The Case For Removing (Almost) All Liberal Arts From College

[Hash]

Disclaimer: I don't agree with this article at all, but I want opinions on it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/2013/the-case-for-removing-almost-all-liberal-arts-from-college/

A pretty good rebuttal/counterpoint: http://hellogiggles.com/in-defense-of-the-liberal-arts

What are everybody's opinions on this guy's point?

[opebo]

My reaction - disgust.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The usual bollocks. Not even worth engaging with.

[dead0man]

They shouldn't be abolished, that's silly, but high school aged kids that aren't really sure what they want to do with their lives should certainly know that most liberal arts degrees aren't going to help you get a job.

[angus]

What are everybody's opinions on this guy's point?

He sees higher education as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself.  This is neither fortunate nor unfortunate, and he is not alone.  Many students are pursuing university degrees specifically with an eye to future employability.  

He is frustrated.  Probably he was one of those liberal arts majors who sampled various courses of study before deciding that a history degree was the easy choice.  Perhaps he spend some time as one of those "debt-laden retail workers."  One could argue that he chose a course of study for the wrong reasons and his frustration is not surprising.

It's more of a rant than a policy proposal.  He makes some insightful points, but the idea that such programs of study are not merited isn't well supported.  Moreover, the idea is easily refuted.  

[opebo]

What are everybody's opinions on this guy's point?

He sees higher education as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself.  This is neither fortunate nor unfortunate, and he is not alone.  Many students are pursuing university degrees specifically with an eye to future employability.  

He is frustrated.  Probably he was one of those liberal arts majors who sampled various courses of study before deciding that a history degree was the easy choice.  Perhaps he spend some time as one of those "debt-laden retail workers."  One could argue that he chose a course of study for the wrong reasons and his frustration is not surprising.

It's more of a rant than a policy proposal.  He makes some insightful points, but the idea that such programs of study are not merited isn't well supported.  Moreover, the idea is easily refuted.

More to the point - his complaints form an excellent critique of the capitalist economic system, not 'education'.

Any society that doesn't provide a comfortable sinecure in the bureaucracy for history majors is horrific. 

[Lief 🗽]

The usual bollocks. Not even worth engaging with.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

My reaction - disgust.

The usual bollocks. Not even worth engaging with.

[Antonio the Sixth]

My reaction - disgust.

The usual bollocks. Not even worth engaging with.

[anvi]

I stopped reading when I got to the bit about communications majors being worthless.  The general rant-like nature of the piece aside, when you perch on a false premise, the conclusion will be a quick dive.

[All Along The Watchtower]

tl; dr version

"The only value of your education is how much $$$$ you can make from the job that your major qualifies you for. Otherwise, don't bother with higher education."

In other words, the usual BS from a disgustingly narrow-minded yet hilariously transparent ideological view (a view that, in other news, is fast becoming the dominant view of policymakers in many countries). It's global economic paranoia on the part of the power elite.

That's what all the fuss about "STEM" majors is about-"remaining competitive" with countries like China. Because American policymakers are scared sh*tless of the notion that maybe, just maybe, a China or India will "catch up" to America.

I know this is hard for some people, particularly on the Right, to believe, but not everyone views education as a  means to act out a purely selfish (and I mean that in the absolute worst sense of that word) motivation to make money.

Just because you are a greedy a$$hole, doesn't mean that everyone else is, or should act that way.

[angus]

Just because you are a greedy a$$hole, doesn't mean that everyone else is, or should act that way.

But we are greedy assholes, apparently.  More importantly, we are impatient assholes.  Did you read the comments below the article?  (I ask whether you might have actually read the article, knowing by your own admission that you haven't, but let's just pretend.)  Poor spelling and poor grammar aside, they were as insightful as the article itself.

Miguel344 in Madrid writes:  "This is tipically American..."  He's right, and so too is the short-attention-span mindset that gives us the confidence to read a few sentences of an article, admit that we didn't read the whole thing because it was too long, and then go on to criticize it as if we had read it.  Too long??  Have you even tried to read the Iliad?  Or the US Constitution? 

Your post--even if nothing else does--perfectly refutes the author's premise that at least a basic liberal arts education isn't worth providing.

[King]

Didn't read.

Any problem with higher education is the failures of the K-12 system.  Making high school diplomas more valuable would eliminate the problem of Liberal Arts being "useless."

[Person Man]

Didn't read.

Any problem with higher education is the failures of the K-12 system.  Making high school diplomas more valuable would eliminate the problem of Liberal Arts being "useless."

