![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
anotheranonIs a "Well-Rounded" Education a Good One?
I think so. I think college is a time to take the opportunity to study things that you will never have time to address once you enter the working world. It's also good and healthy to know about things outside your area of career expertise, and I think requiring, say, art history of a biology major is a good thing - it challenges a person to have to think outside of the comfortable confines of their major. There are additional social benefits of having a wider array of general knowledge - I have run into so many people who only know about ONE THING and simply cannot hold a conversation about anything else.
Also I think its important to learn how to learn, and how to think critically. (Arguably these are both things that one should learn in high school, but so many people are so busy trying to figure themselves out at that age that its very difficult to turn attention to such esoteric matters. There's also the varying quality of public education to consider... but thats a different rant).
I often wonder how well schools/parents/individuals address the great need to actually think about things - IMHO the value of developing an individual opinion seems to be generally de-emphasized in favor of going with the flow - "the nail that sticks up gets hammered down".
There are always exceptions, and I was fortunate enough to have a prof in college who was truly exceptional. I took both World History and Womens' Studies from her. She was the only teacher I ever had who reduced me to tears. Her classes were harrowing because information was never presented as a simple case of the Right Answer vs. the Wrong Answer - they centered on conversation and debate of the information presented, instead of simple memorization/regurgitation. Ultimately she provided the good, swift kick in the pants that I needed to start thinking critically about information; how the source of information and how the source interprets the information can make a huge difference in how the audience percieves it. How almost nothing can be truly described in black and white terms. Her classes were HELL but I learned tremendously from her.
I do think that the notion of a "guild" or "apprenticeship" system has great merit though - I can see the arguments that the standard liberal arts curriculum may be great for developing a flexible mind but isn't always that great at creating actual hard-fact skills that can be used in the workplace.
IMHO the best educational system would be a combination of book learning, theory, general knowledge, and "outside" subjects combined with apprenticeships within the chosen career path.
I think so. I think college is a time to take the opportunity to study things that you will never have time to address once you enter the working world. It's also good and healthy to know about things outside your area of career expertise, and I think requiring, say, art history of a biology major is a good thing - it challenges a person to have to think outside of the comfortable confines of their major. There are additional social benefits of having a wider array of general knowledge - I have run into so many people who only know about ONE THING and simply cannot hold a conversation about anything else.
Also I think its important to learn how to learn, and how to think critically. (Arguably these are both things that one should learn in high school, but so many people are so busy trying to figure themselves out at that age that its very difficult to turn attention to such esoteric matters. There's also the varying quality of public education to consider... but thats a different rant).
I often wonder how well schools/parents/individuals address the great need to actually think about things - IMHO the value of developing an individual opinion seems to be generally de-emphasized in favor of going with the flow - "the nail that sticks up gets hammered down".
There are always exceptions, and I was fortunate enough to have a prof in college who was truly exceptional. I took both World History and Womens' Studies from her. She was the only teacher I ever had who reduced me to tears. Her classes were harrowing because information was never presented as a simple case of the Right Answer vs. the Wrong Answer - they centered on conversation and debate of the information presented, instead of simple memorization/regurgitation. Ultimately she provided the good, swift kick in the pants that I needed to start thinking critically about information; how the source of information and how the source interprets the information can make a huge difference in how the audience percieves it. How almost nothing can be truly described in black and white terms. Her classes were HELL but I learned tremendously from her.
I do think that the notion of a "guild" or "apprenticeship" system has great merit though - I can see the arguments that the standard liberal arts curriculum may be great for developing a flexible mind but isn't always that great at creating actual hard-fact skills that can be used in the workplace.
IMHO the best educational system would be a combination of book learning, theory, general knowledge, and "outside" subjects combined with apprenticeships within the chosen career path.
