But i guess the fact that UK university courses are more focused is why they are only 3 years instead of 4.
Good point, a Ordinary Bachelor's takes three years. And then you do Honours if you want.
I'm still debating whether or not to do my Honours year actually. I mean I could get into a Teaching postgrad with an Ordinary, but then I've never actually heard what Honours year is like to do. But that's for another thread maybe.
Well i actually did Honours as part of my three years, at my Uni you could select "honours modules" which were basically alternatives to standard modules that were a lot harder.
Aren't useful to what? Perhaps you should stop looking at classes as a way to make $ and start seeing them as a way of bettering yourself. If you couldn't get anything out of a great books lit class, that's a failing on YOUR part, not on the class or University.
ITT: Sentry decides what college should be for everyone everywhere always.
ITT: Quid decides to put words in Sentry's mouth and be an ass.
You just said it shouldn't be viewed as a way to make money and instead bettering one's self.
Am I supposed to assume that when you say this you don't mean it?
I think the academic value of college really depends on what you're planning to do afterward.
If you're going to be a doctor or lawyer, or something requiring a certain training, then yes, it's important. However, many degrees are more or less worthless academically. Even if you need it to get a certain job, it's only because society is set up that way, and not because it actually taught you anything useful.
I'm about 3/4 of the way through my first year of a 4 year program. It's been fun, but as far as the classes go, I don't feel I've actually learned anything, outside of a few interesting tidbits in a required psych 101 course that has little to nothing to do with my major.
Now, obviously the first year, academically, is the least specified, so I'm going to at least go for the second year to figure out if it actually feels worth it, but I'm not holding my breath.
The problem is that university used to be where you went if it would help you further your ability in a chosen field. It was extra. Now, it's more or less an expectation, so people who don't actually have a use for it end up going anyway.
It would be great if it was really a place to be exposed to different ideas and concepts, but I find it's not really like that. I have a philosophy class (again, required for first years) that we found out once it began is also called 'critical thinking'. Now, critical thinking is indeed very important, but unfortunately this class is basically the prof trying to impose her views on us, and if we don't agree with her, we're wrong, which seems really ironic.
Aren't useful to what? Perhaps you should stop looking at classes as a way to make $ and start seeing them as a way of bettering yourself. If you couldn't get anything out of a great books lit class, that's a failing on YOUR part, not on the class or University.
ITT: Sentry decides what college should be for everyone everywhere always.
ITT: Quid decides to put words in Sentry's mouth and be an ass.
You just said it shouldn't be viewed as a way to make money and instead bettering one's self.
Am I supposed to assume that when you say this you don't mean it?
I said perhaps... people can look at college however they want... but considering 4 year degrees seem to be more valued then technical degrees, it appears that businesses value the "bullshit" classes.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
The fact that you have to take classes in college that aren't related to your main subject is truly retarded. I can understand it at high school and before that (though not in some cases), but at higher levels of education, you KNOW what you will do in your future because you are studying it right at that very moment. So no, if I'm studying English Literature, I shouldn't be forced to take math. If I'm studying math, I shouldn't take music. If I'm studying music, English Literature is absolutely useless to me.
Any argument to the contrary is pretty much wrong. This is common sense, saving money AND time. You already learn the wide spectrum of different subjects before college. If you need something unrelated to your subject after that, study it on your own time...or hell, take a class that teaches that. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. But being forced to do it is plain dumb.
If I hadn't taken classes outside of my original major, I would have never switched, and possibly not been quite as happy with the rest of my life.
It's not the case that every 18 year old kid knows what they want to do. A lot of times you can just take a class because it sounds fun and have a really good time with it.
LoserForHireX on
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited January 2009
We need to stop measuring the sum total of education's value according to the size of your salary when you graduate, or the range of career available to you. The real value of widespread liberal arts education is that it produces a more engaged and thoughtful citizenry, which is good for democracy. I think as many people should receive as much education as is practically possible. Obviously to achieve that we need to completely rethink the way we pay for college in this country.
Everyone should recieve the following in their higher education.
1) Broad cultural knowledge of the humanities - literature, philosophy, history, etc. These are all important things to being a knowledgeable, productive, non-idiotic human being.
2) Broad empirical knowledge - scientific knowledge, about the universe, physics, chemistry, etc. Not necessarily equations but facts. Because high school sure as hell isn't giving students that kind of knowledge. And it shouldn't be optional; the difficult mathematical practice should be, but learning the general knowledge should be obligatory.
3) Vocational training. This can include an academic career if you want, because some people just want to be professors, but even an English major should learn more than just how to analyze a book. He or she should learn communications-related skills, etc.
I am tempted to add
4) HOW TO FUCKING COMMUNICATE WITH WRITTEN LANGUAGE because it's a fucking travesty how poorly people write now. And it's really not being taught to people in high school, so someone has to do it.
University education is not wholly vocational. Nor should it be. It's there to teach you knowledge because knowledge is an end in itself.
If you do not think knowledge is an end in itself, then you are living proof that the system of education has failed.
If I hadn't taken classes outside of my original major, I would have never switched, and possibly not been quite as happy with the rest of my life.
It's not the case that every 18 year old kid knows what they want to do. A lot of times you can just take a class because it sounds fun and have a really good time with it.
This is actually one of my criticisms of the British system, when you start at a UK university you're kinda expected to be totally sure about what you are doing, hence the focused course.
The problem with this it doesn't give a great deal of scope for changing courses if you aren't happy. You can still switch classes but how are you meant to know what you want to do?
