Replies

At UT I saw two kinds of one semester courses for students outside a major, from the inside:

1. Liberal Arts major taking a science course: Student signs up because it sounds fun, normal and easy, such as a semester course choice which, if they were a communication major (future reporter), would be the single required college level math or science course to graduate. One so easy it would not be for graduation credit in STEM. I knew a teaching assistant in Astronomy. The Astronomy profs made these elective science courses pathetically easy, because it brought $$$ into the department budget per student. They competed between departments for bucks to teach the easiest and sexiest / funnest STEM electives but those students complained that they had to be learn one equation (Newton’s law of Gravitation). These are your current Walter Krankheits.

2.Science or Engineering major taking liberal arts course: Student signs up because it sounds fun and normal. Example English course on “Kurt Vonnegut”. In reality a leftist brainwashing course where you could lose your GPA for grad or professional school for disagreeing about the leftist social activist / social justice / Marxist cryptic messages the teaching assistant saw in Vonnegut’s sci fi / humor satirical novels and stories. Or in Dickens. Ideology test from hell: you sign up for fun and they kneecap your future career based on political correctness.

I used to go to the Co-op (student bookstore) and read books from different majors and textbooks. The Communications (journalism Radio / Television / Film etc.) dept had their own history courses because the History dept wasn’t radical leftist enough ( 70s) . It was history rewrite without the chance of mixing it up with anybody who knew historical facts.

The Law School textbook store had required Marxism textbooks. (80s)

By contrast, A&M had educational objectives set out in writing for every course, and you could test out of anything if you proved you had mastered those educational objectives.

UT did not. I don’t think they didn’t want to say what they were really teaching out loud. They wanted your ass in a chair in their reducation camp to brainwash you where the parents and legislature wouldn’t know.

One time there was an srticle in the Austin Statesman ( I call it the Altered Statesman) about their student application and acceptance interview process, and they bragged how they asked “tell me about an issue where you disagree with your patrents.” I.E. if you had agreed with and gave some weight to your parents guidance, they didn’t want you.

I was on an advisory committee for one of the engineering departments at UT many years ago. One of the committee functions was to advise the department how to balance the requirements of the Texas legislature with the overall academic requirements of the University, with the needs of industry for hiring UT graduates. A proposed graduation "requirement" came up for discussion, that an engineering student demonstrate an appreciation for engineering. Time consuming debate ensued. I laughed and said I was surprised anyone was taking this seriously. When asked for my opinion, I said I had a few thoughts on it. 1. It was bullshit. How are you going to measure said appreciation? 2. They (engineering students) are already here. That demonstrates some level of appreciation that they are sitting in class and their parents are paying for it. 3. How hard is this really? Just drive your car across a bridge. That covers almost all branches of engineering and when you safely arrive on the other side you can appreciate that you're not dead.

Discussion stopped and the "requirement" was rejected.