The Liberal Arts education: A recipe for poverty?
Filed under: Money College, Extracurriculars, Technology, Career, Relationships, School
In today's New York Times, Patricia Cohen explored the growing perception among university students and administrators that the humanities are of questionable value in a world where technological advancement is the measure of progress and economic stability. As she noted, many universities are reducing or eliminating their humanities classes, and students are increasingly moving (or getting pushed) toward more useful, vocational majors.When I was a university instructor, I regularly had to deal with this perception, and it often reminded me of a scene from Four Weddings and a Funeral. One character, explaining why he didn't go to college, states "When you're working in the money markets, what use are the novels of Wordsworth?" A portion of my brain, which I call "the asshole English teacher" always sneered at this remark. After all, Wordsworth wrote poems, not novels, and if this boor had gone to college, he'd damn well know that!
However, underneath my snotty response, this question always bothered me. My university was focused on training engineers, which meant that my classes were filled with students who thought that English was a complete waste of time. Of course, I could understand; when I was a student, I felt the same way about Astronomy, Geology, Math, Statistics, and all the other scientific/technical classes.
This disdain for the humanities went all the way to the top of the university. My school's administration was dominated by former engineers, which meant that the humanities often had to justify their continuing existence, either explicitly in meetings or implicitly through standardization of our curricula. This perspective worked its way down to every teacher, and we were provided with statistics and quotes that we were instructed to cite if our students questioned why they were being forced to read a poem or write a paper.
The basic idea was that, while the sciences power the future, the liberal arts explain it; thus, even as the one keeps the world moving, the other gives it meaning and purpose. While this explanation is very satisfying for a philosophically-minded professor, it is a tough sell for monitor-tanned college freshmen whose horizons are fixed on Cadkey and programming.
I tried a different tack. Rather than telling my students why the humanities would give their lives richness and meaning, I taught them that language and psychology, history and sociology were tools that they needed to master if they ever hoped to sell their ideas. I tried to show that an awareness of audience makes it easier to promote a product or program, that an understanding of culture makes it possible to work in a culture. Most importantly, I taught them that logic and elegant design extend beyond the laboratory, and that their words were, in many ways, no different from the lines of code that they manipulated.
As the humanities continues to try to justify its existence, and as universities begin planning to cut them out, the focus shouldn't be on creating perfect little Lord Byrons and Emily Dickensons. Rather, higher education should set its sights on people like Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein: technological geniuses who could eloquently verbalize the wonder of their discoveries. Just as my astronomy, geology, and math classes gave me raw knowledge that I still use, English, history, and psychology classes gave me the tools to make that knowledge relevant. Until science perfects telepathy, words and culture are the building blocks of our communications, and an ability to use them is priceless.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-25-2009 @ 7:50PM
Scordo said...
see:
http://www.scordo.com/blog/2008/12/why-major-in-philosophy.html
Best,
Scordo.com
Reply
3-04-2009 @ 3:13PM
Student said...
As a Creative Writing, Literature, and Anceint Studies student, my answer has always been: "Yes, I will live in a box; I will also provide you with humanity while you bow before machines."
Joking aside, the world is in a sad state when the pursuit of knowledge (of any kind) is seen as foolish. Above all, the arts and humanities should not have to fight for relevance-- they have proved century after century that they are. It is left to the sciences to prove that these technological "advances" do not require a sacrifice of a soul. It is left to them to defend this bizarre claim that "advancement" is directly proportional to technology. The steady ground remains below the feet of the humanities majors, and the true intentions of post-secondary education surround them like clean air. Anyone who has pursued a true liberal arts education comprehends this. Those peoples without who cannot should not concern themselves with these "problems" anyway. As it should be, in our democratic and mostly free society, the choice to pursue this "obsolete" path remains with the individual.
Reply
3-11-2009 @ 2:50AM
Diane said...
The liberal arts education does it garentee a job in the future?
Not exactly, I have a liberal arts degree and A BA in Soc with cutural Anthroplogy and lot's of Psycholgy credits.
