Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday March 16 2017, @12:41PM   Printer-friendly
from the sit-stay-cook dept.

If you ever need to strike up a conversation with a group of academics, a surefire way to get them talking is to ask about their graduate training. Where did they train, in what methods, in which lab, under what mentor? People will speak with great pride about their training as an economist, historian, chemist, philosopher, or classicist. If, on the other hand, you need to make a quick exit, try sharing the opinion that undergraduate education should include a lot more vocational training. You'll soon find yourself standing alone or responding to accusations of classism and questions about your commitment to social and racial equality. You might even hear that "training is for dogs," a common refrain in higher education that carries the unpleasant implication that skills-based education is the equivalent of teaching students to sit, stay, and shake hands.

For reasons that are not entirely clear, in the United States training is widely understood to be the end, not the beginning, of an educational journey that leads to a particular job or career. Undergraduates are supposed to get a general education that will prepare them for training, which they will presumably get once they land a job or go to graduate school. Any training that happens before then just doesn't count.

It is because of this belief that general-education requirements are the center of the bachelor's degree and are concentrated in the first two years of a four-year program. The general-education core is what distinguishes the B.A. from a vocational program and makes it more than "just training." It is designed to ensure that all degree holders graduate with a breadth of knowledge in addition to an in-depth understanding of a particular subject area. Students are exposed to a broad range of disciplines and are pushed to think critically about the social, cultural, and historical context in which they live. It is supposed to guarantee that all graduates can write, have a basic understanding of the scientific method, have heard of the Marshall Plan and Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and know that iambic pentameter has something to do with poetry.

While few would challenge the importance of general education, both to students and to a well-functioning democracy, there is good reason to question why it has to come at the beginning of a B.A.—and just how general and theoretical it needs to be. The pyramid structure of the bachelor's degree, which requires that students start with the broad base of general requirements before they specialize, is what makes college unappealing to so many young people.

It doesn't have to be this way. There is no iron law of learning dictating that students must master general theories or be fully versed in a particular historical or cultural context before learning how to do things. Some students will do well under this approach, but there is solid evidence that some students learn better through experience. For these students, theory does not make sense until it is connected to action. Putting a lot of general or theoretical courses on the front end just leaves them disengaged or, even worse, discouraged. They will do better if they start by learning how to master certain tasks or behaviors and then explore the more abstract concepts behind the actions.

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 16 2017, @03:04PM (1 child)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday March 16 2017, @03:04PM (#479821) Journal

    Well, there's nothing to argue with, there. I'm completely in agreement that a formal education isn't necessary for a person to be interesting. But, an education is necessary. Father in law, for instance. His formal education ended at the 6th grade. But, he pursued his education all of his life. The old man knew stuff that I never did figure out. I'm half sure that I've mentioned him here, before. If you could state any mathematical problem to him, he would give you the solution, faster than anyone nearby could punch it into a calculator. Not just simple sums, but any algebra or geometry problem. I don't think he grasped Einstein's physics math, but I can't say for sure. All that was required, was that YOU were both smart and fluent enough to state the problem correctly.

    The old man knew a butt-load of poetry, he knew his Bible, he knew agriculture, trees, and animal husbandry. He dabbled in just about everything that I could imagine.

    No, a formal education isn't essential, but an education is.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Thursday March 16 2017, @03:31PM

    by mhajicek (51) on Thursday March 16 2017, @03:31PM (#479841)

    My dad is a retired mechanical engineer and electrical engineer with about 50/50 military and medical engineering experience. I learned more from him growing up than I ever did in school. I got a two year aas in machine tool technology for dirt cheap, and have been able to be the sole breadwinner for my family the whole time.

    --
    The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek