The End of the Liberal Arts at Public Universities

[marmar]

The End of the Liberal Arts at Public Universities
October 11, 2011 | Erik Loomis


Allow me to join Paul and Scott in making this a day dedicated to higher education here at LGM.

Rick Scott opens the logical next front in the conservative war on the liberal arts:

Scott said Monday that he hopes to shift more funding to science, technology, engineering and math departments, the so-called “STEM” disciplines. The big losers: Programs like psychology and anthropology and potentially schools like New College in Sarasota that emphasize a liberal arts curriculum.

“If I’m going to take money from a citizen to put into education then I’m going to take that money to create jobs,” Scott said. “So I want that money to go to degrees where people can get jobs in this state.”

“Is it a vital interest of the state to have more anthropologists? I don’t think so.”

And in fact, the future of the anthropology department at Florida St. is in doubt, to the extent that it is no longer accepting applications from graduate students and possibly not allowing undergraduate majors as well, but I’m not sure about that point.

Of course, the real issue for Scott and other conservatives is that the liberal arts might teach people to think for themselves. Republicans know they are fighting a war on any part of American society that might create liberals. They have taken over the churches, the airwaves, and television news. There’s not much left–academia and Hollywood. Academics are easy to fight because we don’t fight back very effectively. ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2011/10/the-end-of-the-liberal-arts-at-public-universities

[CurtEastPoint]

1. Heaven forbid someone should learn something just for the sake of knowledge.

[Romulox]

2. Working class kids CAN'T AFFORD to "learn something just for the sake of knowledge"

The disdain with which 250k/annum profs. would respond to student concerns with comments like the above and "this is not a trade school!" really shows a disconnect.

This is not "learning for the sake of learning", in any event--this is costing upwards $10k or more a SEMESTER.

[EdMaven]

4. There's a problem with saying universities aren't trade schools? They're not.

[Romulox]

7. It's not even a true statement. The University I attended had half a dozen "trade schools"

Nursing, engineering, teaching, M.D., Law, architecture, psychology, speech and language pathology, and many more, I'm sure.

[pnwmom]

18. And students in all those "trade schools" took liberal arts classes

in the course of earning their professional degrees.

[Romulox]

26. Many of those "trade schools" ARE liberal arts disciplines.

that can only be supported by the lucrative salaries that their graduates expect to receive. Law is an excellent example. :hi:

[pnwmom]

63. Law school is not a liberal arts discipline. n/t

[Romulox]

75. OK. It's not terribly material to any relevant point, at this point.

You want to argue everything but the essence of my point. It grows tiresome.

[EdMaven]

42. None of those are trades. They're professions.

Trades = fields like welding, plumbing, auto repair, cosmetology, machinist, etc.

The dividing line is basically physical or craft skills/labor v. brain labor, wages v. salaries, though of course it's not black & white.

[Romulox]

45. That's a semantics argument. The prof. and I both mean "vocations" by "trade"

We weren't discussing the distinctions between self-regulating "professions" and supposedly menial "trades". In fact, the discussion was with regard to a relatively new-guard industry in which the dichotomy you describe doesn't make much sense (information tech.)

It seems this thread will be about anything and everything but the economics of higher-education debt, at any rate.

edit: and a few on that list are arguably not "professions", which are generally thought to be self-regulating. :shrug:

[EdMaven]

55. Yes, semantic argument, because a "Trade School" is a school that trains people for the trades & a

"University" is a school that trains people for the professions.

Your suggestion, like Humpty Dumpty's, is that language has no meaning & means whatever you say it does.

But a university is not a trade school & neither is a trade school a university.

[Romulox]

60. Nonsense. "Trade" has a broader meaning than the one you insist on.

This is a dead end argument.

[EdMaven]

69. "trade" has many meanings. But not in the context of Trade Schools.

It's a dead end because you insist on playing Humpty Dumpty.


"There's glory for you!"
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,' " Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is, " said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty. "which is to be master—that's all."

