>Posted on 02/18/2010 8:04:08 PM PST by neverdem
‘Mickey Mouse’ degree courses should be swept away, and priorities in university education and research should reflect the challenges facing the country over the forthcoming decades.
No longer should the government be paying 18-year-olds to start courses on celebrity journalism, drama with waste management, or international football business management. These courses should be kicked into touch, especially at a time when the UK is desperately short of funding research into Alzheimer’s and other diseases of ageing, alternative energy sources and wider, more effective health care provision, all of which depend on leading-edge work in the fundamental sciences.
Massive cuts in the science budget have already been announced in this country at a time when President Barack Obama is seeking $66bn, an increase of 5.9% over 2010 levels, to address the strategic priorities on the other side of the Atlantic.
The number of undergraduates studying chemistry, physics, biology and mathematics here had stayed relatively constant over many decades, and the enormous expansion witnessed in tertiary education was largely in the non-science sector. This sector, too, played a vital role in the development of the country, and our future relies on exploiting the synergies provided by a workforce with a wide range of skills, but we now need some realism over the way ahead.
We need a population with an enduring set of skills, such as an understanding of the physical world around us, literacy and communication, numeracy, how to function and continue to learn in a complex society, and above all creativity, rather than an ability to satisfy some ephemeral demand that in ten years time will be viewed as a curiosity.
To take a leaf out of the US’s book, that means that science must not be cut in the same proportion as other subjects at university, but its central role for the future of this country recognised, and funding effectively ‘ring fenced’, so that in effect it becomes a more dominant component.
This is not a question of pleading a special case; such a move is essential if we are all to enjoy the lifestyle we have become accustomed to, and to ensure that we are prepared for the changes that will affect us all in the future.
imho the govt should only provide financial aid for math, science and computer science.
This country gives lip service to “we need more students studying science.”
My child is applying to colleges for the fall for dual majors in Marine Biology and Molecular Biology. Science scholarships for undergraduates are virtually non-existent. If you’re going for post graduate science degrees many more scholarships are out there. How do they expect kids to get to the graduate level if undergraduate scholarships are not available?
My kid was told by one of the colleges that in the next five years half of all government scientists will be retiring, so the jobs will be out there. Sure beats getting a degree in feminist studies!
Yeah, let’s turn everyone into miserable, one-track-brained zombies.
There is more to being educated than having a narrow set of skills.
>Do you have any proof of that? I’m in a M.S. program in science and considering a PhD.
If government would stop paying for ANY courses, then employers would start paying ONLY for courses that actually provide useful knowledge. And more importantly, that would spell an end to the artificially extended adolescence that results from endless years of being a "student" before being eligible for well-paying employment. People would be a lot better off taking one course at a time for 16 years, while working full or nearly full time, than being full-time students for 4 years, having no clue what real-world employers actually want or need, and ending up with a lot of debt accrued in the pursuit of often useless degrees.
As a guy with a BA, I think that most BA programs should be abandoned.
One should either get a major in a science/math discipline or get a full up classical education based on the trivium and quadrivium.
That is one of the dumbest posts I have ever read on FR. STEREOTYPE MUCH? Let me guess. Liberal Arts was your major. To bad you can't report stupidity as abuse to the moderators.
I’m a liberal arts major, and I think most of what the universities teach is fluff. Don’t see why it takes 4 years to do.
If that’s the best you could come up with, you’re not one to be commenting on intelligence.
I wouldn’t necessarily be that tight about it, but I agree that there are some seriously nonsense degrees being handed out. In my hometown of Olympia, WA, is a useless little college called “Evergreen State College”. They’ve lost their accreditation at least once because of their goofy curriculum, and their “free-form” “self-designed degree” garbage.
It wouldn’t burn me much to limit government aid to mainstream curricula and degrees. But I’d be careful about drawing that line *too* sharply. Lots of BA degrees like Finance, Accounting, Economics and such are perfectly serviceable fields of study in the real world.
Kill the humanities.
Even then, most money goes to lab sciences. A lot of that work is done in the private sector.
Math is woefully underfunded.
They expect to get them from China, India and Eastern Europe.
Yes indeed.
And nobody is suggesting getting rid of high school.
“Yeah, let’s turn everyone into miserable, one-track-brained zombies.
There is more to being educated than having a narrow set of skills.”
I know very few scientists that fit that description. Now when you get to Sociologists and “pick your category” studies crowd it’s a different story. What kind of job can someone from a studies program do that advances society. I can learn about these subjects on my own time. It is mostly a job program for men and white haters who can’t do anything useful.
I will use short sentences for your benefit. Julia get a life. People who major in hard science are just smarter than you. Get over it. Now, go play nice.
I’m not saying scientists and business people are dull people. I, too, know many who are well-rounded, colorful people AND highly skilled in their field. But if you take away the option for students to study subjects outside of their planned careers and discourage exploration, then you run the risk of turning out zombies.
I agree that it’s stupid to use government money to give people bogus feel-good degrees, but I don’t think college should HAVE to be all about getting a job and nothing else. Even if we throw out the stupid degrees (as we should), we shouldn’t throw out all courses that aren’t math and science.
And I also disagree with most people here (so it seems—I hope I’m wrong) that “left-brained” jobs are the only legitimate ones. It bugs me to no end when people take a dump on, say, arts education, then moan about the poor quality of and lack of conservative values in today’s arts and entertainment. If you want more conservative artists, support their education—don’t tell them to “get a real job” instead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.