Interest in the Humanities Decline

[aja8888]

That's not taught in high school, if not middle school? One should not need to go to college for that.

That's said, after being here a few decades, and living in the West all that time, I will admit to having some problems with placing these bitty states back east.

We don't need maps anymore, we all have GPS's!

 

[ziggy29]

We don't need maps anymore, we all have GPS's!

Yep, and we don't need to know arithmetic because we have calculators!

 

[ERD50]

... So they want the students and the taxpayers to "give" them the educated people they want (it's a cost, so someone else has to pay it). ...

But looking at this the other way 'round, wouldn't the student want to get the education that employers are looking for?

Sure, there is value to a well-rounded education. Hopefully, employers would recognize this too. But I suspect that they are thinking more short-term, and that the Humanities classes offered really don't provide much in the way of really rounding out a person. Maybe something along the lies of critical thinking would be better?

-ERD50

 

[ziggy29]

But looking at this the other way 'round, wouldn't the student want to get the education that employers are looking for?

In today's real world? Yes. Of course it makes sense. I'm not "blaming" students at all. They have to live in a reality that may not be their utopian fantasy -- especially now that college costs have become ridiculous.

I just think it's a little sad that this "real world" means only being concerned about education that gets you employed (hopefully with a decent salary). And that employers have gone cheap and refuse to give much OJT and instead pushed their training costs on the taxpayers.

 

[ERD50]

And we wonder why many cannot find New Mexico on a map...

I recall reading a critique of these often quoted stats that X% of people could not find such and such on a map.

They pointed out we don't use maps that way. We don't look at blank maps and identify areas, we look at labeled maps to find areas. Often, the maps in those 'tests' don't even have borders on them, so the reference points we use are missing too.

From general knowledge, I'd hope that most people would know that New Mexico is in the SW of the USA. I wouldn't be too surprised if a significant % of people point to Arizona instead (assuming the borders were there). Would that 'fail' the test?

-ERD50

 

[ERD50]

In today's real world? Yes. Of course it makes sense. I'm not "blaming" students at all. They have to live in a reality that may not be their utopian fantasy -- especially now that college costs have become ridiculous.

I just think it's a little sad that this "real world" means only being concerned about education that gets you employed (hopefully with a decent salary). ...

But is it really the employer's responsibility to see that I get a 'well rounded' education? Maybe that should be my responsibility? (not arguing, just raising the question)

For example, I'm interested in music, and little in photography, heck, even my beer brewing has increased my knowledge of chemistry and some physical processes. I can recall specific times where my hobbies actually did help me with my job - I drew on some of these experiences to come up with solutions for more specific problems (still in a technical sense, not really 'humanities' as such).

But to some degree, having these outside interests put me ahead of my 'competition' in some ways. But should I count on learning these things in a formal setting? Could they have been taught to me, or was it the fact that I went searching for them that made them valuable and useful to me in other areas of my life?

It's all a but fuzzy and abstract for me at this point, it's been so long. But I should ask my kids about their humanities courses. I suspect they just wanted to get them out of the way. But maybe it sinks in a little?

-ERD50

 

[imoldernu]

About employer's needs... and hiring because of educational background.

Well, yes, in some disciplines... a hospital shouldn't have to educate a doctor, and perhaps an engineering firm shouldn't be a classroom for engineers, but in an age of specialization, instead of requiring a 4,6 or 8 year degree for most jobs, wouldn't it be a better option to subsidize businesses to train employees for their own specialized occupational needs.

I'd suggest that that most jobs do not really require a broad based college education.

This has been tried multiple times, in operations run by government, whereby potential employees would be directed towards businesses with specific needs, and subsidized during the training period. Chicago experimented with this a dozen or so years ago, with bad results because of the bureaucracy, but the general concept was good. (the bureaucrats ended up getting more than the employers or the trainees).

A typical subsidy might be on the job training for automobile mechanics... whereby the shop would receive a $5/hr subsidy for a one year apprenticeship, with a 2 year job guarantee for a member of the program.

Many ways to implement, including classrooms, on-line educational subsidies or one on one apprenticeships.

All in all, I dislike paying high overhead prices for many services... medical, legal, financial etc, because of the required, expensive educational requirements for the employees, when they are performing rote or low value activities that don't need the higher level of education.

 

[ziggy29]

But is it really the employer's responsibility to see that I get a 'well rounded' education?

Partially.

The employer has every right and reason to want to hire people who are capable of doing the job. Part of the problem is that the definition of "able to do the job has changed so drastically.

It's unreasonable to expect a public (i.e. taxpayer-funded) institution to give them exactly what they need without OJT. And employers are getting so greedy that they won't provide OJT any more. Even companies posting record profits expect new hires to come in and know almost everything on Day One.

