What Price a Degree?

[AuntShecky]

Yesterday a number of Sunday papers carried this column by a UConn professor who also writes for the Hartford Courant. Just by chance, Prof. Barreca addresses the topic we've been discussing in this thread: why should colleges continue to teach the humanities?

Because of the exorbitant costs of higher education, many students and parents primarily consider the "R.O.I" (that old racetrack abbreviation meaning "return on investment.") Increasingly, undergraduates are choosing "practical" fields for their majors, perhaps to the detriment to the ideal of a what an education is supposed to mean. It's not about education any more; it's all about job training.

To her credit, Gina Barreca takes issue with this trend with her highly persuasive article in which she states

Of course we want our children to find useful and profitable work when they graduate from college, if indeed they are fortunate enough to have been able to attend one, but we also need to remember that a real education is not simply the acquisition of a set of skills. Each of us, regardless of birth or class, deserves to be part of the larger conversation that culture provides.

That people of every economic class should have access to and learn about culture is a point well-taken. For the hundreds of angry shouts railing against "elitism" in the arts, there may be only one quiet voice who champions art for everyone, in a way making "elitism" universal (One of these voices belongs to Earl Shorris, the focus of "Escaping the Surround of Force," a much-earlier LitNet thread.)


Prof. Barreca also believes that culture-- not math and science-- is a force to unite people from disparate walks of life:

Ever listen to what the people who really run things discuss? CEOs, CFOs, politicians from all parties, ? songwriters, engineers, surgeons, museum curators and producers of non-reality-based television programming? They don’t talk about work. . .They talk about books, films, art, music and poetry. . .
And there’s another reason to study poetry: As one honest friend declared, the study of literature can be justified by the fact that nobody ever charmed a girl by reciting an equation.

The article concludes with a warning to Academia against the harmful effects of dismissing arts and the humanities, such as shortchanging students the full benefit of a good education:

Public universities are in particular danger of contorting and, at their worst moments, crippling their student body if they define themselves as simply a way for students to get better jobs. In such a caged context, colleges are in danger of becoming service institutions: We will train the Workers of the World, sure — only we won’t give them anything in the humanities to unite them, inspire them, sensitize them or enlighten them.

Needless to say, yours fooly agrees completely. How about you?




http://azstarnet.com/ap/commentary/g...347940b8d.html

[Hawkman]

Something which should perhaps be considered noteworthy with regard to the status of the humanities as an academic subject is that unlike sciences (which are non political) and business studies, (which only serves the status quo) they are predominantly governed by leftist thinking. So what? Well, as it is the duty of the left to raise concerns about, and criticise a globalising society which is almost completely dominated by capitalist liberal economies, the most effective means of marginalising those critiques is to down play the value of the humanities. As has been noted in other threads on this forum, contact hours are reduced in humanities subjects in university and tuition fees are being increased, which renders the university education more difficult to attain for the economically disadvantaged.

Sorry - there was originally a lot more of this but half of it has gone missing, despite having been saved. So much for restoring auto saved content. Can't be bothered to write it all out again.

Live and be well - H

[AuntShecky]

Something which should perhaps be considered noteworthy with regard to the status of the humanities as an academic subject is that unlike sciences (which are non political) and business studies, (which only serves the status quo) they are predominantly governed by leftist thinking. So what? Well, as it is the duty of the left to raise concerns about, and criticise a globalising society which is almost completely dominated by capitalist liberal economies, the most effective means of marginalising those critiques is to down play the value of the humanities. As has been noted in other threads on this forum, contact hours are reduced in humanities subjects in university and tuition fees are being increased, which renders the university education more difficult to attain for the economically disadvantaged.


Live and be well - H

These are all valid issues, with the possible exception of science being "non-political," stated with the understanding that political arguments are verboten on these forums. Apparently, there have been so-called debates about global warming, even though indisputable facts have increasingly porven the truth about this world-wide problem.

All the more reason to insist that today's college students receive a complete and well-rounded education, including the arts and the humanities.

[Clopin]

That's true here in Oz too. If you earn less than $47000 per annum then your Higher Education Debt doesn't kick in so there are a multitude of interesting jobs out there - even career at part time level and one can thrive without ever having to pay the government back so I wouldn't be too quick to put all students in the victim basket. I have two degrees and work in the public service which in Oz is packed with benefits like double super, job security and high pay but I work part time and haven't paid my $8000 debt back yet.

You know the government didn't 'earn' that money right? That's money other people provided to pay for services which are supposed to be useful to them, which probably doesn't include your two useless, indulgent degrees. The cushy government job you mention just adds to your guilt amigo.

Besides I see no problem with people getting trades or learning real professions and actually having to earn a living. Anybody can self educate, get a library card they are free. You can even download the curriculum from top schools directly from their websites and watch many lectures online. Education is the cheapest it's been in the history of mankind, but that useless piece of paper that qualifies you to do absolutely nothing? Yes that's an expansive scam.

Also the quality of a university education seems to be complete crap nowadays. My girlfriends room mate is a business student and she hasn't read a book outside of the classroom (so she reads maybe ten books a year) in her entire life aside from trite **** like Harry Potter and Janet Evanovich. The courses she's enrolled in include; public speaking, a history of the Beatles, astronomy and greek mythology and a few retarded business classes where she learns how to shake hands and print business cards.

You have misread, I'm afraid. Canada DOES NOT have the same system as the UK. In Canada, you're responsible for paying your debts in full, no matter what.

Yes that's realy terrible... being expected to pay back money you borrowed. My heart weeps for people who expected to be able to spend four to six years critiquing Herzog films, talking about Andy Warhol and reading Russian poetry on the federal dime without having to be responsible for their own spending and then 'discovering' that the hackneyed education they picked up is totally worthless regarding absolutely everything.

Canada (where I live) has such a shortage of skilled tradespeople and frankly unskilled workers that the country is going so far as to import labour for decently paid and available positions, and yet all the 'smart' people are employed at Starbucks with their liberal arts degrees. The stigma against trades and actually working for a living is perpetuated by such idiotic buffoons that it pains me to even think about all the degrees handed out to these imbeciles annually.

[Emil Miller]

Yes that's realy terrible... being expected to pay back money you borrowed. My heart weeps for people who expected to be able to spend four to six years critiquing Herzog films, talking about Andy Warhol and reading Russian poetry on the federal dime without having to be responsible for their own spending and then 'discovering' that the hackneyed education they picked up is totally worthless regarding absolutely everything.

Canada (where I live) has such a shortage of skilled tradespeople and frankly unskilled workers that the country is going so far as to import labour for decently paid and available positions, and yet all the 'smart' people are employed at Starbucks with their liberal arts degrees. The stigma against trades and actually working for a living is perpetuated by such idiotic buffoons that it pains me to even think about all the degrees handed out to these imbeciles annually.

Ah yes, without the arts we could all be clever robots, but long before the word robot was coined, man had realised the truth of the biblical saying that:"Man shall not live by bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.''
Regardless of whether one believes in God or not, it's obvious that art is integral to human existence, otherwise why would music be so cherished by mathematicians who often make up the bulk of chamber music players. I agree that there seems to be a stigma attached to trades that concern our purely physical needs, but that doesn't negate the spritual requirement that seperates humans' from the animals, as much as people often like and care for animals.

[Paulclem]

Yes that's realy terrible... being expected to pay back money you borrowed. My heart weeps for people who expected to be able to spend four to six years critiquing Herzog films, talking about Andy Warhol and reading Russian poetry on the federal dime without having to be responsible for their own spending and then 'discovering' that the hackneyed education they picked up is totally worthless regarding absolutely everything.

Canada (where I live) has such a shortage of skilled tradespeople and frankly unskilled workers that the country is going so far as to import labour for decently paid and available positions, and yet all the 'smart' people are employed at Starbucks with their liberal arts degrees. The stigma against trades and actually working for a living is perpetuated by such idiotic buffoons that it pains me to even think about all the degrees handed out to these imbeciles annually.

I think your blame is directed a the wrong people. The skills gap is present in the UK as well. Perhaps it's present in other western countries too, but the blame - if there is any for wanting to become better educated in the subject you like and perhaps excel at - lies with the government who consistently fail to fund and promote a broad and balanced education with a clear message about progression and careers.

It is also the fault of the education establishment for not really understanding anything outside the educational world and thus not promoting, encouraging and signposting those subjects which will fill the skills gap.

It is also the fault of higher education for not being able to provide combinations which can nurture the artistic side whilst providing real skills training. They provide courses of three to four years in universities, racking up student debt when they are in from October to May, with often extended Christmas and Easter holidays with many subjects providing 10 or 12 hours teaching time week. Questionable value for money I would say.