[Romulox]

72. This is perhaps the silliest argument I've heard here. Just ridiculous. nt

[EdMaven]

74. That's what people say when they're wrong. :) Check the dictionary.

Universities aren't trade schools.

[Romulox]

76. "Trade: a : the business or work in which one engages regularly : occupation"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trade*

Truly, I am in the presence of a great mind. :silly:

[EdMaven]

81. Trade School: a secondary school teaching the skilled trades.

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Skilled Trades and Apprenticeship - General Description

Each major curriculum leads to a certificate of completion and verification to sponsoring companies that the apprentice or trainee has completed the required related instruction. A student must complete at least 576 contact hours of course work in an approved curriculum to be eligible for the certificate. Most students can complete a program of instruction in three to four years by attending one to two days or evenings per week, although this varies by curriculum. The names of the major available curricula are listed below:

* Automotive/Truck Mechanic
* Die Maker
* Electrician/Commercial & Residential
* Electrician/Industrial
* Industrial Truck Repair
* Instrumentation
* Machine Repair/Maintenance
* Machine Repair/Machinist
* Machinist
* Maintenance
* Metal Model Maker
* Metal Patternmaker
* Millwright
* Plumber
* Plumber/Pipe Fitter
* Sheet Metal Worker
* Tool & Die Maker
* Tool Maker
* Welding
* Wood Patternmaker
http://www.hfcc.edu/programs/trade_and_apprentice.asp


Truly I am in the presence of a major Humpty Dumpty.

A university is not a trade school.

PS: "Great minds" don't need to refer to dictionaries often. They already know what words mean. They also know that the dictionary is not the language as the map is not the territory.

[pnwmom]

64. That's because everyone is disagreeing with your premise that $250 K

is a common salary for any professor, but especially those who are not in "trade schools" like law or medicine.

[Romulox]

73. LOL. It's like debate/telephone. Now I'm arguing that it is a "common" salary?

Never said that. :shrug:

[JCMach1]

14. 250k, really? in what universe?

Florida has some of the lowest and I do mean LOWEST salaries for Professors, especially in the Liberal Arts.

[pnwmom]

19. I know; what a joke.

[Romulox]

21. Ahem (linky!)

http://errwpc.umdl.umich.edu/public/3/3/1/3314612.2010.001.xlsx

[pnwmom]

30. Ahem! Your link doesn't support your point.

I didn't see any professors in humanities making anywhere near $250K.

I saw a professor in sociology making $103K, and a couple of assistant professors making $63K and $71K. Hardly exorbitant salaries compared to other fields requiring their level of education.

[Romulox]

37. There are several professors in that list that make in excess of that amount

and many more in excess of $200k. I didn't limit my point to "humanities" professors, at any rate. Nor were salaries even more than tangential to the larger point--education for the sake of education is simply unaffordable for the largest class of students.

That doesn't mean I abhor my two humanities degrees.

[pnwmom]

62. The only professors making that much are in the med school,

which IS a trade school.

[alcibiades_mystery]

43. Your own evidence shows you to be deft at hyperbole

No doubt you posted it in order to bury your interlocutors in data. I went through the list, well, most of it, and the conclusions are fairly clear. I'll summarize them here for those not willing to download the ahem, linky:

* The number of professors making $250,000 a year or more is miniscule relative to the whole
* The number of professors making more than $200,000 a year is miniscule relative to the whole
* Of those making more than $200,000 a year, the vast majority are obviously physicians working in the medical school; most of those physicians notably don't make $250,000
* Of those making more than $200,000 a year who are not physicians, the vast, vast majority work in one of the other professional schools, such as the Ross School of Business or the law school
*Of those classified as "liberal arts" making more than $200,000 a year, almost all are in economics, and a few in political science and similar disciplines.
*The highest salary I saw for somebody in the "useless" discipline of anthropology was for rather famous anthropologist and writer Ruth Behar, who makes a massive $126,900 a year. She's written six books and innumerable articles over the course of twenty five years of scholarship, and is a full professor in her department. She makes the equivalent of a first-year associate at a major corporate law firm...without the year-end bonus.

