Let's Ditch Gen Eds

[Wahoo Redux]

In the U.S. undergraduate education is not much different between colleges and universities.  It is different between community colleges and colleges and universities. The designation "college" does not necessarily mean a trade school.

Generally speaking, in the U.S. a "college" is a strictly undergraduate institution---it could be a 2 year community college or 4 year liberal arts college.  Our strictly vocational programs (vet or dental tech, for instance) are almost all at the community colleges.  Four year "colleges" lack significant graduate programs. 

From my experience as a student and then as an instructor, CCs are far less rigorous than most 4 year colleges and universities----although I am sure there are exceptions.

A "university" has significant graduate programs, although sometimes this is just a law school and/or a teacher's ed MA and/or an MBA tacked on the side of a primarily undergrad teaching institution.

I am just wondering why we do not offer one degree that covers the student's career training, however many credits that would take, and another degree that requires broader liberal arts coursework which would look like the degrees we have now.  A student could choose to be job certified, or a student could choose to be liberal arts educated.  Call the degrees whatever you want.

[marshwiggle]

I am just wondering why we do not offer one degree that covers the student's career training, however many credits that would take, and another degree that requires broader liberal arts coursework which would look like the degrees we have now.  A student could choose to be job certified, or a student could choose to be liberal arts educated.  Call the degrees whatever you want.

Part of the problem is that with many STEM programs, as I indicated earlier, the length of the program is dictated by course sequences.  Given that the US is more or less unique in the "liberal arts" emphasis, most other countries have programs about 4 years long because of these sequences. If there are programs in the US that don't have any sequence longer than 2 or 3 courses, and you offered a shortened degree without the "broader" requirements, I imagine it would be very popular.

[Wahoo Redux]

I might go so far as to suggest that we offer "football" and "tennis" and "wrestling" degrees et al., whatever these would look like. (12 credits weight lifting; 12 credit sequence on great figures in sports; 24 credits baseball; whatever...)

I just got an email from (grrrrr!) a kid who wants to play baseball.  Almost every email, of which there were many, mentioned baseball.  Mr. Mark-McGwire-wannabe is incredibly lazy but for baseball.  He did not comprehend that a 51% class grade was an "F."  He needs at least a "C" to play baseball.  We are not even a D-1 school.  Kid, you'll never make it to the pros.  I gave him the week to turn in his missing assignments, no promises on a final grade.

Why not just let this kid play baseball? 

[mleok]

I might go so far as to suggest that we offer "football" and "tennis" and "wrestling" degrees et al., whatever these would look like. (12 credits weight lifting; 12 credit sequence on great figures in sports; 24 credits baseball; whatever...)

I just got an email from (grrrrr!) a kid who wants to play baseball.  Almost every email, of which there were many, mentioned baseball.  Mr. Mark-McGwire-wannabe is incredibly lazy but for baseball.  He did not comprehend that a 51% class grade was an "F."  He needs at least a "C" to play baseball.  We are not even a D-1 school.  Kid, you'll never make it to the pros.  I gave him the week to turn in his missing assignments, no promises on a final grade.

Why not just let this kid play baseball?

Not sure if you're being serious, or just being your usual self, and interjecting irrelevant issues in an attempt to derail your own thread.

[Wahoo Redux]

I might go so far as to suggest that we offer "football" and "tennis" and "wrestling" degrees et al., whatever these would look like. (12 credits weight lifting; 12 credit sequence on great figures in sports; 24 credits baseball; whatever...)

I just got an email from (grrrrr!) a kid who wants to play baseball.  Almost every email, of which there were many, mentioned baseball.  Mr. Mark-McGwire-wannabe is incredibly lazy but for baseball.  He did not comprehend that a 51% class grade was an "F."  He needs at least a "C" to play baseball.  We are not even a D-1 school.  Kid, you'll never make it to the pros.  I gave him the week to turn in his missing assignments, no promises on a final grade.

Why not just let this kid play baseball?

Not sure if you're being serious, or just being your usual self, and interjecting irrelevant issues in an attempt to derail your own thread.

I suppose I am being 95% fatuous, 3% reducto ad absurdum, and 2% why not?

My student, Yogi Berra, is not smart or motivated.  He is a perfect example of a relatively nice young fella who should not be in college----but then he wouldn't be playing baseball.  This is a business writing class so I assume Yogi is a business major, which at our school means he has no real idea what he wants to do, except that he wants to play baseball.  Ours is not a sports school, so Yogi will probably never make the pros, but still, he wants baseball.