It's time for a change, and time to stop blaming students who are only taking what is available, what they see as being worthwhile with the limited options they are presented with.

Ah yes, without the arts we could all be clever robots, but long before the word robot was coined, man had realised the truth of the biblical saying that:"Man shall not live by bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.''
Regardless of whether one believes in God or not, it's obvious that art is integral to human existence, otherwise why would music be so cherished by mathematicians who often make up the bulk of chamber music players. I agree that there seems to be a stigma attached to trades that concern our purely physical needs, but that doesn't negate the spritual requirement that seperates humans' from the animals, as much as people often like and care for animals.

Agreed. I find your views refreshing liberal Brian.

[Clopin]

Ah yes, without the arts we could all be clever robots, but long before the word robot was coined, man had realised the truth of the biblical saying that:"Man shall not live by bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.''
Regardless of whether one believes in God or not, it's obvious that art is integral to human existence, otherwise why would music be so cherished by mathematicians who often make up the bulk of chamber music players. I agree that there seems to be a stigma attached to trades that concern our purely physical needs, but that doesn't negate the spritual requirement that seperates humans' from the animals, as much as people often like and care for animals.

When did I suggest getting rid of 'the arts'? This is a totally fallacious, probably intentional, misunderstanding on your part; the idea that without people going and getting pointless degrees nobody would read or contribute to art. I don't have a degree and I read ten books last month, it's really easy to do... I went to the library, took them out and then read them, it was free as well.

[OrphanPip]

Canada (where I live) has such a shortage of skilled tradespeople and frankly unskilled workers that the country is going so far as to import labour for decently paid and available positions, and yet all the 'smart' people are employed at Starbucks with their liberal arts degrees. The stigma against trades and actually working for a living is perpetuated by such idiotic buffoons that it pains me to even think about all the degrees handed out to these imbeciles annually.

The labour shortage is a myth perpetuated by companies with a vested interest in depressing labour costs. Several economists and analysts have reported on the fact that labour "shortages" in Canada have essentially not changed in decades. Yet all of a sudden its a crisis that require importing workers? What about the offloading of work training on to the public purse by corporate interests? And then they expect us to subsidize the importation of miners from China? The trades are the most heavily subsidized of all education in Canada. You can get a trades diploma for $100 dollars from a public college in Quebec. And the fact of the matter is that the service industry accounts for the majority of the Canadian economy, there are not so many trades jobs as the media pundits would have people believe.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business...603/story.html

The fact of the matter is a university was never intended as a training centre, it's meant for education.

[Emil Miller]

Agreed. I find your views refreshing liberal Brian.

Liberal is as liberal does and there are cases where it doesn't.

[*Classic*Charm*]

The fact of the matter is a university was never intended as a training centre, it's meant for education.

This!

A friend of mine works in recruiting for an Ontario university, and we were talking about the argument made (by myself, as well as others) that universities provide lots of knowledge and no skills. I feel very frustrated that I don't see a future utilizing my degree until I have acquired the skills which will allow me to apply my knowledge. She gets frustrated by that argument, given the fact that universities were never intended to provide skills. Universities were created with the intention of being places where those who wished to learn came to listen to those who wished to teach. They were intended to serve as, essentially, lecture halls- to propagate theory and knowledge. They were never intended to become sites for the mass training of trades, which were until relatively recently learned in the field.

A degree isn't worth much; an education is priceless.

That's all well and good, but for the fact that I cannot apply my education without the necessary skill.

For example, I have an agriculture degree (if you want to get technical about it). I have a fair bit of knowledge about a lot of aspects of animal health, physiology and husbandry. I do not, however, have the skills to apply my knowledge, which is why I want to go to vet school, which will both provide me with more knowledge and give me the skills to use it.

[mal4mac]

... I cannot apply my education without the necessary skill.

For example, I have an agriculture degree (if you want to get technical about it). I have a fair bit of knowledge about a lot of aspects of animal health, physiology and husbandry. I do not, however, have the skills to apply my knowledge, which is why I want to go to vet school, which will both provide me with more knowledge and give me the skills to use it.

But without an education you are more likely to be at a loss when something unusual happens.