Summary, then: the $250k/annum professors you speak of are not in the liberal artys, but in the very professional schools and proto-professional disciplines that you're promoting.

Nice evidence.

[Romulox]

44. Nonsense. You're dissecting a point I didn't make.

As discussed below, I didn't limit my comment to "humanities" or "liberal arts" professors.

At any rate, why such a drive to engage with a point I didn't make, and a corresponding drive not to engage with the point I did make?

"but in the very professional schools and proto-professional disciplines that you're promoting. "

That I'm promoting? Quote, if you please, because I am not promoting any "proto-professional disciplines"(sic). I am talking about the reality of the economics of student debt. But that doesn't mean I am the cause of students having difficulty paying it, or that I am "promoting" the situation I describe. :eyes:

[alcibiades_mystery]

48. No, you invented a persona that doesn't exist in reality

And when you were called on it, you started backtracking like crazy. The simple fact is that you don't know fuck all about what goes on in universities.

[Romulox]

52. Again nonsense. I won't defend arguments that you have constructed. nt

[pnwmom]

67. Yes, promoting. You said that working class students

can't afford to take classes just for the sake of knowledge. Which is not true. Working class students taking trade related majors -- such as engineering -- can and do take liberal arts courses in the course of earning their degrees. And they wouldn't have a very good education -- or be as useful to their future employers -- if they didn't.

I've never heard any employer of engineers complain that a new hire was too good at writing or communicating, skills that were mostly developed as a part of the dreaded "distribution requirements"; and which universities require as a way of assuring a broad knowledge base among their graduates.

[Romulox]

71. Studying for a specific job (i.e. to be an engineer) is NOT what is meant by "education for the sake

of education." I simply can't make it any clearer for you. :wtf:

[pnwmom]

65. Good analysis. Thanks! n/t

[Romulox]

20. Large land-grant in my home state. The "good one". nt

[JCMach1]

57. This recent hiring year in the Chronicle, the State of Florida was hiring profs

in my field for as little as 36K... less than I made teaching HS years ago in Florida.

[XemaSab]

16. My mom got a degree in English and she's been on welfare her whole life

Oh, no wait, she started out in the secretarial pool and now she's a technical editor/project manager. Her job is rewriting all the crap that people with science degrees churn out so that it's fit to be delivered to the client. :P

[Romulox]

24. Things aren't the same today as they were in your mother's day.

Unemployment for recent college graduates is higher than at any period since the Great Depression.

[pnwmom]

35. It's tough everywhere, even in technical fields.

I know an recent engineering graduate who looked for a year before he found a job. It was at a small company with a pay that was about 2/3 of what he could have gotten if he had graduated a couple years earlier.

[XemaSab]

82. It's true, but there is still a need for liberal arts students

I would say that a literature class is FAR more useful for the average person than calculus is.

I would also say that trying to push everyone into the math and science disciplines is just corporate America trying to turn us all into robots.

And I say that as someone with a science degree.

[pnwmom]

17. Yes they can. Engineering students can and do take liberal arts

classes as a part of their general university requirements.

And liberal arts professors don't make anything close to $250 K. Many of them make barely more than post-docs in engineering.

[Romulox]

25. That's a silly response. So engineers can afford a Liberal Arts education (just 1 elective, tho!)

:silly:

[pnwmom]

32. The required courses usually include many courses

in the humanities and social sciences. Engineers don't only take engineering courses.

[Romulox]

39. OK. But filling out a distribution on the way to an Engineering degree isn't

really "education for the sake of education." Quite the opposite, actually. It's the dreaded "trade school" my profs so disdained.

[pnwmom]

59. Yes, it is. The point of fulfilling the distribution requirement

is to prevent the future engineer from being as narrowly educated as he would be if he only took engineering classes. All those required English, psychology, and history classes are part of "education for the sake of education."

[Romulox]

61. But engineering is one of the dreaded "T" words. So no. It's about getting a job as an engineer.nt

[pnwmom]

The required humanities courses are about getting a broad education

not about learning the technical aspects of being an engineer.

[Romulox]

77. The engineering students are there to earn engineering degrees.

An engineer is not and cannot be an example of someone pursuing "education for the sake of education." It is a vocational degree ("trade school", the linguist above notwithstanding.)

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. ROFL

"250k/annum profs" in the liberal arts! At state universities no less!

:rofl:

:rofl:

You're hilarious.

[Malikshah]

31. OK. At the risk of perpetuating your disdain. Epic Fail based on faulty evidence

As someone who is teaching upper division courses with a total enrollment of ~140 students and who is paid less than some of the executive assistants at my university...your argument holds no water whatsoever. I would go so far as to say your way of thinking (based on faulty evidence and specious logic) actually makes a strong case for a Liberal Arts Education. Spare us the anecdotes about prima donna profs who make 250K plus/annum. Do a modicum of research and you will find that 99% (funny, huh) of Liberal Arts professors (from various ranks from adjunct to full) make far far far less than that. Members of the academy are expected to do three things-- teach, research, and service. The percentage expected for each varies based upon the college/university with which one is associated. At state-run schools, the research output is especially onerous as one is dealing with little or no money and/or time, and yet one's salary/career is based upon research output in many cases.

Add to that the exponential rise of the administrative load on professors just as the administration of the universities rise (salary included for the myriad VPs, provosts, etc) Assessment, Retention, Outcome are the watchwords of the day....nothing about what the University is all about.

Suffice it to say, you appear to have not read the article closely and/or know little if anything about the University system as it truly functions.

Stop being the enemy.

[Romulox]

41. My point wasn't really about salaries. It was about the insensitivity of demanding the poor take on

debt in order to pursue "education for the sake of education".

The complaints about work load are not even germane to the topic, and your final comment, "Stop being the enemy," is bizarre. :shrug:

[Malikshah]

47. If you re-read your post-- you start off with the issue of salary--

that is the standard line of the enemies to education. Be a bit more self-aware on that issue and you'd see it. As for going into debt in order to pursue education for the sake of education than, again, you are not getting it.

It is not education for education's sake. That mindset focuses on the extrinsic value of education-- think vending machine. You put your money in and get something in return. This is something that those in the academy rail against on a daily basis (at least the scholars--admin folk are all about this mindset)


Rather than focus on the extrinsic value-- students going to University need to focus on the intrinsic value of their education. The skills they learn, the life-experiences they have (no, I'm not talking about the stereotypes of student "life-experiences"), the expanding of their worlds both literally and figuratively. In other words, the journey is what they take from their liberal arts education and the rich potential it has for them. If they just take classes as carbon-based life forms and "punch the clock," then they have wasted their money-- and yet you are trying to blame the universities for this??

As for the workload being germane to the topic-- damn straight it is when someone starts off with talking about salaries, etc.

As for people demanding that the poor take on debt-- no one is demanding anyone do anything in that regard. You make of your degree what you make of it. You take on what you can handle with a purpose in mind.

[Romulox]

51. Stop taking a salary for teaching and you can tell people about the fallacy of focusing on money

Your ideals are admirable, but perhaps you aren't aware that student loans aren't dischargeable in bankruptcy? Next time you look out on your class, you must know that a significant portion of them will spend the next 10 or 20 years dodging defaulted student loans. It's a reality.

[Malikshah]

84. And I'm living it long after I finished a terminal degree to be able to do research and

teach at the collegiate level. I am well aware of the costs. Again-- your post focused on the faculty. They do not determine the tuition. The majority of their salary does not come from tuition (at least at state-sponsored schools). The politicians have for too long played the three card monty game with Education budgets (the lottery scam being the most offensive). The have with a dogged determinism attempted in many cases successfully to corporatize the academic process-- to the detriment of society as a whole. And yet-- it is the Faculty who are to blame??!!!???