The fact that you have to take classes in college that aren't related to your main subject is truly retarded. I can understand it at high school and before that (though not in some cases), but at higher levels of education, you KNOW what you will do in your future because you are studying it right at that very moment. So no, if I'm studying English Literature, I shouldn't be forced to take math. If I'm studying math, I shouldn't take music. If I'm studying music, English Literature is absolutely useless to me.
Any argument to the contrary is pretty much wrong. This is common sense, saving money AND time. You already learn the wide spectrum of different subjects before college. If you need something unrelated to your subject after that, study it on your own time...or hell, take a class that teaches that. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. But being forced to do it is plain dumb.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
I learned to figure out a 15% tip around the fifth grade, you didn't?
Guess I understand why American school system is fundamentally flawed if this stuff comes around to you in college.
clever. Guess I figured out that if you don't want a liberal arts education, there's a Devry in almost every fucking city.
You...aren't really making a point here. If learning how to figure out a 15% tip and other similar stuff already happens before college, why do we have to waste time in it after it? If the basic knowledge set is learned before it, why the fuck do we need to cram a bunch of useless stuff that we will never ever need beyond maybe one or two instances in our entire life? If I study international politics, again, why I need higher levels of math? Please try to answer this questing with something else besides "liberal arts education!" please.
And yeah, I'm looking at classes as the way of learning stuff that has some use to me. If I'm interested in some subject (which I am) I'm going to learn it on my free time. I don't want to waste time and money being forced to learn something that I'm not interested in at all, and what won't be any use to me at the slightest.
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
The fact that you have to take classes in college that aren't related to your main subject is truly retarded. I can understand it at high school and before that (though not in some cases), but at higher levels of education, you KNOW what you will do in your future because you are studying it right at that very moment. So no, if I'm studying English Literature, I shouldn't be forced to take math. If I'm studying math, I shouldn't take music. If I'm studying music, English Literature is absolutely useless to me.
Any argument to the contrary is pretty much wrong. This is common sense, saving money AND time. You already learn the wide spectrum of different subjects before college. If you need something unrelated to your subject after that, study it on your own time...or hell, take a class that teaches that. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. But being forced to do it is plain dumb.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
I love how all the "college requires too much money for the value it provides" arguments are generally thoughtful and logical, and all the responses, presumably from college students or graduates, are "U R RONG DUMMY, GOD!!!!!!"
He said that the broad-based education should be completed in high school. That would include learning to calculate a 15% tip. So your response was pre-empted. Think of something else, please, preferably something without insults. Not everyone who skipped college is an idiot or should be treated as such.
I'm 31. I make $51k a year as a project management professional. I never finished more than a year of college, and to this day I regret the money I did blow on it.
I can program in VB, java, javascript, C++, html, and LUA (thank you WoW - heh). I'm revising my first novel. I've coded 3 applications at my place of employment that are used company-wide to improve producation and monitor quality. I've gotten raises of 9 and 11% for two of the last four years (thank you, sinking economy for turning that around) and my performance reviews have always been 95% of whatever the scale is that year or better.
My wife and I owned our first home when I was 22.
Pretty much none of this would have been possible if I had been in college until I was 22. I was making at least $24k a year starting at the age of 19 and it went up fast.
Returning to school would be a much more worthwhile endeavor for me if I were able to take strictly what I needed, instead of being forced to take "Freshman Seminar", swimming, or any of a number of other asinine requireds I have seen over the years.
Public education (read: high school and earlier) has an obligation to expose children to a wide variety of subjects so that they a) can make an informed decision about what they'd like to pursue, and b) have a base level of knowledge when they graduate (the 15%tip).
Post-high school education - the education I HAVE TO PAY FOR - should be like any other consumer commodity. Give me what I need. Don't hold me over a barrel strictly because you can get away with it. If that is the only option, then any smart consumer is going to reject the product.
The problem is that university used to be where you went if it would help you further your ability in a chosen field. It was extra. Now, it's more or less an expectation, so people who don't actually have a use for it end up going anyway.
With the exception of doctors, lawyers, engineers, and heavily science-oriented programs (which are a modern phenomenon) you're profoundly confusing a four-year university for a trade school.
The fact that you have to take classes in college that aren't related to your main subject is truly retarded. I can understand it at high school and before that (though not in some cases), but at higher levels of education, you KNOW what you will do in your future because you are studying it right at that very moment. So no, if I'm studying English Literature, I shouldn't be forced to take math. If I'm studying math, I shouldn't take music. If I'm studying music, English Literature is absolutely useless to me.
Any argument to the contrary is pretty much wrong. This is common sense, saving money AND time. You already learn the wide spectrum of different subjects before college. If you need something unrelated to your subject after that, study it on your own time...or hell, take a class that teaches that. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. But being forced to do it is plain dumb.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
I love how all the "college requires too much money for the value it provides" arguments are generally thoughtful and logical, and all the responses, presumably from college students or graduates, are "U R RONG DUMMY, GOD!!!!!!"
I like people who use themselves as a model for success, and pretend that means a fucking thing.
Post-high school education - the education I HAVE TO PAY FOR - should be like any other consumer commodity. Give me what I need. Don't hold me over a barrel strictly because you can get away with it. If that is the only option, then any smart consumer is going to reject the product.
yeah, it's called University of Phoenix.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Education isn't intended to be merely a job training institute. It also trains people to be better citizens, which is why it is so useful in society. Knowing how to generating a self balancing binary search tree or design a bridge does not make you a non-terrible person - lots of engineers listen to Limbaugh and spout the same ridiculous bullshit history that is taught at most high schools (Civil War wasn't about slavery, Founding Fathers were evangelicals, Native Americans were asking for it, etc).