I know the world has changed in the last 47 years.... BUT -- my dad was a pilot in the Air Force, and in 1966 he was grounded by high blood pressure. (Today he would have been able to fly with approved medications if it could be managed, but not in 1966.) He left the Air Force after 13 years and moved to California and became a computer programmer. And eventually, a project leader. With NO degree.

And he retired better than 95% of us can hope to.

But the point is, the employer hired for aptitude and trained from there. Employers today know they have the leverage, so they privatize the profits and put the costs on the public. I know enough about how you feel about things and about one group putting its costs on other that I'm surprised you seem to be OK with a system that expects taxpayers to provide specific skills that for-profit businesses want in order to make more profit. You may not like a system that pays for students to get the skills needed to get hired, so why do you seem to be OK with a system that allows employers to milk the system and make the same taxpayers pay for their training?

 

[ERD50]

Partially.

The employer has every right and reason to want to hire people who are capable of doing the job. Part of the problem is that the definition of "able to do the job has changed so drastically.

It's unreasonable to expect a public (i.e. taxpayer-funded) institution to give them exactly what they need without OJT. And employers are getting so greedy that they won't provide OJT any more. Even companies posting record profits expect new hires to come in and know almost everything on Day One.

I know the world has changed in the last 47 years.... BUT -- my dad was a pilot in the Air Force, .... He left the Air Force after 13 years and moved to California and became a computer programmer. And eventually, a project leader. With NO degree.

And he retired better than 95% of us can hope to. ...?

Well, maybe I've been out of the job market too long, and/or maybe my experience is too narrow, but we really didn't expect fresh-out engineers (and I hired plenty of 'em in my career) to hit the ground running on Day One. Just about every place has specific systems - what you get out of a fresh-out is they should know enough to be able to absorb the info you give them, and start working with it. They have a lot to learn.

Heck, when I first started at MegaCorp, they threw me a set of binders and told me to study it. They said it wouldn't make much sense, but I'd probably pick up enough to help me with the training sessions that started next week. It wasn't all that much different when I left.

As far as your Dad, yes, that was a different time. The computer industry was young, and a sharp guy w/o a degree could do well for himself. That is harder today, no doubt.

-ERD50

 

[Midpack]

Doubtless, a science or other technical education would have proved more remunerative, but at this point, would not trade the breadth of study and knowledge for money.

I tend to agree with ya. I'm also a Liberal Arts grad. I managed to somehow scrape by and support the family despite not having a technical degree. And I enjoyed my education, despite working my way through school, and don't think I'd change the way things worked out.

Would you advise an 18-21 year old today to choose Humanities/Liberal Arts? And if that's where their hearts & minds are leading them, when they ask about what job security and standard of living they might expect from those degrees, what would you tell them?

 

[candrew]

If one views a college degree as something to be used in the service of capitalism and/or the global economy, then it stands to reason that an education in the liberal arts and humanities is unnecessary. It seems our culture is transforming into one that places little value on intellectuals who are fashionably scorned in the mainstream media and made to feel out of place in a society that only values ideas that serve the interests of the markets and the wealthy. Where would our nation be without intellectuals like Martin Luther King, William F. Buckley and Dubois who challenged convention and the status quo along with precipitating social and economic justice? Theirs is a dying breed of intellectuals who were willing to take risks and fight for matters of freedom, justice, transparency and equality. It is in fact the arts, literature and music along with critical, intellectual thought that separate us from the barbarians. Attempting to quantify the value of the arts & humanities in any culture is difficult, however, investing in them is not always intuitively obvious like investments in finding cures for diseases or advances in things like engineering. Just because something can't me measured doesn't mean it is without value. Have we arrived at a point where we only value those things that have dollars attached to them and provide some sort of measurable economic gain? If so, what does that say about us as a people and our culture?

 

[Free To Canoe]

When I lived in California in the 1980s, my native CA neighbors thought Connecticut (where I am from) was a foreign country, let alone find it on a map.

Just today, elders had to explain to the youngster (30+ yrs old, running his own business) where "New England" is! We live in Pennsylvania! This is scary to have to explain grade school stuff to adults.