My response? Fuck off with that bullshit. Pure and simple. Fuck. the. hell. off. Of course that doesn't win friends, so we take the time to explain reality to folks first. :)

[tblue37]

92. Despite being an academic myself for 39 years, and having been married to

a professor for 13 of those years, I have never known a professor who makes $20,00/year. No doubt some "rock star" profs make big bucks in very exclusive and expensive schools, but even my ex-husband, who has an international reputation as one of the best in his field, makes just under $100,000 at age 68, near the very end of a very long and productive career. Most of the highest paid profs I know are in the $90,000 to $110,000 range, and they achieve that level only at the end of long and illustrious careers. Where you get the idea that most profs make $250,000 is beyond me.

Furthermore, many of us with a lifetime of teaching college are still not tenure-track, and we make significantly less, despite decades of service to the field and to our schools. I make $37,500 as a full-time lecturer, and I have taught (English) at the same school since 1972.

On the other hand, I have never really believed that students should be expected to go tens of thousands of dollars into debt for a 4-year liberal arts education that does not fit them for a reasonably well-paid career. What students are learning in the first two years of general education in most 4-year colleges is largely remedial--much of it is what used to be taught as part of a high school education, which was, of course, nowhere near as costly!

If kids were learning much in K-12, they could safely use their post-secondary education as training for their career of choice, without having to become indentured servants for the rest of their lives. I don't blame the teachers for the dumbing down of education, of course. It's the politicians and the parents who insist not only that teachers teach to poorly designed tests, but also that the students be given high grades whether they have demonstrated actual mastery of any knowledge or skills. Teachers are not really permitted to teach much or to hold kids to anything resembling real standards, so they arrive on our college campuses in desperate need of remediation in a lot of basic subjects.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

3. I don;t see how LA/BA degrees engender more "self-thinking" than tech/BS degrees.

While I'm not a fan of limiting education possibilities... I don't see how one can say liberal arts might teach people to think for themselves. Mostly because of the implied converse, science & tech degrees don't teach people to think for themselves.

I believe all degree, especially graduate degrees, engender original thinking and research.

[EdMaven]

6. I agree, but I think the distinction w/ li arts is the subject matter -- language,

philosophy, the arts, psychology, politics, history etc.

original thinking & research, different areas; liberal arts are in a sense broader than most science/tech degrees.

[HereSince1628]

13. But they give access to thoughts the oppressors don't want us to hold

Being informed by those who came before us is not irrelevant.

TOday the mayor of Boston screams that he wants to eradicate all hints of Civil Disobediance...yet, ~150 years ago, Henry David Thoreau a resident of self-same Massachusetts argued that EVERY citizen has a Duty to Civil Disobedience when faced with a government demanding we corrupt our values.

Thoreau is introduced to most college students through Liberal Arts education not Science, Technology, Engineering or Mathematics.

Liberal Arts are essential to gaining an understanding ourselves, and very importantly, to getting the BEST advice from the generations who came before us.

[Old and In the Way]

5. Liberal Arts is a curricula based on learning a little bit about a lot of things.

Conservative Arts will be the opposite: learning a lot about very few things.

[Confusious]

50. You got that wrong

Conservative would be learning little about anything.

Seeing how most things are today, learning a little about everything doesn't lead to a career.

It just leads to shitty jobs for the rest of your life.

All the low hanging fruit has been picked over multiple times. You have to be an expert to get anywhere.

[Wait Wut]

8. Fuck him and all the rest of the anti-education wads.

This is a common rant in AZ. "Universities were meant to teach only agriculture and mechanics, not history or liberal arts".

These assholes are terrified of an educated society. Keep us all in the fields and the shops. Here, they were even talking about charging to use the PUBLIC Library or dismantling it, altogether. No...it didn't get far, but it just friggin amazes me how obvious they are and some just don't see it.

[truebrit71]

9. I think they just want future generations to be as stupid and narrow-minded as they are...

...that way they won't get shown up at cocktail parties by folks that are smarter than they are..

[Wait Wut]

36. I don't think "we'll" be invited to their cocktail parties.

But, that's pretty close to what they think. Besides, who needs the maid to read?

[AngryAmish]

11. Are you saying that folks with engineering degrees are not educated?

That is frankly nuts.

The arrogance of people with a poetry degree thinking that they are the only truly "educated" people is pretty galling.