The liberal arts requirement isn't actually new. If anything there's a lot less attention to subjects outside your major now than there was 20-40 years ago. The courses required now are there to make sure you have the basic tools outside your major to function in the workplace and in society. And no, we can't depend on high schools to do that because standards of education at the high school level is highly varied and all too often unacceptably low.
Additionally, much as it annoyed me part of school is creating a work ethic. I was the kid who breezed through everything and never had to do any work even at honors/AP levels. College made me work at least a little and improved my work ethic enough that I can more easily force myself to actually show up to work and hold down a job. Its a controlled environment that allows one to realize you can't fuck around all the time without terrible consequences, learn skills that will help in the workplace and become your own person.
edit
Also regarding "High school should provide the basics of society and enough guidance so people know what they want to do in life" ... have you met an 18 year old lately?
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
I think you have the wrong thread.
But seriously, pretty much everything you're saying has a lot more to do with the basic kind of person those people are than it has to do with a degree. An ignorant moron can get a BA and still be an ignorant moron. It's not a magical fix-all that automatically makes them an intelligent, productive member of society.
You...aren't really making a point here. If learning how to figure out a 15% tip and other similar stuff already happens before college, why do we have to waste time in it after it? If the basic knowledge set is learned before it, why the fuck do we need to cram a bunch of useless stuff that we will never ever need beyond maybe one or two instances in our entire life? If I study international politics, again, why I need higher levels of math? Please try to answer this questing with something else besides "liberal arts education!" please.
And yeah, I'm looking at classes as the way of learning stuff that has some use to me. If I'm interested in some subject (which I am) I'm going to learn it on my free time. I don't want to waste time and money being forced to learn something that I'm not interested in at all, and what won't be any use to me at the slightest.
2 Things
First, in the US, and more specifically in California, you don't have to do "higher level math" if you aren't in a related field (engineering, math, statistics, economics). I'm a philosophy major and I just got over the hump of having to take a math class past some middling algebra. I took statistics, so now I understand how those work and am better prepared to deal with anything surrounding statistics in the future.
Second, you are just as good at teaching yourself as a teacher is at teaching you? You can learn anything on your own with just as much depth of knowledge and with just as much of a grasp on it? I doubt that, I doubt it a lot. Mostly because you're some college kid and a teacher is someone who has devoted years of their life towards mastering a subject.
LoserForHireX on
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The fact that you have to take classes in college that aren't related to your main subject is truly retarded. I can understand it at high school and before that (though not in some cases), but at higher levels of education, you KNOW what you will do in your future because you are studying it right at that very moment. So no, if I'm studying English Literature, I shouldn't be forced to take math. If I'm studying math, I shouldn't take music. If I'm studying music, English Literature is absolutely useless to me.
Any argument to the contrary is pretty much wrong. This is common sense, saving money AND time. You already learn the wide spectrum of different subjects before college. If you need something unrelated to your subject after that, study it on your own time...or hell, take a class that teaches that. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. But being forced to do it is plain dumb.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
I learned to figure out a 15% tip around the fifth grade, you didn't?
Guess I understand why American school system is fundamentally flawed if this stuff comes around to you in college.
clever. Guess I figured out that if you don't want a liberal arts education, there's a Devry in almost every fucking city.
You...aren't really making a point here. If learning how to figure out a 15% tip and other similar stuff already happens before college, why do we have to waste time in it after it? If the basic knowledge set is learned before it, why the fuck do we need to cram a bunch of useless stuff that we will never ever need beyond maybe one or two instances in our entire life? If I study international politics, again, why I need higher levels of math? Please try to answer this questing with something else besides "liberal arts education!" please.
And yeah, I'm looking at classes as the way of learning stuff that has some use to me. If I'm interested in some subject (which I am) I'm going to learn it on my free time. I don't want to waste time and money being forced to learn something that I'm not interested in at all, and what won't be any use to me at the slightest.
I can't answer the question to your satisfaction because we fundamentally disagree on the purpose of education. People who say "why should I take Music 243" are being disingenuous. Look, here at ASU students are required to take Two Natural Science classes, Two Social and Behavioral Science classes, and Two Humanities classes... now, argue against a student having a basic knowledge in each of those areas...
Natural Science promotes reason and scientific inquiry, Social Behavioral Sciences promotes human understand and working with other people, and Humanities promotes an appreciation and respect for art, literature, and music.
I fail to see how any of that is a negative.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
I think you have the wrong thread.
But seriously, pretty much everything you're saying has a lot more to do with the basic kind of person those people are than it has to do with a degree. An ignorant moron can get a BA and still be an ignorant moron. It's not a magical fix-all that automatically makes them an intelligent, productive member of society.
So education has nothing to do with the "basic kind of person those people are?"
No one's arguing that a modern, four-year liberal arts education is some sort of panacea for all of society's woes.
The problem is that university used to be where you went if it would help you further your ability in a chosen field. It was extra. Now, it's more or less an expectation, so people who don't actually have a use for it end up going anyway.
With the exception of doctors, lawyers, engineers, and heavily science-oriented programs (which are a modern phenomenon) you're profoundly confusing a four-year university for a trade school.
No, no I'm not. I'm saying that modern society makes university the expectation, rather than an extra for those who really want to. The result is universities being flooded with people wasting their money and wondering why the fuck they're there.
University is good for some people, but it's not for everyone. Unfortunately, those who realize that are often forced into it anyway because of expectation and perception.