 

[Midpack]

If one views a college degree as something to be used in the service of capitalism and/or the global economy, then it stands to reason that an education in the liberal arts and humanities is unnecessary. It seems our culture is transforming into one that places little value on intellectuals who are fashionably scorned in the mainstream media and made to feel out of place in a society that only values ideas that serve the interests of the markets and the wealthy. Where would our nation be without intellectuals like Martin Luther King, William F. Buckley and Dubois who challenged convention and the status quo along with precipitating social and economic justice? Theirs is a dying breed of intellectuals who were willing to take risks and fight for matters of freedom, justice, transparency and equality. It is in fact the arts, literature and music along with critical, intellectual thought that separate us from the barbarians. Attempting to quantify the value of the arts & humanities in any culture is difficult, however, investing in them is not always intuitively obvious like investments in finding cures for diseases or advances in things like engineering. Just because something can't me measured doesn't mean it is without value. Have we arrived at a point where we only value those things that have dollars attached to them and provide some sort of measurable economic gain? If so, what does that say about us as a people and our culture?

You tell us...

I think we may have a chicken or the egg question here though.

 

[samclem]

I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.John Adams
US diplomat & politician (1735 - 1826)

Has Adams's hoped-for evolution stopped? Maybe Adams didn't know about globalization.

 

[imoldernu]

Would you advise an 18-21 year old today to choose Humanities/Liberal Arts? And if that's where their hearts & minds are leading them, when they ask about what job security and standard of living they might expect from those degrees, what would you tell them?

In short... I do understand that times have changed.
As to advice... I have 2 grandsons both of whom are in accelerated programs... one in IMSA, and the other at NC Illinois... both science oriented. Careful mentoring by their dad is directing them into balanced courses and providing opportunities for educational travel and exposure to the arts.
If I were to be starting again, I would definitely be looking for security first... you are correct!.

I have never regretted my broad based education... Inspiration for lifetime curiosity and satisfaction.

 

[Which Roger]

With the rapidly-changing employment landscape, versatility and adaptability are key skills, and these are the kinds of skills that one develops at a liberal arts college. I think colleges have gone too far in training students for a specific occupation, and often by the time they graduate, the job opportunities in that area have dried up, and they don't have the skills to adapt and quickly pick up something different.

I hit the sweet spot with a technical degree from a liberal arts college. The critical thinking, writing skills, etc. that the liberal arts gave me often put me a step ahead of my peers in the workforce, even though many of them were as strong as, or superior to me, in the technical aspects of the job.

 

[ERD50]

If one views a college degree as something to be used in the service of capitalism and/or the global economy,

But why view it that way? Isn't it a two-way street? The student gets a job, receives compensation/benefits, and the capitalist is able to use the employee's skills as a resource to provide 'stuff'/services that people want. One can't really do w/o the other.

It seems our culture is transforming into one that places little value on intellectuals who are fashionably scorned in the mainstream media and made to feel out of place in a society that only values ideas that serve the interests of the markets and the wealthy.

Well, we were talking about business. I can't really see any reason for business to be very involved with 'intellectuals', other than for some forward thinking ideas for their products.

But 'our culture'? Who is to say we value intellectuals less today than in the past? I sure don't recall my elders quoting Keats or Shakespeare. How would you measure this?

Have we arrived at a point where we only value those things that have dollars attached to them and provide some sort of measurable economic gain? If so, what does that say about us as a people and our culture?

You are asking this on a forum of people dedicated to Early Retirement? If all we valued was the $, we'd all still be working!

-ERD50

 

[Midpack]

In short... I do understand that times have changed.
As to advice... I have 2 grandsons both of whom are in accelerated programs... one in IMSA, and the other at NC Illinois... both science oriented. Careful mentoring by their dad is directing them into balanced courses and providing opportunities for educational travel and exposure to the arts.
If I were to be starting again, I would definitely be looking for security first... you are correct!.

I have never regretted my broad based education... Inspiration for lifetime curiosity and satisfaction.

The Humanities make life richer and more rewarding IMO, but it's only gotten harder to build a career outside medicine, science/technology, legal. Non-technical learning probably requires self-study nowadays, much more than prior generations. And I don't actually know, but I get the sense developing countries are steering their kids to science & technology too. IOW it's almost worldwide, for better or worse.

 

[imoldernu]

If one views a college degree as something to be used in the service of capitalism and/or the global economy, then it stands to reason that an education in the liberal arts and humanities is unnecessary. It seems our culture is transforming into one that places little value on intellectuals who are fashionably scorned in the mainstream media and made to feel out of place in a society that only values ideas that serve the interests of the markets and the wealthy. Where would our nation be without intellectuals like Martin Luther King, William F. Buckley and Dubois who challenged convention and the status quo along with precipitating social and economic justice? Theirs is a dying breed of intellectuals who were willing to take risks and fight for matters of freedom, justice, transparency and equality. It is in fact the arts, literature and music along with critical, intellectual thought that separate us from the barbarians. Attempting to quantify the value of the arts & humanities in any culture is difficult, however, investing in them is not always intuitively obvious like investments in finding cures for diseases or advances in things like engineering. Just because something can't me measured doesn't mean it is without value. Have we arrived at a point where we only value those things that have dollars attached to them and provide some sort of measurable economic gain? If so, what does that say about us as a people and our culture?