I'm reading "Spillover" by David Quammen at the moment which is a wonderful account of zoonosis, and the widely educated vets & other specialists, who have managed to advance this essential science, and thereby save countless animal and human lives. The vets (they seem to be mostly vets) are amazing not only for their skill & bravery but for their wide ranging intellects, many have taken a second degree or two in subjects like epidemiology or tropical medicine. No way would a narrowly trained vet have any chance of advancing such a field. I suggest you read this book, it should make you feel that your agriculture degree has not been a waste of time. Maybe your agricultural knowledge could help you and other vets when you encounter unusual cases. For example, it was found that palm oil sap, infected by bats, was the source of one virus that killed many humans. Detailed knowledge of agriculture, anthropology, zoology and virology was needed to put all these pieces together!

[LitNetIsGreat]

I don't have a degree and I read ten books last month, it's really easy to do... I went to the library, took them out and then read them, it was free as well.

I have seen a lot of comments such as this one, which seems to be suggesting that you can get the same value from a library card as you can from studying a complete degree. To me this is about the same suggestion as studying to be a medical doctor by reading Wikipedia and watching YouTube videos.

If this was the case and all you need was a library card or Wikipedia, then let's just close all the universities down completely. We can stick up a supermarket or a McDonald's in the space instead and for education you can walk around trying to find a library still open after government cuts.

[Clopin]

That was one of the stupidest posts I've ever read. Congrats.

I was going to just leave it at that, but here I'll just go and point out why your post was totally retarded and betrayed a stunning lack of logical cohesion in your thought process.

You start by countering my suggestion that reading classic works of literature/non fiction is a valid educative process and an autodidactic education can yield as many benefits as taking a degree by suggesting that this is the equivalent to watching youtube videos on medicine. What makes you say that? First of all, medicine is largely a trade which requires sophisticated tools, machinery and use of fine motor skills and the failure to perform adequately can result in loss of life or debilitating injury for patients. I also don't believe you can learn to be a carpenter by reading books on carpentry; you have to actually go out and build things to master the technique. Similarly you can not learn to paint like Rembrandt solely from reading books on painting, and in all of these fields dedicated hands on training will be more valuable than book learning (youtube videos might often actually be of use though).

Now it was my assumption that this thread was largely considering degrees in liberal arts and humanities (a degree in medicine is obviously very valuable) in which case reading the actual classic works and criticism which are the curriculum of said university degrees can't really be dismissed as "watching videos on youtube" because that's simply... not a fair comparison.

You next move on to Wikipedia and mcdonalds (which I never mentioned) and bring up closing down universities and replacing them with supermarkets and fast food restaurants as some sort of horrible anti education dystopia which I suppose my ideas on self educating would naturally bring about.

I have plenty of friends with "complete degrees" and they haven't opened a book in years and they know absolutely nothing because getting a BA with almost purely elective courses of dubious educational merit is totally possible and in fact easy to do.

Now for some people who are serious scholars and researchers universities are invaluable, but for most people you can educate yourself just fine without spending the hundred grand.

[LitNetIsGreat]

My post was perfectly accurate and only confirmed by yours above and your clouded anecdotes, like the one below:

I have plenty of friends with "complete degrees" and they haven't opened a book in years and they know absolutely nothing because getting a BA with almost purely elective courses of dubious educational merit is totally possible and in fact easy to do.

From which you conclude, basically, humanity degrees are of 'dubious educational merit' which can be easily replaced with enough visits to the library because, apparently, these degrees are really 'easy to do' anyway. By the same standard therefore I say you can replace theoretical knowledge in other fields in the same way. You don't need to go to medical lectures, mathematical lectures or any other degree that you personally deem worthy because, I assume, you can also get this knowledge from library cards...or Wikipedia or YouTube. Why not, if you can get enough knowledge from library cards, let's just do that?

(I could easily throw out similar clouded anecdotes about how I have gained more knowledge about some personal medical issues from reading online, than I have from my doctor. So I could conclude that all doctors are pointless.)

Again it comes back to perspective. You don't value humanity degrees (it clearly seems) therefore we don't need them.

It reminds me of the Monty Python sketch. They should update it with subjects - the tall one is science, the middle one is literature and the small one is chess study!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2k1iRD2f-c

"I look down on him because he has a humanities degree...etc, etc"

[*Classic*Charm*]

... your post was totally retarded ...

You don't give yourself or your education much credit with this little gem.