So education has nothing to do with the "basic kind of person those people are?"
That's not what I said. By the time people reach university age, they've already had 12 years of formal education, and for many of them, their identity is already pretty established. University can certainly have an effect on them, but it doesn't fundamentally change everyone who goes through.
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
Look, maybe, maybe I'm completely confused here because I'm not American and maybe there is a different between education in our respective countries...but philosophy? Political science? Chemistry, math? I know who Freud was and what were his basic theories on human development. If you ask me what an oedipus complex is, I can answer that. In three different languages. I know how to give a fifteen percent tip. I know why United Nations was formed, that the League of Nations was it's predecessor, and the reasons why the other failed and the other didn't. I learned to know the reasons behind inflation and deflation, how the markets work, what were the reasons behind the current financial crisis and so on. I know what a periodic table is, and what do you get when you mix two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom.
My point being? I learned all of those things before college. That was just a scraping of the barrel too, obviously. Eleven years of pretty much non-stop education. Dozens of different subjects. More courses then I can count.
So why...why do I need to repeat it all in college? Isn't it already a time for me to start preparing for the specific job I'm going to enter? Does an even deeper understanding of Immanuel Kant's theories be REALLY neccessary for me not to be an equivalent to a hillbilly idiot?
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Yes, those people are idiots and need to be educated.
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
I think you have the wrong thread.
But seriously, pretty much everything you're saying has a lot more to do with the basic kind of person those people are than it has to do with a degree. An ignorant moron can get a BA and still be an ignorant moron. It's not a magical fix-all that automatically makes them an intelligent, productive member of society.
There are thousands and thousands of people whose minds are opened by what they learn in university. What I learned in university changed my mind about many social issues, and made me into a better human being.
Education can change the basic kind of person you are.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
...
What school did you go to that you couldn't figure out a tip by ninth grade?
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Yes, those people are idiots and need to be educated.
No, you can't make them pay for it.
Their decision to go to college is just that - their decision.
The fact that higher education comes with higher education is a bonus, not a detriment.
If anything you should be complaining about curriculums and course selection and lack of funding that prevents you from taking the classes you want or forces you to take a shitty class that could have been a valuable learning experience in terms of gaining knowledge as a human being.
Or you could complain about the lack of standards or organization that plagues higher education in liberal arts degrees and produces a failure to establish a solid academic basis.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
...
What school did you go to that you couldn't figure out a tip by ninth grade?
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
Yeah, I think people here would be surprised by the number of high school graduates who can't calculate a tip.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
Look, maybe, maybe I'm completely confused here because I'm not American and maybe there is a different between education in our respective countries...but philosophy? Political science? Chemistry, math? I know who Freud was and what were his basic theories on human development. If you ask me what an oedipus complex is, I can answer that. In three different languages. I know how to give a fifteen percent tip. I know why United Nations was formed, that the League of Nations was it's predecessor, and the reasons why the other failed and the other didn't. I learned to know the reasons behind inflation and deflation, how the markets work, what were the reasons behind the current financial crisis and so on. I know what a periodic table is, and what do you get when you mix two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom.
My point being? I learned all of those things before college. That was just a scraping of the barrel too, obviously. Eleven years of pretty much non-stop education. Dozens of different subjects. More courses then I can count.
So why...why do I need to repeat it all in college? Isn't it already a time for me to start preparing for the specific job I'm going to enter? Does an even deeper understanding of Immanuel Kant's theories be REALLY neccessary for me not to be an equivalent to a hillbilly idiot?
I do think it might be a cultural difference, yeah. I don't want to sound arrogant or come across as a dick or anything, I really don't. I'm just genuinely curious about how the US is different.
The fact that you have to take classes in college that aren't related to your main subject is truly retarded. I can understand it at high school and before that (though not in some cases), but at higher levels of education, you KNOW what you will do in your future because you are studying it right at that very moment. So no, if I'm studying English Literature, I shouldn't be forced to take math. If I'm studying math, I shouldn't take music. If I'm studying music, English Literature is absolutely useless to me.
Any argument to the contrary is pretty much wrong. This is common sense, saving money AND time. You already learn the wide spectrum of different subjects before college. If you need something unrelated to your subject after that, study it on your own time...or hell, take a class that teaches that. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. But being forced to do it is plain dumb.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
I learned to figure out a 15% tip around the fifth grade, you didn't?
Guess I understand why American school system is fundamentally flawed if this stuff comes around to you in college.
clever. Guess I figured out that if you don't want a liberal arts education, there's a Devry in almost every fucking city.
You...aren't really making a point here. If learning how to figure out a 15% tip and other similar stuff already happens before college, why do we have to waste time in it after it? If the basic knowledge set is learned before it, why the fuck do we need to cram a bunch of useless stuff that we will never ever need beyond maybe one or two instances in our entire life? If I study international politics, again, why I need higher levels of math? Please try to answer this questing with something else besides "liberal arts education!" please.
And yeah, I'm looking at classes as the way of learning stuff that has some use to me. If I'm interested in some subject (which I am) I'm going to learn it on my free time. I don't want to waste time and money being forced to learn something that I'm not interested in at all, and what won't be any use to me at the slightest.
I can't answer the question to your satisfaction because we fundamentally disagree on the purpose of education. People who say "why should I take Music 243" are being disingenuous. Look, here at ASU students are required to take Two Natural Science classes, Two Social and Behavioral Science classes, and Two Humanities classes... now, argue against a student having a basic knowledge in each of those areas...