While this is a perception shared by many, and with which I'd largely agree, still I have hope and a belief that science and humanity can and will coexist.
...That wisdom and technological skills are not mutually exclusive, and that we are not bound by historical experience as we explore new vistas.
As we look to the past for truths gained by experience there are positives yet to be discovered.

The days of Benjamin Franklin, Aristotle and Thomas Young are long past, and it will take the combined intelligence of all to go forward in a world that moves faster in a year, than what once took centuries.

 

[donheff]

No statistics here but I see quite a few young people (friends of my daughter, nieces and nephews) and while they tend to focus on slightly more practical majors than my generation did they read widely. Bottom line they seem as well rounded as my cohort. Lets face it, if you are interested in the humanities the great works are freely accessible - you don't need to spend a fortune on a literature degree to study them. Get your degree in something practical and mix in the great books to taste.

 

[2B]

When I was getting my engineering degree in the 1970s, I took two freshman english classes, psychology, art history, scandinavian literature, english literature, economics and some business classes. I wrote for the college newspaper (easy money) for two years.

I've always tried to read a non-fiction book every month which tend to be historically oriented and I sprinkle in a classic now and then.

I don't think a technical degree is mutually exclusive of exposure to other subjects.

 

[Walt34]

The typical humanities classroom is filled with kids who are being forced to take the course. So, the professors need to make the classes an easy "A" so students will choose their course. If a kid is trying to get into med school, he's not likely to take a humanities course from a professor who challenges his students.

Quote from my father: "No one wants less for their money than a student".

Which was me in college. I was directly boresighted on the job I wanted and if a class didn't have anything to do with that objective I simply wasn't interested. Of course, to get the degree I needed some humanities classes and asked around which were the easiest and took those, learning only as much as was necessary to pass the exams, then promptly forgot about it.

And frankly I still wonder if taking those classes was worth my time. It's sort of like knowing the speed of light - interesting, but not really applicable to daily life.

 

[HFWR]

"Humanities" as a degree seems relatively worthless in monetary terms. Humanities as part of the curriculum, from elementary through bachelor level, is part of what I'd call "education". We're creating too many sheeple otherwise...

 

[imoldernu]

While I totally agree that technology and humanities are in no way mutually exclusive, the educational process provides a discipline to understanding the basis and history of the arts/culture/philosophy et al.

A few instances...
The Middle East, and the part that religion plays in the difficulties, is more easily understood, from formal study of comparitive religion... Not that it can't be learned, but foundational depth broadens the outlook.

Art- As we are surrounded by examples, everywhere, the learned ability to identify artists, schools of art, historical periods and the background of more cryptic styles, makes for great appreciation.

Music... Many, many hours of sitting in a lab with earphones on, "parsing" Beethoven's Fifth Symphony etc. , left me with mixed feelings... Now, I instinctively look for instrumentation, counterpoint, anacrusic 5 or thetic 4,
and try to frame the structure. Not good... but doesn't apply to "Rap", so just old school.

Languages... Probably not very important unless one has involvement in different cultures, but on a personal basis, a matter for enjoyment. Just finished watching "Downfall", and enjoyed the movie, but only had to look at a few of the subtitles. Have had a ball in our Florida senior community, making friends and acting as interpreter for many foreign snowbirds, as almost all speak either French or German, no matter what their native language.

Philosophy and History... neither critical to lving in today's culture, but a wonderful background to my favorite hobby... "Being a Fly on the Wall of Evolving History".

So I DO agree that none of this is necessary, and all of it is there for free, for anyone to study, learn, or appreciate. Can I tell the difference between one who had a Liberal Arts background, or a person with a technical background?
Absolutely not!... Intelligence or dullness comes through without regard to Higher education specialization... and it really doesn't matter anyway.

Still, I hope that we can keep a balance in our system, and that the direct connection of income to education subsidy is not so complete as to harm the schools that were formerly considered to be "tops" in quality of education... ie, the US News Ratings.

 

[candrew]

The ability to function in contemporary society requires both analytical and expressive ability. A well rounded study in the humanities and social sciences is essential to developing those abilities.

There seems a widely held belief that the primary role of education is to provide job training by teaching specific workplace skills that employers need but don’t want to devote the resources to teaching themselves. Those entering the labor market can expect to undergo many shifts in jobs/careers. Education should equip a person to learn fast and well over a lifetime, to think critically and handle complexity in the many forms it will be encountered.