lordjeebus

I am an undergrad at a US university well-known for its academic reputation.

My understanding of the concept of the liberal-arts college education is that through exposure to different fields of thought and different ways of thinking -- in both readings and discussion with fellow students -- one can develop a certain way of thinking about things, developing knowledge, and achieve a higher level of understanding issues through the sharing and synthesis of opinions. This is the theory of a liberal arts education.

In practice, most of my fellow students are not here for the liberal arts education. The main concerns are earning an impressive degree and cultivating an impressive GPA. The main secondary concern is kissing ass to earn nice letters of recommendation for grad/professional school admissions. What happens often in classes, then, is that most people are interested not in reaching new levels of understanding, but in impressing one's professor and peers. Instead of debate, we have people spewing irrelevant facts and stating the obvious, to prove to the professor that they are "participating" and deserve a good grade. There are certainly particular moments and classes where we have productive and lively discussion, but in general people are more concerned with their transcripts than their minds.

Politically, most people hold the same political beliefs. However, regardless of the political beliefs people hold, most people seem to have passionate feelings about issues they really know little about. Political discourse is often worthless because people here are so uninformed -- both liberals and conservatives. As an example, there was a recent widespread campaign against a particular piece of legislation. Flyers went up all over campus, making 4 or 5 claims about the legislation as reasons to reject it. I looked up the proposed legislation online and saw that of those claims, all but 1 were taken into account in the legislation -- the flyers were mostly incorrect. But try telling this to someone and they think you're crazy or evil.

Hence, I am disillusioned by the American liberal arts experience. In contrast, I find that the TFP embodies the ideals of this experience that my university has lost. People discuss and debate things that interest them, consider the opinions of others, and are referred to relevant facts when important. People discuss for the sake of discussion -- TFP has no grades, and most posters aren't posting to boost their post count.

I think that many people have intellectual drives. I just think that the liberal arts education ideal isn't working because college education is important for more than the experience -- people hiring graduates are interested in the reputation of your school and your grades as a measure of your intelligence, creativity, and work ethic. We need an outlet for our intellectual drives, and thanks to the shared interests of its members and high quality of moderation, the TFP can serve as that outlet for many people.

For those who attend or attended school in the US, do you share my experience, or is the situation better for you? Those outside the US -- how does your university system compare intellectually? What aspects of the TFP make it a superior intellectual experience? (or, if you do not find it superior to the university system, how come?) How could a university make incorporate the good aspects of the TFP?

uncle phil

You are a leg up on those classmates/posers you share class space with. Keep your mind open and your nose to the grindstone; you will surpass their irrelevancy...

__________________
"We were wrong, terribly wrong. (We) should not have tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional military tactics against a foe willing to absorb enormous casualties...in a country lacking the fundamental political stability necessary to conduct effective military and pacification operations. It could not be done and it was not done."
- Robert S. McNamara
-----------------------------------------
"We will take our napalm and flame throwers out of the land that scarcely knows the use of matches...
We will leave you your small joys and smaller troubles."
- Eugene McCarthy in "Vietnam Message"
-----------------------------------------
never wrestle with a pig.
you both get dirty;
the pig likes it.

Pragma

I attend a similar "higher learning instutute" here in the States, and have a very similar problem. The place is overrun with rich little kids who kiss up to their professors, run for SGA or whatever club president to make themselves look good, and spout nonsense about anything that crosses their mind.

We've had even worse examples of ignorance than those flyers you referenced - our SGA president went on record calling the state governor "public enemy number one" (thereby giving the governor a reason to back out of an upcoming radio show with the SGA president) instead of fostering rational debate.

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

ARTelevision

Interesting thread idea.
Here's another one that relates to it.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...TFP+University

__________________
create evolution

VitaminH

I fear my state school is much the same in problems. One thing i noticed is that the classes seemed to be divided into two factions: The kids who study and go to class when they want and when they feel it necessary, and accept the grades they get as a direct result of the amount of work they put in accordingly, and the others, the whiney kids who are used to getting everything they want and will sit in a prof's office after a test and argue syntax and beotch and moan over a few points until the prof gets so fed up with it they up their grade. I once met a girl who said "Oh I get A's in all my classes because I just won't leave the professor alone until he ups my test grades to an A."


Disgusting.


I have never argued a grade on a test, excepting maybe once or twice when i found a mistake in the grading that was blatenly obvious.

Here it is much the same way with politics as LJ up there described. Most students unfortunately are sheep who just follow what the flyers tell them to do or whatever is 'cool' to be protesting this week, rather than looking into issues and forming their own opinions. Free thought my ass.