Or for that matter actually make more students successful in STEM fields. Unless there's another reason why almost half the class gets Ds and Fs in Calculus and Chemistry. I'm on the tangent that students simply don't choose a good field where the money is because they are scared sh**tless of the rigors of courses that High School did not prepare them for. Heck, even half of the people flunk Sophomore Accounting (which is just a small step above things like Political Science). So, its not really the College's fault for offering useless degrees, its the High School's fault for being easy enough to drink concealed Vodka out of an Orange Juice bottle during class and still getting all As and maybe a 2 Bs a year.


And trust me on this. I've done the "lets go find a sexy career without having to take any math" instead of "I just want to lead an enriched life even if it means I won't be able to have anything that nice or actually do anything that exciting" and that path  basically made me a poor douchebag. The only silver lining is that I haven't had to go to a loan shark (any lender that's not the feds) to pay for school  and am now off to get a STEM degree that is pretty much all math and is probably what I should have been doing all along.  Though it is hard being a 27 year old Junior.

So its not so much that we should stop paying people to teach things like Drama and Political Science. Its really that people should be prepared to take whatever field they want to take. Or maybe its simply too easy to get a degree in something that's not hiring. Maybe only giving passing grades to people who have the work ethic and talent to actually use the degree could be a state. Basically, we don't want programs that basically come off as saying "major in this if you are more interested in pussy/dick and booze/dope than having a good job". If they weren't like that, no one would call for the above.

[DemPGH]

No, I wholeheartedly disagree that the arts should be "removed," i.e., purged. No. Now an argument can be easily made that the arts are not practical - fine, but the sciences are actually alive and well. Biology I would describe as overwhelmed while most of the others are "at capacity." This, of course, is based upon demand. Outside of raw mathematics and maybe raw chemistry, the sciences actually do not "need people." There are more than enough to fill the need.

But the arts teach critical thinking (hopefully) and provide an avenue for the development of writing skills, which are really crucial. I'd hate like hell to lose that. I don't want that deep-sixed or even relegated to where overextended jobbers and part-timers are running it. And History? Do we REALLY want to deep-six that? We better not.

No, I would not encourage my child to be a music major or a writing major - there are more practical choices (like athletics!), but to say the arts have outlived their usefulness is very wrong.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Didn't read.

Any problem with higher education is the failures of the K-12 system.  Making high school diplomas more valuable would eliminate the problem of Liberal Arts being "useless."

Exactly, particularly in certain states and areas where politicians want the K12 classroom so badly to mirror the teachings of White Evangelical Neo-Fundamentalist Protestant doctrine.

And angus, I did read the article. The "tl; dr" was for people who didn't read it.

[RI]

I partially agree with the article. I would support bifurcating universities into technical and liberal arts institutions with specific specializations. One type could be primarily focused on career-based programs that require considerable expertise (engineering, mathematics, medicine, law, computer science, natural sciences, mathematical economics, and some of the more applied social fields such as social work and education) whereas the other would be "liberal" with a focus more on learning for its own sake (with fields such as political science, history, philosophy, art, sociology, theatre, classical languages), though it would likely only be accessible for the rich by virtue of being rather worthless toward pursuing a non-academic career. I would avoid the latter myself, not because these are bad things to learn, but because they are bad things to pay to learn (again, unless you seek to be a professor or something).

I personally think that college should be primarily a means to an end and not an end in itself; unless someone else is paying for it, you better have a realistic and actionable plan to repay your debts after you graduate. As it stands, most students who attend college do so under terrible auspices with little planning and gain little from it. Few college students actually get this "enriching" from liberal arts education, and they hardly teach critical thinking in a way that you couldn't get from math or science courses, and generally the first two years at a university spent on general requirements is a waste of time.

Writing skills should be learned in K-12, but that is another matter entirely.

[DC Al Fine]

Few college students actually get this "enriching" from liberal arts education, and they hardly teach critical thinking in a way that you couldn't get from math or science courses, and generally the first two years at a university spent on general requirements is a waste of time.

Writing skills should be learned in K-12, but that is another matter entirely.

Agreed. The higher learning is there for those who want it, but I've found that for every serious arts student, there are 5-10 bros/party girls skating through. Arts education should be there for those who are serious about it, but the admissions process should be stricter.

[angus]

And angus, I did read the article. The "tl; dr" was for people who didn't read it.

Man, I'm really off my game today.  