Natural Science promotes reason and scientific inquiry, Social Behavioral Sciences promotes human understand and working with other people, and Humanities promotes an appreciation and respect for art, literature, and music.
I fail to see how any of that is a negative.
I'm not saying it's a negative. I'm saying that it's not neccessary and unless you enter college as a total dumbass it's going to waste your time and money.
I'm a big fan of reason and science. I can already work with people. I do appreciate and respect art, literature and music.
Why do I need to go through said courses? What, I don't appreciate and respect the arts enough? Is there some sort of an specific level of respect for them I need to attain before I'm a decent human being?
It's not an anecdote, it's credentials. I find that college-goers tend to get extremely full of themselves and willing to write off the opinions of what they perceive as "the non-successful". My quality of life has never suffered once for not attending college, which was the point of sharing that information. Before anyone chooses to write me off as an ignorant buffoon who never finished college, they ought to consider the points I raised.
The other aim of sharing that is to defend the earlier post about how going to college can actually cost you more money in the long run. I haven't fired up the old Excel spreadsheets like he did, but his points ring true to me.
I'm not saying it's a negative. I'm saying that it's not neccessary and unless you enter college as a total dumbass it's going to waste your time and money.
I'm a big fan of reason and science. I can already work with people. I do appreciate and respect art, literature and music.
Why do I need to go through said courses? What, I don't appreciate and respect the arts enough? Is there some sort of an specific level of respect for them I need to attain before I'm a decent human being?
Uh, maybe because you aren't everyone? Audit the fucking courses dude. That way you don't have to waste any of your time in them. You can prove that you know all that stuff already and that it would be a waste for you to take it. Every institution that I've ever been to has allowed courses to be skipped provided that you could demonstrate that you already had the knowledge.
You sound like you are a very very well educated person. And unless you can claim that people as well educated both in and out of school are the norm in your country, you still haven't shown that having those requirements isn't a good thing.
LoserForHireX on
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
...
What school did you go to that you couldn't figure out a tip by ninth grade?
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
I have trouble reading out loud because my brain moves faster than my mouth. Also I get really nervous in front of people (especially reading something). I can also calculate 15% tips in under a few seconds. Where does that put me?
I'm not saying it's a negative. I'm saying that it's not neccessary and unless you enter college as a total dumbass it's going to waste your time and money.
I'm a big fan of reason and science. I can already work with people. I do appreciate and respect art, literature and music.
Why do I need to go through said courses? What, I don't appreciate and respect the arts enough? Is there some sort of an specific level of respect for them I need to attain before I'm a decent human being?
Maybe it's not about YOU. Maybe it's about the inner-city kid who wasn't able to learn about Kant or the Scientific Method because his teacher was too fucking busy making sure the other 40 kids in his class knew how to read at a 5th grade level.
Congrats, I'm glad you managed to master the arts and sciences based on your own experience, you truly are the Beyonder... but not everyone was as freaking lucky as you. So, if you see taking classes to enrich that understanding as a punishment, then yeah, I guess you get punished for being ahead of the curve.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
They were probably the people who thought any knowledge outside their major was unnecessary, so they slacked their way through any diversity requirements and so are dumb outside of a rote knowledge in whatever they do.
In these cases I've seen though, they were CS majors who didn't know the basics of CS (like OO, etc which I know was taught in several classes).
This post is directed at anyone who thinks a broad liberal arts education isn't worthwhile:
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
Look, maybe, maybe I'm completely confused here because I'm not American and maybe there is a different between education in our respective countries...but philosophy? Political science? Chemistry, math? I know who Freud was and what were his basic theories on human development. If you ask me what an oedipus complex is, I can answer that. In three different languages. I know how to give a fifteen percent tip. I know why United Nations was formed, that the League of Nations was it's predecessor, and the reasons why the other failed and the other didn't. I learned to know the reasons behind inflation and deflation, how the markets work, what were the reasons behind the current financial crisis and so on. I know what a periodic table is, and what do you get when you mix two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom.
My point being? I learned all of those things before college. That was just a scraping of the barrel too, obviously. Eleven years of pretty much non-stop education. Dozens of different subjects. More courses then I can count.
So why...why do I need to repeat it all in college? Isn't it already a time for me to start preparing for the specific job I'm going to enter? Does an even deeper understanding of Immanuel Kant's theories be REALLY neccessary for me not to be an equivalent to a hillbilly idiot?
do you not realize that you are a particularly aberrant example?
a lot of people on PA were probably bright kids who ended up in gifted programs because they already knew half the stuff their schools were trying to teach them, for pretty much their whole life.
that doesn't mean teaching people these things has no value, especially since most people don't know that shit.
fuck, 30 or 40 percent of people believe in ghosts. they believe in ghosts. most people don't know why the seasons change (i didn't even know until i looked it up last year because it's a tricky one, but i really should have). people are not getting the basis of knowledge that they require. they are not being trained to think critically.
i am a coordinator at a writing centre at a university. i know what problems people have when they try to write. engineers and business students and tons of other students aren't being trained to think critically at all. they don't know what logical fallacies are, they can't construct an argument, they can't even write. the arts students? they have to develop those skills at some level in order to get a passing grade. unfortunately, they are the ones who have lax training in other areas of knowledge. people need both.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
...
What school did you go to that you couldn't figure out a tip by ninth grade?
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
Yeah, I think people here would be surprised by the number of high school graduates who can't calculate a tip.
If someone can't calculate a tip by the time they graduate high school, they're an idiot. Plain and simple. University is supposed to be for higher education, not shit you should have learned years before.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
...
What school did you go to that you couldn't figure out a tip by ninth grade?