__________________
"Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever."
- Napoleon Bonaparte

rogue49

College is setup to satisfy the criteria of the academia,
who do things to sate their own egos, theories and protections of their jobs,
and have nothing to do with how things work in the real world.

We deal with this because we want that little piece of paper,
that the HR people and executives use to pretend they know who they are hiring,
and to rationalize our wage scales.
This doesn't have anything to do with skill, talent or experience.
Just pure theoretical knowledge.

It's all an illusion...learn what you can, enjoy the experience for what it's worth.
And then you'll have to start working.

There will be a test on this tomorrow,
and it will reflect 1/4 of your TFP GPA.

wry1

Keep in mind that the concept of a "University" has changed radically since it was first fostered by the Greeks several thousand years ago....

The purpose of "higher education" has not changed since it began; it is still to produce a segment of society which has had the benefit of additional sources of experience, writing, discussion and debate. I would find it quite unfair to blame the university for any divergence from this goal; rather, I would lay the blame squarely where it belongs: with the students and instructors too lazy (or, God forbid, too stupid) to properly pursue this goal.

I've found that the instructors who do cave in to the "whiners" are usually Graduate Students who have a teaching position within a department. Most full Professors - and many of the Associate Professors - where I am attending school will not put up with such behavior, and any damned fool stupid enough to try it might just see their grade drop instead!

Remember that, at the University level, school exists for you to educate yourself. Professors and other faculty and staff members are there to help you, but all the responsibility rests on your shoulders. I highly recommend scheduling frequent meetings with your instructors during their office hours, as this will also provide you with the chance to review any questionable areas of either lectures or assignments in the proper environment; don't go in expecting to change the grade, and instructors (I've found) will open up to you for a much more productive meeting.

Lastly, "Liberal Arts" in the U.S. tends to be more a description of an education type than a specific education result. These days that title signifies that the person who holds it has studied in a multitude of areas, but is not necessarily well-versed in any of them. Review your current academic plan; if you find that your studies would lend themselves to another type of degree, then by all means consider changing your degree program.

Good luck!

gtr71

Rogue 49, your exactly right, it is an illusion vs. the "real world"

ubertuber

I have found that the quality of my education experience increased greatly when I stopped trying to "go with the flow". The school has to make sure you meet certain minimum standards. If they didn't, the degree wouldn't mean anything. This isn't to say that you wouldn't have gotten anything, but your degree has to signify that everyone who has earned it has satisfied some sort of requirement. However, this doesn't have to be, and in my opinion, should not be the extent of your education. So I decided to let the school get what they need from me (a willingness to jump through their hoops) but I wouldn't be shy about taking what I want from the school. This means being an active participant in my own education and challenging the school and my teachers to meet my demands as well. Most teachers will be pleasantly surprised by someone who engages them, even if it is challenging. From what I have seen, truly hungry students are rare, and schools are eager to feed them when asked.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Rodney

I went to college 30 years ago, and I'm in grad school now (MA Education with a teaching credential thrown in). So I can offer a little perspective.

First, education matters more to those who know what it's like not to have some, and truly want to better themselves. I started at community college 30 years ago, at a time when schools like that one were crammed with middle-aged re-entry women and Vietnam-era vets of all ages (we were right down the road from a humongo airbase). The profs didn't get away with anything: they'd make some statement, and some old master sergeant in the back of the room would call them on it. In political science I sat next to a retired Air Force guy who'd been on detached duty for the CIA in Vietnam, and he gave that prof hell throug the entire course. Just said what he thought, all the time. And those re-entry women were no pushovers, either; a lot of them were older than a lot of the faculty, and they had experience. It was mostly the kids who slacked off, or who were afraid to say anything against what the professors said.

30 years later, I was taking community college courses again, during the day and in the evening. And there's a big different between the day students and the night students. The day students are mostly what lordjeebus describes: slackers, doing as little work as possible, whining about grades, talking in class, all that. Because most of them are 18 or 19. At night, there's a larger proportion of people from age 25-50 and beyond. And these are people who are going to school after a hard day in the shop, or the office, or taking care of the kids. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be there. The work gets done right (most of the time, we still have young slackers), they work hard, and -- well, some of them have opinions. They're still not as outspoken as those old vets and moms from 30 years ago, though some are. More than in day classes, anyway.

Flash back 30 years again, and I'm in a state college for the final two years of my BA. It was a step backwards -- college just isn't as much fun when everybody's 18, mostly don't know what they want yet, and aren't necessarily there for teh right reasons, except that they're "supposed to" go to college to succeed in the world. So, Lord, these problems aren't new. The problem is, most students aren't exactly in love with learning for learning's sake, and they'll never get there unless some professor hooks them. And unfortunately, most professors aren't great teachers. With one or two exceptions, most of the kick-ass teachers I've had were untenured lecturers, people who were still relatively new to their field, still in love with it, and even working in it outside of class. For too many of the tenured guys, it's just a no-can-fire-me job in which you can do anything you want. Or worse, it's mainly about research, and the students are second priority. And of course, what happens if you disagree with the professor, and he doesn't like it? There are things he can do -- things to your grade, recommendations he can choose not to write, many other things. I've seen it.

