3 ms·

Oddly enough I've always thought that one of the big problems with the US university system is that it's too broad. When I went to university in Australia I st

by hugh3 16y ago

Oddly enough I've always thought that one of the big problems with the US university system is that it's too broad. When I went to university in Australia I studied four subjects in my first year (Physics, Chemistry, Maths, Computer Science), two subjects (Physics and Chemistry) in my second year, two subjects in my third year, and only physics in my fourth year. On the other hand, I get the impression that the average American university student wastes at least a third of his time doing random-ass subjects with no real relevance to his major, right? In my opinion, "broad education" is what you should be getting in high school.

rdouble 16y ago
I get the impression that the average American university student wastes at least a third of his time doing random-ass subjects with no real relevance to his major, right? Not necessarily, if you are majoring in science or engineering. That sounds like my brother's physics degree at a big state university. As a math major at a liberal arts college, by 3rd and 4th year I was mostly taking math courses. I did have to take a number of liberal arts electives, but I've probably made more use out of Spanish and even History of Minneapolis and St. Paul than I have out of any of my higher math courses... There's a lot of variety in American higher education. The curricula for the same major could be very different based on where you go to college. A physics major at Oberlin would probably be required to take more electives in "random ass subjects" compared to a physics major at Caltech.
stevenbedrick 16y ago
I disagree. My undergraduate degree was in biology, but I earned it from a liberal arts college. What did that mean? It meant that I took an awful lot of biology classes, but I was also forced[1] to take a lot of classes outside of the science building. The college's degree requirements specified that you had to take a certain number of credits from such-and-such department, a certain number from so-and-so, and so on, no matter what your major happened to be. As a science major, it was sometimes very challenging to fit all the requirements in, but I'm really glad I did. Having a broad base of knowledge outside one's speciality is extremely liberating personally, and it can be professionally empowering, as well. It's easy, as a scientist, to lose perspective about what we do- both in terms of "why are we doing this at all" to "why do we do this in this specific way." A good liberal arts education helps you a) recognize situations in which those sorts of questions are relevant, and b) can help you develop a useful set intellectual tools for answering those questions. Also, a lot of the biology I learned is already obsolete, ten years later; while learning it was certainly worthwhile, it is of relatively little practical value to me today (and not just because I didn't end up going into biology). Also, having to take some humanities classes helped me become a better writer, and also helped me learn how to effectively discuss my work and why it is important. Those have proved to be extremely useful skills in life, both in academia as well as in the "real world". Now, I would also argue that, had I been a humanities major of some sort, taking some hard-core science classes would have been quite beneficial- it would have taught me about a different way to engage with and think about reality, which can only be beneficial to one's ability to think about literature, or music, or whatever. Oh, BTW- in addition to biology classes, I took a fair number of CS classes (almost enough for a minor), and I feel like my programming abilities over the years have definitely benefited from a liberal arts background. Furthermore, when I was doing hiring at my pre-grad-school job, I found that the best candidates weren't necessarily the ones with impeccable CS credentials. Often, the ones that worked out best in the end were often the ones that had broader academic horizons. They tended to have an easier time dealing with ambiguous situations and instructions, and were better able to "dive in" and "JFDI" when confronted with new and unfamiliar codebases, technologies, or projects. That's not to say that CS classes weren't important, or anything like that- just that there's a synergistic effect between good CS and the humanities. [1]: "Forced" isn't quite the right word, here, since getting a broad education was the whole reason I chose a liberal arts school. "Required," maybe?
- hugh3 16y ago
  I dunno. Personally I found that I could never enjoy things like literature and history until they stopped being educational requirements.

by hugh3 16y ago

rdouble 16y ago

I get the impression that the average American university student wastes at least a third of his time doing random-ass subjects with no real relevance to his major, right? Not necessarily, if you are majoring in science or engineering. That sounds like my brother's physics degree at a big state university. As a math major at a liberal arts college, by 3rd and 4th year I was mostly taking math courses. I did have to take a number of liberal arts electives, but I've probably made more use out of Spanish and even History of Minneapolis and St. Paul than I have out of any of my higher math courses... There's a lot of variety in American higher education. The curricula for the same major could be very different based on where you go to college. A physics major at Oberlin would probably be required to take more electives in "random ass subjects" compared to a physics major at Caltech.

stevenbedrick 16y ago

I disagree. My undergraduate degree was in biology, but I earned it from a liberal arts college. What did that mean? It meant that I took an awful lot of biology classes, but I was also forced[1] to take a lot of classes outside of the science building. The college's degree requirements specified that you had to take a certain number of credits from such-and-such department, a certain number from so-and-so, and so on, no matter what your major happened to be. As a science major, it was sometimes very challenging to fit all the requirements in, but I'm really glad I did. Having a broad base of knowledge outside one's speciality is extremely liberating personally, and it can be professionally empowering, as well. It's easy, as a scientist, to lose perspective about what we do- both in terms of "why are we doing this at all" to "why do we do this in this specific way." A good liberal arts education helps you a) recognize situations in which those sorts of questions are relevant, and b) can help you develop a useful set intellectual tools for answering those questions. Also, a lot of the biology I learned is already obsolete, ten years later; while learning it was certainly worthwhile, it is of relatively little practical value to me today (and not just because I didn't end up going into biology). Also, having to take some humanities classes helped me become a better writer, and also helped me learn how to effectively discuss my work and why it is important. Those have proved to be extremely useful skills in life, both in academia as well as in the "real world". Now, I would also argue that, had I been a humanities major of some sort, taking some hard-core science classes would have been quite beneficial- it would have taught me about a different way to engage with and think about reality, which can only be beneficial to one's ability to think about literature, or music, or whatever. Oh, BTW- in addition to biology classes, I took a fair number of CS classes (almost enough for a minor), and I feel like my programming abilities over the years have definitely benefited from a liberal arts background. Furthermore, when I was doing hiring at my pre-grad-school job, I found that the best candidates weren't necessarily the ones with impeccable CS credentials. Often, the ones that worked out best in the end were often the ones that had broader academic horizons. They tended to have an easier time dealing with ambiguous situations and instructions, and were better able to "dive in" and "JFDI" when confronted with new and unfamiliar codebases, technologies, or projects. That's not to say that CS classes weren't important, or anything like that- just that there's a synergistic effect between good CS and the humanities. [1]: "Forced" isn't quite the right word, here, since getting a broad education was the whole reason I chose a liberal arts school. "Required," maybe?

hugh3 16y ago
I dunno. Personally I found that I could never enjoy things like literature and history until they stopped being educational requirements.