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
Yeah, I think people here would be surprised by the number of high school graduates who can't calculate a tip.
I think some people here would be surprised by the number of college graduates who can't calculate a tip.
do you not realize that you are a particularly aberrant example?
a lot of people on PA were probably bright kids who ended up in gifted programs because they already knew half the stuff their schools were trying to teach them, for pretty much their whole life.
that doesn't mean teaching people these things has no value, especially since most people don't know that shit.
fuck, 30 or 40 percent of people believe in ghosts. they believe in ghosts. most people don't know why the seasons change (i didn't even know until i looked it up last year because it's a tricky one, but i really should have). people are not getting the basis of knowledge that they require.
That's more of a sign of a terribly flawed public education system than a reason to go to university.
This moment in history is going to show the value of a properly-taken liberal education. A lot of extremely specialized people are losing their jobs and have no secondary skills of any note to fall back on. People who have multiple aptitudes and an overall broader experience are going to be able to find -different- stuff to do aside from sweeping floors until the economy brings back their original job.
Right now I'm loving my English degree and my backgrounds in science, art, history, construction, math, and so on, because society could completely collapse and I'd still be able to get by.
Um, no.... YOU are wrong. It's called a Liberal Arts education for a reason. There's a basic knowledge set that anyone who graduates from college should fucking understand. If you're an English Professor and you can't figure out a 15% tip, then there's something fundamentally flawed there.
So, I guess you should quit being wrong...
...
What school did you go to that you couldn't figure out a tip by ninth grade?
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
Yeah, I think people here would be surprised by the number of high school graduates who can't calculate a tip.
I think some people here would be surprised by the number of college graduates who can't calculate a tip.
And here's where we learn that my tip example was a bit of hyperbole used to make a point. Perhaps I overshot... or undershot... or sucked at shooting.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Posts
Well i actually did Honours as part of my three years, at my Uni you could select "honours modules" which were basically alternatives to standard modules that were a lot harder.
Am I supposed to assume that when you say this you don't mean it?
If you're going to be a doctor or lawyer, or something requiring a certain training, then yes, it's important. However, many degrees are more or less worthless academically. Even if you need it to get a certain job, it's only because society is set up that way, and not because it actually taught you anything useful.
I'm about 3/4 of the way through my first year of a 4 year program. It's been fun, but as far as the classes go, I don't feel I've actually learned anything, outside of a few interesting tidbits in a required psych 101 course that has little to nothing to do with my major.
Now, obviously the first year, academically, is the least specified, so I'm going to at least go for the second year to figure out if it actually feels worth it, but I'm not holding my breath.
The problem is that university used to be where you went if it would help you further your ability in a chosen field. It was extra. Now, it's more or less an expectation, so people who don't actually have a use for it end up going anyway.
It would be great if it was really a place to be exposed to different ideas and concepts, but I find it's not really like that. I have a philosophy class (again, required for first years) that we found out once it began is also called 'critical thinking'. Now, critical thinking is indeed very important, but unfortunately this class is basically the prof trying to impose her views on us, and if we don't agree with her, we're wrong, which seems really ironic.
I said perhaps... people can look at college however they want... but considering 4 year degrees seem to be more valued then technical degrees, it appears that businesses value the "bullshit" classes.
If I hadn't taken classes outside of my original major, I would have never switched, and possibly not been quite as happy with the rest of my life.
It's not the case that every 18 year old kid knows what they want to do. A lot of times you can just take a class because it sounds fun and have a really good time with it.
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
1) Broad cultural knowledge of the humanities - literature, philosophy, history, etc. These are all important things to being a knowledgeable, productive, non-idiotic human being.
2) Broad empirical knowledge - scientific knowledge, about the universe, physics, chemistry, etc. Not necessarily equations but facts. Because high school sure as hell isn't giving students that kind of knowledge. And it shouldn't be optional; the difficult mathematical practice should be, but learning the general knowledge should be obligatory.
3) Vocational training. This can include an academic career if you want, because some people just want to be professors, but even an English major should learn more than just how to analyze a book. He or she should learn communications-related skills, etc.
I am tempted to add
4) HOW TO FUCKING COMMUNICATE WITH WRITTEN LANGUAGE because it's a fucking travesty how poorly people write now. And it's really not being taught to people in high school, so someone has to do it.
University education is not wholly vocational. Nor should it be. It's there to teach you knowledge because knowledge is an end in itself.
If you do not think knowledge is an end in itself, then you are living proof that the system of education has failed.
This is actually one of my criticisms of the British system, when you start at a UK university you're kinda expected to be totally sure about what you are doing, hence the focused course.
The problem with this it doesn't give a great deal of scope for changing courses if you aren't happy. You can still switch classes but how are you meant to know what you want to do?
You...aren't really making a point here. If learning how to figure out a 15% tip and other similar stuff already happens before college, why do we have to waste time in it after it? If the basic knowledge set is learned before it, why the fuck do we need to cram a bunch of useless stuff that we will never ever need beyond maybe one or two instances in our entire life? If I study international politics, again, why I need higher levels of math? Please try to answer this questing with something else besides "liberal arts education!" please.
And yeah, I'm looking at classes as the way of learning stuff that has some use to me. If I'm interested in some subject (which I am) I'm going to learn it on my free time. I don't want to waste time and money being forced to learn something that I'm not interested in at all, and what won't be any use to me at the slightest.
