was denied by every college he applied to and worked with his buddy Schrader (Hill) to create a fake college website and acceptance letter to show his parents. Long-story-short, a hundred-ish kids end up also getting acceptance letters, show up to the derelict psychiatric hospital that serves as the made-up school’s campus, and Bartleby decides to reinvent the higher education model based on… the needs of students!
The film is silly and ranks fairly mediocre as movies go. However, there are profound and radical themes on education and learning throughout the plot and dialogue. Specifically, three of the big ideas that I examine here: the role of college, the nature of curriculum, and project-based learning (PBL).
One of the painful lines early in the film is by Bartleby’s father. “Society has rules and the rule is you go to college.” Especially in the last decade, many noteworthy individuals have pointed to the ambiguous role college has taken on. Due to many factors including the economy, global trends, the rapid advancement of technology, and the antiquated approaches of many institutions, the college degree simply less vital than it used to be (and for a higher price tag). I am not saying students should not consider college, everyone should have some post-secondary training or education, but there are many industries that are not having needs met from college grads (especially in the tech sector) and you can find the skills needed for those jobs online or from internships. Trades jobs are in high demand and often pay very well. The point is that students should consider alternatives to the traditional four-year education that has been the American norm for decades.
One of the great methods that Bartleby utilizes with the South Harmon Institute of Technology (SHIT…) is his decision to base the ‘curriculum’ around what students want to learn. It is profound that student input on curriculum is practically nonexistent. While the film takes his approach to an extreme, there is an absolute need for curriculum to not only use student input, but have a flexible nature in general. Curriculum should be malleable and adapt as the world, study body, and faculty changes. The corollary to this idea, which the film does a great job exploring, is that students find their passions much quicker through individualized, flexible, and student-centered courses. One of the reasons that many colleges are working themselves into obscurity is by never adapting or changing curriculum to suit the needs of the students.
As soon as Bartleby and the gang take on the challenge of throwing together a learning institution, they unknowingly embrace a true PBL model. For starters, they took a decrepit psychiatric hospital and did some major renovations on their own. I know from teaching experience that the majority of high schoolers have never done much work with their hands, especially to the level of giving a substantial facelift to an old building. Other examples from the film include a character developing a rock band and performing for a party, another student designing the school’s apparel and putting on a fashion show, and then there is Glen, who spends most of the film creating new culinary items. As there is no formal faculty, aside from the heavily cynical and drunk Dean Lewis (Black), the students are in charge of designing, building, and employing all of the aspects of the school. In the true nature of PBL, the school doesn’t seem to have a formal day structure or class schedule and students simply work on their projects all day. Grades, credit accumulation, tests, and lectures are nonexistent.
While these ideas between the role of college, curriculum, and PBL may not have been the intent of the film’s director (Steve Pink also directed the Hot Tub Time Machine films), the satirical jabs at the collegiate service industry and educational infrastructure in general by this 13 year-old film have aged well.
Learning V. School 