[marmar]

12. "Are you saying that folks with engineering degrees are not educated?"

Where did you get that from?

[MedicalAdmin]

15. It's a reflection of generations of frat boy engineering students ...

saying the same thing.

Let's face it, there are arrogant pricks in every field. Let's not get into a flame war here.



Although I am not sure where you got to your post from what came before it.

[pnwmom]

23. I think the arrogance is just as great in people who think

there's no point in studying anything that won't lead directly to a profession or a job.

[Wait Wut]

33. I agree.

I've also known several people with "useless" degrees that made a good living doing what they love. Not everyone is mathematical, managerial, technical, etc. I guess those people (including myself) should just be put to work in the fields, even though I make a very good living doing what I do. And, I hate farms. :cry:

(DISCLAIMER: Before I get attacked for my last sentence, I did not say I hate "farmers" or the awesome things that come from farms. I sneeze when I'm around farms and my eyes turn red. I personally think they all smell funny or horrible. I can hate farms if I want. If anyone tries to make me work at one, you'll see a full-scale, one woman, revolution.)

[pnwmom]

38. I'm with you about farms.

Wheeze! Sneeze! Cough!

[Wait Wut]

28. WTF?

Where the hell did you get that from? You need to get a degree in Reading Comp. And, where the fuck did you get that I had a "poetry degree"? Are you insinuating that people who can read are uneducated?

[BrendaBrick]

34. Charging to use the PUBLIC library???????

...or dismantling it? :wow: That's scary! I'm glad it didn't get far in AZ...but the idea of it? Might just be the next ploy and if so, I would hope comedian Drew Carey catches a whiff of this!

This is just sad news ~

[Wait Wut]

40. They had a "reason"...

Too many people were using the library because they couldn't afford cable TV, anymore. I'm not kidding. There were complaints from teapers that people were bringing their families (OH, THE HORROR!!!) and "hanging out" in the library because it was free entertainment and air conditioned. Some asshole took it and ran with it...for about 100 ft.

Thomas Jefferson would have punted this ass to the last century.

[BrendaBrick]

46. Unbelievable!

Because it was free entertainment and air conditioned???? Really? Where do they come off thinking of this stuff? Too much time on their hands? This just boggles my mind! What kind of a person thinks up crap like this?????

[morningglory]

10. Damn! I got a degree in Anthropology. Was the first person

in my geneological line to graduate from high school. I had parents who admired learning and reading, but they didn't have enough "sense" to encourage me to study something lucrative that the oil companies could use, for example. Every job I have ever had required a college degree, and I have had a couple of enjoyable careers. Math/science careers are no picnic. I know someone who got a degree in biology and her first job was counting roach and rat parts in Stouffer's chocolates. A higher education is an education.
Edited to add that the more liberal the better, in my way of thinking.

[ceile]

27. That's ridiculous.

So he doesn't want to train teachers (history, English, music) to educate our kids? We should all study the concrete (science, math, engineering) and leave behind the things that have helped shape our histories and our human consciousness?

[MineralMan]

29. Interesting. I have a degree in English, with another year of

graduate work (I used up my GI bill). I've worked as a project designer, a computer programmer/engineer, a columnist for several magazines, a company owner, and a retailer of mineral specimens to collectors around the world. The one thing they all had in common was the need to write clearly and effectively. Now, in my old age, I'm writing complete websites for small businesses, ranging from Equine Veterinarians and HVAC companies, to international translation services and swimming pool builders. Again, the common need is for clear, effective writing.

Everything ends up as a document, eventually. Effective writing is important.

[Confusious]

53. Times have changed

You used to be able to get a good job in the computer biz without a degree.

Not any longer. Best you can do is best buy, or some small company with an owner who thinks he's god.

I'm back in school for that reason.

