5 ms·

While I didn't particularly like it as a student, looking back on university ~15 years later, the educational component that I feel like I got the most out of w

by tjr 11y ago

While I didn't particularly like it as a student, looking back on university ~15 years later, the educational component that I feel like I got the most out of was being forced to take a variety of sundry non-major classes. Most of the major material I probably would have learned on my own anyway; it was the other 'breadth' classes that, well, broadened my thinking in ways I did not expect. Though from a purely vocational standpoint, the elimination of the breadth classes would seemingly allow for not only faster graduation, but also taking more major classes. That may well be a good thing too.

henrikschroder 11y ago
Agree, outside of my comp sci. major, I took courses in cognitive psychology, history of science, and technical writing, and looking back, those were very useful. However, it's frustrating that it's regarded as perfectly fine to require STEM students to take courses in breadth subjects, but completely preposterous to require liberal arts students to take breadth courses in hard science.
- hackuser 11y ago
  > it's regarded as perfectly fine to require STEM students to take courses in breadth subjects, but completely preposterous to require liberal arts students to take breadth courses in hard science. Hmmm ... at my U. science was required for everyone. Are you sure that wasn't the case at yours? They weren't required to take the most difficult science classes but the same is true for STEM majors taking liberal arts courses. (I'm using "liberal arts" to mean humanities, social sciences, and the arts.)
  - ForHackernews 11y ago
    The "Liberal arts" also include physical science and mathematics: https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberal-arts https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberal-arts If you mean "humanities and social sciences" then say that.
    - henrikschroder 11y ago
      Thanks for the correction, that's what I meant!
  - henrikschroder 11y ago
    Interesting. I went to an institute of technology, so I'm pretty sure they didn't require science classes for humanities and social sciences majors (thanks for the correction!), since they didn't offer those majors. :-) But I know the neighbouring universities offered science classes for non-science majors students, although it was never a requirement, and mentioning that maybe it ought to would make most people upset. It's been twenty years now though, but I don't think the situation has changed, sadly.
- douche 11y ago
  I think at most colleges, you do have to get at least a couple of science credits. Of course, they are usually along the lines of "Stars for Stoners" (Intro to Astronomy), "Rocks for Jocks" (Intro to Geology), or "DNA for Dumbasses" (Intro to Biology) I'll be honest, I took Stars for Stoners, and it was a very interesting class. But it certainly was not hard, and given the choice to do it again, without having to fill the general reqs, I'd spend the time reading some good hard science fiction and taking another higher-level history or computer science course instead.
  - bradleyjg 11y ago
    The intro level humanities courses may not have as clever nicknames but they bear the same relationship to upper level courses and the discipline as a whole as those classes do. A 100 level history course aimed at non-majors looking for distribution classes isn't going to teach much "real history". Not even close. At best you are getting a small morsel of the methods and philosophies of the field buried deep inside a large scoop of crowd pleasing "and then, and then" readings and discussion. Not that there's anything wrong with that approach to pedagogy for either the scientists or the historians.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
taylorwc 11y ago
I have very mixed emotions about this. There were certainly some non-major-specific courses that I had to take that did have a positive effect on my thinking and reasoning ability. The majority, however, were a giant waste of time and money, and I still resent being forced to take them. May be just as much a reflection on my alma mater as on me.
WalterBright 11y ago
The most useful non-STEM class I took turned out be basic accounting.
brightball 11y ago
I have to agree. Pysch 101 was the best course I took in college outside of my Comp Sci classes. Having classes with group projects in business and english were really helpful from a sheer communication standpoint but there were parts that were overdone. At my college my major had specific classes that we could choose from for the electives and only a few "true" electives. I think it would have been much better to just allocate the rest of the hours to pure electives and just give a category. Choosing what I want to learn about vs being told "learn one of these three things" would have led me to be more interested in the subjects in the first place.
nickpsecurity 11y ago
My college's critical thinking, diversity, religion, and environmental science classes were outside my major. Yet, they made for fun discussions and learning experiences. Met some good friends, too. I can tell that things I learned in those classes have had a long-term effect.

by tjr 11y ago

henrikschroder 11y ago

Agree, outside of my comp sci. major, I took courses in cognitive psychology, history of science, and technical writing, and looking back, those were very useful. However, it's frustrating that it's regarded as perfectly fine to require STEM students to take courses in breadth subjects, but completely preposterous to require liberal arts students to take breadth courses in hard science.

hackuser 11y ago
> it's regarded as perfectly fine to require STEM students to take courses in breadth subjects, but completely preposterous to require liberal arts students to take breadth courses in hard science. Hmmm ... at my U. science was required for everyone. Are you sure that wasn't the case at yours? They weren't required to take the most difficult science classes but the same is true for STEM majors taking liberal arts courses. (I'm using "liberal arts" to mean humanities, social sciences, and the arts.)
- ForHackernews 11y ago
  The "Liberal arts" also include physical science and mathematics: https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberal-arts https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberal-arts If you mean "humanities and social sciences" then say that.
  - henrikschroder 11y ago
    Thanks for the correction, that's what I meant!
- henrikschroder 11y ago
  Interesting. I went to an institute of technology, so I'm pretty sure they didn't require science classes for humanities and social sciences majors (thanks for the correction!), since they didn't offer those majors. :-) But I know the neighbouring universities offered science classes for non-science majors students, although it was never a requirement, and mentioning that maybe it ought to would make most people upset. It's been twenty years now though, but I don't think the situation has changed, sadly.
douche 11y ago
I think at most colleges, you do have to get at least a couple of science credits. Of course, they are usually along the lines of "Stars for Stoners" (Intro to Astronomy), "Rocks for Jocks" (Intro to Geology), or "DNA for Dumbasses" (Intro to Biology) I'll be honest, I took Stars for Stoners, and it was a very interesting class. But it certainly was not hard, and given the choice to do it again, without having to fill the general reqs, I'd spend the time reading some good hard science fiction and taking another higher-level history or computer science course instead.
- bradleyjg 11y ago
  The intro level humanities courses may not have as clever nicknames but they bear the same relationship to upper level courses and the discipline as a whole as those classes do. A 100 level history course aimed at non-majors looking for distribution classes isn't going to teach much "real history". Not even close. At best you are getting a small morsel of the methods and philosophies of the field buried deep inside a large scoop of crowd pleasing "and then, and then" readings and discussion. Not that there's anything wrong with that approach to pedagogy for either the scientists or the historians.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

taylorwc 11y ago

I have very mixed emotions about this. There were certainly some non-major-specific courses that I had to take that did have a positive effect on my thinking and reasoning ability. The majority, however, were a giant waste of time and money, and I still resent being forced to take them. May be just as much a reflection on my alma mater as on me.

WalterBright 11y ago

The most useful non-STEM class I took turned out be basic accounting.

brightball 11y ago

I have to agree. Pysch 101 was the best course I took in college outside of my Comp Sci classes. Having classes with group projects in business and english were really helpful from a sheer communication standpoint but there were parts that were overdone. At my college my major had specific classes that we could choose from for the electives and only a few "true" electives. I think it would have been much better to just allocate the rest of the hours to pure electives and just give a category. Choosing what I want to learn about vs being told "learn one of these three things" would have led me to be more interested in the subjects in the first place.

nickpsecurity 11y ago

My college's critical thinking, diversity, religion, and environmental science classes were outside my major. Yet, they made for fun discussions and learning experiences. Met some good friends, too. I can tell that things I learned in those classes have had a long-term effect.