So, who else gets pissed off when the inevitable tide of bible belt fundies comes rushing back in down in Oklahoma or Tennessee or one of those other states we should've let secede, and starts blathering on about "EEVOLOOSHUN IZ JUST A THEERY" and trying to politically mandate that ID be taught in schools?
Doesn't it piss you off to talk to some ignorant hillbilly who thinks that global warming is a "LIB'RUL CONSPIR'CY THEERY" or some other such nonsense?
Don't you hate it when some Ron Paultard starts drooling "THE FREE MARKET FIXES ALL PROBLEMS!" nonsense all over a legitimate discussion of economics?
Are you seeing a trend here, now?
These people are Walmart greeters. They're mechanics. Fry cooks. Teachers. Politicians. They don't need chemistry! They don't need math! They don't need economics! They don't need philosophy! They don't need political science! What the hell does a mechanic need political science for?
Also, bear in mind: these people are voting. And even though you know that intelligent design is a load of bullshit, and they don't understand why, their votes are worth the same as yours.
Does a well-rounded education still sound like a waste of time?
There's a lot more at stake here than education for education's sake.
I love how all the "college requires too much money for the value it provides" arguments are generally thoughtful and logical, and all the responses, presumably from college students or graduates, are "U R RONG DUMMY, GOD!!!!!!"
He said that the broad-based education should be completed in high school. That would include learning to calculate a 15% tip. So your response was pre-empted. Think of something else, please, preferably something without insults. Not everyone who skipped college is an idiot or should be treated as such.
I'm 31. I make $51k a year as a project management professional. I never finished more than a year of college, and to this day I regret the money I did blow on it.
I can program in VB, java, javascript, C++, html, and LUA (thank you WoW - heh). I'm revising my first novel. I've coded 3 applications at my place of employment that are used company-wide to improve producation and monitor quality. I've gotten raises of 9 and 11% for two of the last four years (thank you, sinking economy for turning that around) and my performance reviews have always been 95% of whatever the scale is that year or better.
My wife and I owned our first home when I was 22.
Pretty much none of this would have been possible if I had been in college until I was 22. I was making at least $24k a year starting at the age of 19 and it went up fast.
Returning to school would be a much more worthwhile endeavor for me if I were able to take strictly what I needed, instead of being forced to take "Freshman Seminar", swimming, or any of a number of other asinine requireds I have seen over the years.
Public education (read: high school and earlier) has an obligation to expose children to a wide variety of subjects so that they a) can make an informed decision about what they'd like to pursue, and b) have a base level of knowledge when they graduate (the 15%tip).
Post-high school education - the education I HAVE TO PAY FOR - should be like any other consumer commodity. Give me what I need. Don't hold me over a barrel strictly because you can get away with it. If that is the only option, then any smart consumer is going to reject the product.
I like people who use themselves as a model for success, and pretend that means a fucking thing.
yeah, it's called University of Phoenix.
The liberal arts requirement isn't actually new. If anything there's a lot less attention to subjects outside your major now than there was 20-40 years ago. The courses required now are there to make sure you have the basic tools outside your major to function in the workplace and in society. And no, we can't depend on high schools to do that because standards of education at the high school level is highly varied and all too often unacceptably low.
Additionally, much as it annoyed me part of school is creating a work ethic. I was the kid who breezed through everything and never had to do any work even at honors/AP levels. College made me work at least a little and improved my work ethic enough that I can more easily force myself to actually show up to work and hold down a job. Its a controlled environment that allows one to realize you can't fuck around all the time without terrible consequences, learn skills that will help in the workplace and become your own person.
edit
Also regarding "High school should provide the basics of society and enough guidance so people know what they want to do in life" ... have you met an 18 year old lately?
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I think you have the wrong thread.
But seriously, pretty much everything you're saying has a lot more to do with the basic kind of person those people are than it has to do with a degree. An ignorant moron can get a BA and still be an ignorant moron. It's not a magical fix-all that automatically makes them an intelligent, productive member of society.
2 Things
First, in the US, and more specifically in California, you don't have to do "higher level math" if you aren't in a related field (engineering, math, statistics, economics). I'm a philosophy major and I just got over the hump of having to take a math class past some middling algebra. I took statistics, so now I understand how those work and am better prepared to deal with anything surrounding statistics in the future.
Second, you are just as good at teaching yourself as a teacher is at teaching you? You can learn anything on your own with just as much depth of knowledge and with just as much of a grasp on it? I doubt that, I doubt it a lot. Mostly because you're some college kid and a teacher is someone who has devoted years of their life towards mastering a subject.
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
I can't answer the question to your satisfaction because we fundamentally disagree on the purpose of education. People who say "why should I take Music 243" are being disingenuous. Look, here at ASU students are required to take Two Natural Science classes, Two Social and Behavioral Science classes, and Two Humanities classes... now, argue against a student having a basic knowledge in each of those areas...
Natural Science promotes reason and scientific inquiry, Social Behavioral Sciences promotes human understand and working with other people, and Humanities promotes an appreciation and respect for art, literature, and music.
I fail to see how any of that is a negative.
So education has nothing to do with the "basic kind of person those people are?"
No one's arguing that a modern, four-year liberal arts education is some sort of panacea for all of society's woes.
No, no I'm not. I'm saying that modern society makes university the expectation, rather than an extra for those who really want to. The result is universities being flooded with people wasting their money and wondering why the fuck they're there.
University is good for some people, but it's not for everyone. Unfortunately, those who realize that are often forced into it anyway because of expectation and perception.
That's not what I said. By the time people reach university age, they've already had 12 years of formal education, and for many of them, their identity is already pretty established. University can certainly have an effect on them, but it doesn't fundamentally change everyone who goes through.