[MineralMan]

58. What job? I've worked for myself since 1974.

I started my own software company and operated it for 8 years. It was fairly successful, and paid the bills for my wife and I. I was the whole company, from product design and programming to publication, fulfillment, and tech support. The company's products were reviewed in PC Magazine and PC World, among others and sold well. Changes in the industry, though, forced me to closed the company down in 2003. It cost me nothing to start the business and it was profitable from the very start. It made money right up until I closed it. Completely bootstrapped. All of my ventures have been bootstrap operation, and purposely kept small enough for me to do the whole thing. I make a lousy boss, and I hate extra paperwork, so I always stayed small and ran one-person operations.

My wife is also self-employed. She's been a magazine writer, editor, and is still doing those things, along with a lot of web content work. She's been in business since 1988.

Self-employment is not for everyone. It's an ugly way to make a living sometimes, but...

[Romulox]

78. Bootstrap maker, no doubt. nt

[MineralMan]

90. Nope. I never did any leather work. I had a friend who did, though.

Made a good living at it, too.

[Confusious]

54. Crap. dupe

hate it when I do that.

[Dawson Leery]

49. Teabaggers rejoyce!

Ignorance prevails once again!
:puke:

[jwirr]

56. What scares me about getting rid of the liberal arts is that we already

have way to many educational programs that teach one subject and nothing more. It is like taking civics out of the high schools. If every student cannot have access to some good general education such as history, civics, etc. then we are all going to be worse off. I know that students today cannot afford to stay in college another year or two in order to get this extra knowledge and I would like to see how we can do this some other way - adult education? internet? public forums?

If we let this go we will be victims of the dumbing down of America that so many have already fallen victim of.

[exboyfil]

70. Our local university has a 45 hour Liberal Arts Core

that every student goes through. You can get through the core and get a degree by only taking 10 hours of "quantitative" classes (for example Math for Decision Making, a general life science course, and a general physical science course). These three courses are barely at a 10th grade Honors level for most High Schools. The core contains 32 hours of non-quantitative requirements such as Communications, English Composition, English Lit, Fine Arts, 3 courses in Civilizations and Cultures, 3 courses in Social Studies, and a Capstone course that mostly focuses in the Social Studies area.

I feel that this curriculum is too heavily loaded in Social Studies, and both a second math course and a third science course should be expected. At a minimum something at the level of Calculus I, Chemistry I, and Physics I (non-Calculus based). If you can't get through these courses in college, then you have no business being in college.

Opinions?

[jwirr]

80. Well speaking to a lady who has a learning disability in math I am

here to tell you that my degree in Social Work (MSW) did not require that I use any of those math course, science course (except sociology). I needed to understand people and what makes them tick. I needed to know about health problems etc.

What I was talking about regarding history is the many of the things that we learned in high school amounted to nothing more than names, dates, places of wars etc. There was little theory behind actions and no truth when it came to the bad things. If we do not teach more after high school no one will know about the Native American history, slave history, etc. and we will all end up like the Tbaggers and Bachmann.

[exboyfil]

86. I put out that comment to generate this feedback

You have difficulty processing in math. Other individuals have difficulty processing the written word. Should a math major be required to take all of the courses listed (seven social studies courses, English composition, a literature course, communications, and a fine arts course)? Is not an understanding of math and science also important in functioning in our society? Engineers and scientists will rarely use the social studies, literature, or art courses in their work. Would not a command of statistics aid you in your work if you are processing papers on policy decisions regarding your social work? Working through a course which rigorously uses the scientific method is beneficial in detecting what is true science versus pseudoscience. Math helps an individual to think logically and is useful for breaking down the garbage that is given as fact out there. If nothing more a knowledge of algebra is useful in trying to calculate your benefits from social security.

I guess what I am saying is what is good for the goose is good for the gander. If you are going to require so many hours in these courses, a few more classes with more rigor in the sciences and math is not too much to ask. It used to be viewed as part and partial with a liberal arts education.

As far as your comments regarding Native American history and slave history. Most textbooks I have seen have very large sections on both of these topics. Large sections of the New York regents exam for graduation are dedicated to these topics.

I was showing that criticizing STEM studies as not have a firm liberal arts base by showing that a typical midwestern university's program has virtually no rigorous STEM content either. One of our state universities requires 24 hours of liberal arts outside of math and science. Over twice what is required for those not pursuing a STEM curriculum.