A friend he has a BA in English.Also , a better GPA in English.
Neither of us really did well with jobs.
But we came out of school druing a ression too and jobs were hard to come by.It was a ression in times past.
I worked making above minimun wage for about three years then decided to get married have kids and leave the workforce.
While I was making more than minmium wage at the time I was not working in the best of places. It was less than I had hoped and it felt dismal for me. I thought I would go back and work again but didn't cause my children had special needs.
The psychology helped and knowing I had a background in child development I would be able to adress my kids needs.
As a person I have grown and learned that stuff I didn't think I really needed was most definately needed in life and in society.
But if you are going to work for the City: any city you need two years of college credits to do so. Now you do need a Liberal arts education to pick up the garbage even. Poliece and fire or any city agancy a liberal arts education is a must. So I don't see it disapparing. The tech careers are great but not every one is a Techie....
The jobs have changed the Knowlege needed has changed and this is where America has failed. Our students don't match what jobs are out there. Oppertunity to find what your good at is so hard these days.
I changed my major about five times in college do to requirements and for what the avalible jobs might be... what I ended up with didn't match the job market.
Reply
3-11-2009 @ 6:24PM
David F said...
I don't want to sound like one of those people, but I just have to say this: your post argues for the value of the liberal arts education, yet the post itself has several misspellings and grammarical errors! I will be positive and assume that you are challenged as a typist, not necessarily as a linguist. That being said, I do agree very strongly with the content of your posting.
3-16-2009 @ 10:34PM
The artist said...
David, you are a hypocrite, and one of the worst kind. You point out the fact that even though the post does defend the education of the liberal arts, there are several gramatical errors within it. You obviously know something about the english language, which is more than I can say for most people I know. I commend you for this. However-and this is where you are the hypocrite-you cited many mispellings in the post, and yet you failed to spell the word "grammatical" correctly. You said it was "grammarical" which, by the way,is not an actual word. Now I am not sure if you failed to double-check what you typed, or if you just figured that technology and spell-check would fix any spelling errors, but either way, you have failed. So you have no right to criticize someone who cannot spell as wonderfully as the 1st place winner at the spelling bee, when you yourself cannot even spell-or double check what you type.
Reply
3-16-2009 @ 10:41PM
The Artist said...
David, you are a hypocrite, and one of the worst kind. You do point out that there are several grammatical errors in a post that defends the teaching of the liberal arts. You have a good understanding of the english language, and for that, I must commend you. However-and this is the hypocrite part-you pointed out several errors in spelling, and yet you failed to spell the word "grammatical" correctly. Instead of spelling"grammatical", you spelled "grammarical"(which is not an actualy word, by the way.) Now, I do not know whether or not you failed to double check what you typed, or if you put your confidence in technology and spell-check to fix any spelling mistakes you have had-but either way-you have failed. You have no right to criticize somebody who may not spell as well as the 1st place champion at the spelling bee because you cannot even spell the word "grammatical."
From,
The Artist
Reply
3-23-2009 @ 7:19PM
Catherine said...
Many engineers and scientists have disdain for the humanities because they are not fact-based. Why must we care what race, gender, or sexual orientation an author is -- why not just read the best literature available? Why do we care whose idea it is -- why don't we just discuss the merit of the idea? Unfortunately, that would require facts, which can be proven true or not true.
Today's substitute in too many cases is feelings. We all have feelings, and who am I to say that mine are more valid than yours, or his, or that guy's over there. Well, I am not interested in your "feelings" -- discuss the plot, the hero's fatal flaw, the timeless theme, etc., but spare me your feelings. I've had some excellent lit courses, but way too many wandering, touchy-feely semi-incoherent excursions into ivory tower fantasy land.
I look at the young whippersnappers of today and despair of their utter lack of historical knowledge. They don't even know how little they know. No wonder they fall for any good-sounding idea that comes along, and parrot it back until the next good-sounding idea gets imprinted on the top layer of brain matter.
More humanities -- no!! Better humanities -- yes!
Reply