Or it's generational.  We used to call such things the "Reader's Digest" version or the "Cliff Notes" version.  I should realize that "tl/dr version" conveys that nowadays.

Anyway I think I agree, more or less, with your comments.  I'd only quibble with your mistake that such attitudes are only prevalent on the right.  As far as I can tell, it is the mainstream view that education is a means to an end.  It is an attitude that is firmly held in the center.  The far right and far left still have the old attitudes.  The William Buckley crowd, just as much as the Noam Chomsky crowd, appreciates the liberal arts.  But the starbucks crowd--the middle classes and pragmatist/centrists--only appreciate the ratio of dollars invested to dollars gained.  Wistfully I am saddened by that, as I have always seen education as an end in itself, but as a practical matter this was the logical consequence in the Great American Experiment.  In a time when only the landed gentry attained higher education, one could choose to study philosophy, literature, law, music, or physics, because it was interesting.  The money was irrelevant, and it was expected that one would learn all the liberal arts core, and more of one subject if it was deemed interesting.  One certainly wouldn't have been expected to make a living at any of it.  But in our free and compulsory public school mindset, and one in which we are pushing everyone to go to post-secondary institutions, we see more and more less affluent people in universities and colleges.  These are the very classes that would always think of money, precisely because they are not born with very much of it.  Eventually, the university becomes a trade school.  This phenomenon is playing out more and more worldwide as the Chinese, Indians, Brazilians, and other emerging market players follow our example in this regard.

[Person Man]

and what I have seen is that a lot of these emerging market type students do a lot better in challenging Freshman STEM courses like Physics and Calculus. Many of them do just as well or better at them than at things like Civics and History.

Then again, maybe these STEM classes are harder, have larger barriers to entry and therefore have unemployment rates that are half and starting salaries that are about double of what they are for non-STEM majors

[angus]

and what I have seen is that a lot of these emerging market type students do a lot better in challenging Freshman STEM courses like Physics and Calculus. Many of them do just as well or better at them than at things like Civics and History.

This is true.  My first apartment mate in college was an Iranian who made easy As in physics, calculus, and chemistry, but struggled greatly with Norton's Anthology of English Literature.  In fact, he had a couple of F grades on his transcript and had to repeat at least one English course and at least one History course.  I believe that had more to do with a language barrier.  His English was terrible.  Funny guy, too.  He always spoke English worst when he was pulled over by cops.  He did all sorts of terrible things while driving--illegal U-turns, driving over curbs, bumping into people--but always managed to avoid getting tickets when pulled over.  He used to trade a fat black chick in our building cigarettes in exchange for sex.  One day I walked in on them and she was riding him and he was hollering and panting.  Good times.  Then he'd feel guilty about it and put his little green prayer mat out and cry and hold the Koran.  Very complex dude.  His brother was a real weirdo.  Scary guy.  Carried a big knife with him everywhere and wasn't afraid to pull it out if someone pissed him off.  He always had good weed, though.  He a mexican wife with bleach-blonde hair.  He could speak no spanish and she could speak no persian.  But I digress...

Anyway, yes we do many things right in our universities.  Folks come from all over the world to attend them.  Folks don't come from all over the world to attend our high schools.  Possibly because theirs are usually better.  That's a different issue and we shouldn't confuse it with this thread.

[opebo]

He did all sorts of terrible things while driving--illegal U-turns, driving over curbs, bumping into people--but always managed to avoid getting tickets when pulled over.  He used to trade a fat black chick in our building cigarettes in exchange for sex.  One day I walked in on them and she was riding him and he was hollering and panting.

Yes, they like fats, and they like blacks.  Also, interestingly, they like ladyboys (situational homosexuality being rife in the middle east for obvious reasons).

But aside from that, it is true that foreign students are almost always comically bad drivers, like the 'asian lady driver' from Family Guy.

[Vosem]

I agree with the article in spirit -- there's not much point in going to college to major in liberal arts -- but not in fact -- as long as the market does exist for liberal arts majors, colleges should continue teaching liberal arts.

[SPC]

I agree with the article in spirit -- there's not much point in going to college to major in liberal arts -- but not in fact -- as long as the market does exist for liberal arts majors that is largely perpetuated by government-subsidized student loans, colleges should continue teaching liberal arts.

FTFY

[Mechaman]

I say this as someone who has an Accounting degree:

Thank god for my Liberal Arts classes.  I don't know how the hell I would've survived those five years if all I heard about was EPS, demographic marketing, and whatever else "general business" bullsh$t we had to take.

Wholeheartedly oppose.