[justiceischeap]

66. Two words: ASS HOLE

What do we do with folks who want to be artists and teach the arts, etc? Is there no place in the world for art any more or does art become a technical vocation? Or what about people who study music?

[geardaddy]

68. I guess East Asian Studies is useless then, too.

I've managed to keep employed for 25 years straight, since I graduated from college.

[Romulox]

79. Yes. Take out large loans for humanities degrees! What could go wrong?

Anyone who mentions the crushing weight of student loan debt is only "promoting" a rightwing agenda. :shrug:

[Harmony Blue]

85. No offense

but most people I know that have engineering degrees, and are in the same position as those with humanities degrees (unemployed). The only engineering degrees that seem to be holding up are chemical engineering and electrical. The reason why is because those specific sub fields of engineering are more broader and open up job options. The vast majority of humanities degrees are broad, and thus do offer advantages in finding employment.

[exboyfil]

88. We are currently hiring Mechanical and Agricultural Engineering

graduates along with some Industrial and, of course, Electrical Engineering graduates.

[MadHound]

91. Why shouldn't somebody pursue the field, the profession that they love?

I find it more than amusing how some people around here, and the country, are trying to divide college degrees into "good" and "bad" camps. The "good" camp includes things like engineering, law, science, business, etc., the occupations that get paid well. The "bad" camp includes the humanities, things like English, History and Philosophy.

Yet what nobody realizes is that all knowledge is valuable, all knowledge is needed, all knowledge is good. To make an arbitrary division of knowledge into good and bad, valuable or not valuable shows a distinct lack of wisdom.

[Harmony Blue]

83. At the University of South Florida

you are required as an engineering student to take courses in other disciplines and meet the Gordon Rule (writing competency) because it is paramount if you pursue a career in engineering, or continue to med school.

You will NOT be hired as an engineer based on physics, and mathematics courses alone. The state test you must take to become an engineer requires the ability to use experiences from the other disciplines. Furthermore, in engineering, you need to be able to use creativity and be an effective writer, and communicator.

Liberal arts are the cornerstones of an educated populace.

What Rick Scott is proposing is pure bullshit.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

87. You're focusing on the WRONG PROBLEM

The problem is not liberal arts versus vocational courses. The problem is that companies used to hire liberal arts graduates for entry level positions and train them in-house.

Now they want cookie-cutter MBAs.

They want people trained for specific job titles. They also like people who know nothing but their job titles, because such people don't question authority or think outside the company's straitjacket.

As late as the 1970s, this was not the case. Many current older executives were liberal arts graduates.

[belcffub]

89. I went to college to get a job

got a darn good one doing IT work for 15 years now... most of the people I know went to school to get good paying jobs... putting the limited resources of a university where the jobs are makes sense...

what is really needed is a revolution in higher education... I suspect that most people attending college are like me... looking for a job... trade schools would fill that need better, in a shorter time, more cost effectively then college...

[Harmony Blue]

93. You can find a job with a liberal arts degree

On the University of South Florida campus, every week at noon there is an employer of the week table set up outside of the school of business. It is directly in the path of the walkway from the USF Sun dome parking lot.

Often they are asked what degrees are they looking for, and they reps point out that creativity, energy, communication etc. This is where liberal arts degrees have an edge.

[snot]

94. K&R'd

"A modern economic system demands mass production of students who are not educated and have been rendered incapable of thinking."
– U.N.E.F. Strasbourg, On the Poverty of Student Life (1966).

[bvar22]

95. Science/Engineering/Business/Law teach people how to earn a living.

The Humanities teach people how to Live Well.

I started college in Engineering,
but fell in love with Literature and Philosophy during my 2nd year,
and graduated with a BA.
The Course of my Life was changed by Walt Whitman.
Thank You, Walt,
though at the time I was forced to read your words I hated you.

Living Well is not the same thing as Having a Good Job,
though it is possible to do both.

I don't believe it is possible to Live Well without knowing what those who came before us
thought, felt, and did.
It is possible to get a good job without knowing those things,
but is it worth it?