Look, maybe, maybe I'm completely confused here because I'm not American and maybe there is a different between education in our respective countries...but philosophy? Political science? Chemistry, math? I know who Freud was and what were his basic theories on human development. If you ask me what an oedipus complex is, I can answer that. In three different languages. I know how to give a fifteen percent tip. I know why United Nations was formed, that the League of Nations was it's predecessor, and the reasons why the other failed and the other didn't. I learned to know the reasons behind inflation and deflation, how the markets work, what were the reasons behind the current financial crisis and so on. I know what a periodic table is, and what do you get when you mix two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom.
My point being? I learned all of those things before college. That was just a scraping of the barrel too, obviously. Eleven years of pretty much non-stop education. Dozens of different subjects. More courses then I can count.
So why...why do I need to repeat it all in college? Isn't it already a time for me to start preparing for the specific job I'm going to enter? Does an even deeper understanding of Immanuel Kant's theories be REALLY neccessary for me not to be an equivalent to a hillbilly idiot?
Yes, those people are idiots and need to be educated.
No, you can't make them pay for it.
There are thousands and thousands of people whose minds are opened by what they learn in university. What I learned in university changed my mind about many social issues, and made me into a better human being.
Education can change the basic kind of person you are.
Maybe the same schools that turned out the kids who had trouble reading out loud in my college lit classes.
Their decision to go to college is just that - their decision.
The fact that higher education comes with higher education is a bonus, not a detriment.
If anything you should be complaining about curriculums and course selection and lack of funding that prevents you from taking the classes you want or forces you to take a shitty class that could have been a valuable learning experience in terms of gaining knowledge as a human being.
Or you could complain about the lack of standards or organization that plagues higher education in liberal arts degrees and produces a failure to establish a solid academic basis.
Yeah, I think people here would be surprised by the number of high school graduates who can't calculate a tip.
I do think it might be a cultural difference, yeah. I don't want to sound arrogant or come across as a dick or anything, I really don't. I'm just genuinely curious about how the US is different.
I'm not saying it's a negative. I'm saying that it's not neccessary and unless you enter college as a total dumbass it's going to waste your time and money.
I'm a big fan of reason and science. I can already work with people. I do appreciate and respect art, literature and music.
Why do I need to go through said courses? What, I don't appreciate and respect the arts enough? Is there some sort of an specific level of respect for them I need to attain before I'm a decent human being?
It's not an anecdote, it's credentials. I find that college-goers tend to get extremely full of themselves and willing to write off the opinions of what they perceive as "the non-successful". My quality of life has never suffered once for not attending college, which was the point of sharing that information. Before anyone chooses to write me off as an ignorant buffoon who never finished college, they ought to consider the points I raised.
The other aim of sharing that is to defend the earlier post about how going to college can actually cost you more money in the long run. I haven't fired up the old Excel spreadsheets like he did, but his points ring true to me.
Uh, maybe because you aren't everyone? Audit the fucking courses dude. That way you don't have to waste any of your time in them. You can prove that you know all that stuff already and that it would be a waste for you to take it. Every institution that I've ever been to has allowed courses to be skipped provided that you could demonstrate that you already had the knowledge.
You sound like you are a very very well educated person. And unless you can claim that people as well educated both in and out of school are the norm in your country, you still haven't shown that having those requirements isn't a good thing.
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
I have trouble reading out loud because my brain moves faster than my mouth. Also I get really nervous in front of people (especially reading something). I can also calculate 15% tips in under a few seconds. Where does that put me?
Maybe it's not about YOU. Maybe it's about the inner-city kid who wasn't able to learn about Kant or the Scientific Method because his teacher was too fucking busy making sure the other 40 kids in his class knew how to read at a 5th grade level.
Congrats, I'm glad you managed to master the arts and sciences based on your own experience, you truly are the Beyonder... but not everyone was as freaking lucky as you. So, if you see taking classes to enrich that understanding as a punishment, then yeah, I guess you get punished for being ahead of the curve.
In these cases I've seen though, they were CS majors who didn't know the basics of CS (like OO, etc which I know was taught in several classes).
do you not realize that you are a particularly aberrant example?
a lot of people on PA were probably bright kids who ended up in gifted programs because they already knew half the stuff their schools were trying to teach them, for pretty much their whole life.
that doesn't mean teaching people these things has no value, especially since most people don't know that shit.
fuck, 30 or 40 percent of people believe in ghosts. they believe in ghosts. most people don't know why the seasons change (i didn't even know until i looked it up last year because it's a tricky one, but i really should have). people are not getting the basis of knowledge that they require. they are not being trained to think critically.
i am a coordinator at a writing centre at a university. i know what problems people have when they try to write. engineers and business students and tons of other students aren't being trained to think critically at all. they don't know what logical fallacies are, they can't construct an argument, they can't even write. the arts students? they have to develop those skills at some level in order to get a passing grade. unfortunately, they are the ones who have lax training in other areas of knowledge. people need both.
If someone can't calculate a tip by the time they graduate high school, they're an idiot. Plain and simple. University is supposed to be for higher education, not shit you should have learned years before.
I think some people here would be surprised by the number of college graduates who can't calculate a tip.
That's more of a sign of a terribly flawed public education system than a reason to go to university.
Right now I'm loving my English degree and my backgrounds in science, art, history, construction, math, and so on, because society could completely collapse and I'd still be able to get by.
And here's where we learn that my tip example was a bit of hyperbole used to make a point. Perhaps I overshot... or undershot... or sucked at shooting.