Which brings me back to the present: Flash forward 30 years again -- second community college stint over, me in grad school now. Learning about teaching with a group of mostly female, mostly early-20-somethings. Still some slackers, but not many because teaching is not an easy profession and most of my colleagues (not all of them) are smart enough to see that. And it's a very liberal school, and the profs pride themselves on being open and liberal and most of the students feel that way, too. But since the profs are very free about giving their political opinions in class -- and frankly, almost everything in education is political these days -- people who don't hew to that line stay silent. And this is in a program where group discussion and reflection (I'm sick of that word) are a major part of the instructional style. So there's a certain amount of ass-kissing, going along, and people who don't feel at ease risk their participation in the program.

Give them credit, apparently the teaching program administration picked up on the fact that some people didn't feel free to talk, and the program head (who teaches one of the classes) sat down in front of us this week and said, "What's the problem, what can we do about this?" Hey, let's open a dialog, very PC thing to do, but the right thing in this case. Only one of the conservatives opened up by the time class ended (the most thoughtful one), but we're continuing the discussion. In the meantime, I sent the prof an email that all boils down to this question: If I disagree with the professor in class, what happens to me? We're talking about a professional program in which recommendations are needed, and in which your classmates are also going to become your job-hunting network. Anyway, she wrote back that she just hadn't thought anyone would ever be afraid of crossing her -- well, I guess it's been a long time since she's been a student. But I'm hopeful.

At any rate, professors are part of the problem, and so is the whole education=job thing. People aren't there for education necessarily, just for a job. And when something is seen as threatening that job possibility -- disagreeing with the teacher -- it doesn't happen. Safer to suck up. It's happening even in my program, one that emphasizes participation and honest discussion.

I suppose the best thing to do would be to dismantle half the universities in favor of technical or trade colleges that just teach you a skill or profession and make no bones about making you a well-rounded individual. You could probably get a CS education in three years or less that way, business, too. Then make four-year colleges mainly for the people who really want to broaden themselves. Which is a good idea when preparing for any profession, ultimately, but recruiters don't actually care, so hey.

Aside from that, I'd propose classes somewhat like the ones I'm in now -- lots of discussion, lots of group projects (slackers end up on their own, if they don't watch it), lots of open-ended inquiry. You can't come up with the answer that the teacher wants if _he won't tell you what it is._ And I've had a couple of good profs who play that game -- maddening, but good. Ultimately, though, even through this open-ended approach, people need to feel free to say what they want, and it has to be encouraged. It's not real education if it's just regurgitation. You gotta build the knowledge in your own mind, through research, argument, and defense of argument, before it really sticks in there and becomes part of you. Even in the teaching program at Liberally Enlightened University, we're still working on that. Although frankly, I'm pleased that it's being addressed at all because I have _never_ seen this topic come up in any class before.

God, where am I going with this? I gues that, mainly you're right, lordjeebus. But the situation is better when students have better motivation for being in school, like the reentry women who didn't just want to be mommies anymore , or a better sense of self like those old soldiers. A school full of 19-year-olds just doesn't cut it. And the professors get slack, because nobody calls them on anything.

wry1

Rodney has hit the nail on the head with his comparison between attending school 30 years ago and today. What I would like to elaborate on, though, is simply this: there really hasn't been a "perfect" example of what a College or University should be. If you took a dispassionate look at the various forms which have cropped up through the ages, arguments could be made against every last one of them...and some of them are still around today (Oxford, anyone?).

Those ex-military members of Rodney's classes had the right idea: question, question, question. Take nothing at face value, and always look beyond the "required" reading to find opposing thoughts and opinions on whatever topic you're dealing with. You may or may not agree with the literature, or the professor for that matter, but the whole purpose of obtaining a Liberal Arts degree is to develop the skills to seek the broader truth....even if (or when) it conflicts with your beliefs.

Don't worry too much about incurring the wrath of a pissed-off professor. While tenure does provide job security, it does not prevent censure or other means of reprimand - and quite frequently such actions will result in monetary damages when salaries are reviewed (i.e.-they get a smaller raise, if any). As a result, it is quite rare to find one who will pursue a vendetta over something as basic as a conflicting (if vocal) viewpoint.

...And if they do, keep documentation of your work and appeal any grades you receive.

phukraut

Rodney, great post, you gave me some new insights on university life.