I had a job one time where our VP over Software Development was a BA in English Lit. Go figure. I was not there long enough to gauge her effectiveness.
Only if you miss the WHOLE POINT of college... and also don’t understand the word VALUE.
The statement of what a fluff major can make over the years might be true for a lot of them.
I teach at a medium size university that has traditionally focused on older, returning, lifetime learners. That is the key. Many of the students I see in courses who want an IT degree or business degree are former fluff majors.
Now, taking and learning from the English and history courses is still important for a well-rounded educated individual but those types of majors won’t in the long run be very satisfying for most students in the long run.
A lot of college majors are hobbies — Art History, Literature, theater, etc.
while it may be true that every one catches up to others, the only reason humanities etc make any money is that they go into teaching in college or completely change their job searches to something more practical....
The only way to judge the effectiveness of a liberal arts education is to find out how well the student adheres to communist ideologies.
“Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.”— Joseph Stalin
Maybe in the 19th century when people went to college to be more rounded in their education, when most of the folks going were on the life path to “good” jobs before ever getting near college. But this is the 21st century, now we go to college to get jobs, and you need to gauge the cost of the degree to the wage it’ll get you.
No, it’s not.
Wheeeeee!!!
Would you like fries with that would seem to be a follow up question.
I'll happily agree with that premise, if universities will also agree that money is a terrible way to pay for a degree.
Value is entirely subjective, on an individual basis. But if you look on a more macro scale, as the average return on that investment increases, so too does the average value. I know several people are happy working a job, paying their bills and buying the beer. They’re content with the status quo, and don’t mind if that’s how the rest of their lives go. An expensive engineering degree has little value to them, but the cheap humanities degree they have is well worth the position they’re in. But some people want to achieve more (or less) and for them, a higher-earning degree has more value, and a humanities one, none (or no degree has value if they don’t need it).
Yes, while one is standing in line at the Church Pantry, after having been to the UIC office and by the County Services office to reapply for SNAP, etc., they can reflect on the real meaning and import of selected choices from The Canterbury Tales and relate that to current times of “Party in the USA.”
One of the kids has a BS in Chem, a Masters in Biology and and Doctorate in Physiology and is working outside those fields with great satisfaction. Another kid as a BS in Chem and General Science, a minor in Physics and didn’t want to battle the reasearch bound guys in Masters programs so is teaching science.
Another family major started with a BA in History but also later got an MBA and spent a good career in Healthcare Management managing clinical people with clinical educations.
While formal education can be a qualifier, it doesn’t dictate where you end up. It sure didn’t with me.
Students who were going there primarily to get a truly universal education and whose goals were to learn from the great art and literature of the past and help preserve and advance it going forward.
It would be so great if the humanities were once again seen as a guilty pleasure rather than as some sort of humanizing program. A luxury that only the wealthy could afford to partake in full time.
Eliminate all of the psychobabble and sociobabble from the humanities and replace it with good research and well-considered analysis.
Sure, just “Do What You Love” and soon Skittle-pooping Unicorns will be showering you with love. But not money.
Read his book:
http://www.npr.org/2013/10/21/236207605/scott-adams-explains-how-to-fail-at-almost-everything-except-dilbert
As individuals and society, we must perform a cost benefit analysis of 4 years of life and $50K to $200K of cost.
A religious or philosophical group can say the benefit is beyond measure. A college cannot, when there are many lower cost options and better uses of personal and collective (taxpayer) money.
Articles like this are analogous to throwing hunks of red meat to starving dogs. You see, many Freepers worship at the feet of the Great God, Engineering. And you don’t get a degree in said subject, you’re just a pathetic loser.
They concede that degrees in some other disciplines, all of which must be in the “hard sciences” category may be worthwhile. But that’s about it.