Marshy has several times forcefully posed the rhetorical question why should we make people take classes they don't want to take?  It is actually a perfectly valid challenge.

You, I believe, argue that K-12 exposure should provide enough "rounding."  And this is also a valid challenge.

Yogi wants baseball. He is paying for his education.  Why shouldn't we give him what he wants?

[marshwiggle]

My student, Yogi Berra, is not smart or motivated.  He is a perfect example of a relatively nice young fella who should not be in college----but then he wouldn't be playing baseball.  This is a business writing class so I assume Yogi is a business major, which at our school means he has no real idea what he wants to do, except that he wants to play baseball.  Ours is not a sports school, so Yogi will probably never make the pros, but still, he wants baseball.

But isn't part of the idea in the US that college is a "life stage" that everyone should experience, if possible, and sports is one way to try and hook people into it?

In other words, the reason he's at college when he wants to play baseball is precisely that the education industry has told him that he should go for that purpose?

If they hadn't tried to hook him that way, he probably wouldn't be at college in the first place.

[Wahoo Redux]

My student, Yogi Berra, is not smart or motivated.  He is a perfect example of a relatively nice young fella who should not be in college----but then he wouldn't be playing baseball.  This is a business writing class so I assume Yogi is a business major, which at our school means he has no real idea what he wants to do, except that he wants to play baseball.  Ours is not a sports school, so Yogi will probably never make the pros, but still, he wants baseball.

But isn't part of the idea in the US that college is a "life stage" that everyone should experience, if possible, and sports is one way to try and hook people into it?

In other words, the reason he's at college when he wants to play baseball is precisely that the education industry has told him that he should go for that purpose?

If they hadn't tried to hook him that way, he probably wouldn't be at college in the first place.

Sure, college education is perceived of as an "experience."  Is there a point there?

I doubt that the "education industry" "told" him "he should go."

The "education industry" dangled the possibility of playing on a college team.  And it offers him a perfectly legitimate education at the same time. Yogi made the decision to go to college. Baseball has the minor leagues.  Yogi should probably be playing on a Rookie League team.  Instead, he is flunking my class. 

I'm wondering why we wouldn't give Yogi the education he desires. 

[mleok]

Sure, college education is perceived of as an "experience."  Is there a point there?

I doubt that the "education industry" "told" him "he should go."

The "education industry" dangled the possibility of playing on a college team.  And it offers him a perfectly legitimate education at the same time. Yogi made the decision to go to college. Baseball has the minor leagues.  Yogi should probably be playing on a Rookie League team.  Instead, he is flunking my class. 

I'm wondering why we wouldn't give Yogi the education he desires.

Do you want him in your class? I wouldn't.

[marshwiggle]

I doubt that the "education industry" "told" him "he should go."

The "education industry" dangled the possibility of playing on a college team.  And it offers him a perfectly legitimate education at the same time. Yogi made the decision to go to college. Baseball has the minor leagues.  Yogi should probably be playing on a Rookie League team.  Instead, he is flunking my class. 

Suppose you flipped that around; in order to recruit a top-notch math student they guarantee him a spot on their baseball team. 

Why should being good at one thing entitle someone to some entirely different thing?

[Wahoo Redux]

Sure, college education is perceived of as an "experience."  Is there a point there?

I doubt that the "education industry" "told" him "he should go."

The "education industry" dangled the possibility of playing on a college team.  And it offers him a perfectly legitimate education at the same time. Yogi made the decision to go to college. Baseball has the minor leagues.  Yogi should probably be playing on a Rookie League team.  Instead, he is flunking my class. 

I'm wondering why we wouldn't give Yogi the education he desires.

Do you want him in your class? I wouldn't.

Ha!  I wish he'd never taken my class in the first place.

I am still answering emails and post-grading this poor yutz.  I'll see if I can get him to the "C" he needs to play.

I was just taking the idea to its most exaggerated, most ridiculous end.  And, when you think about it, is it so ridiculous?  There are no guarantees one will work in one's major, so even if Yogi is never on the field at Dodger's Stadium, he would still have a degree.

If we are trained in the essentials by K-12, and college is for specialization, why wouldn't we have specialized bachelor's degrees for athletes?

@Marshy, how do you think college athletes are recruited?  Are you just contrarian to be contrarian? 

[marshwiggle]

If we are trained in the essentials by K-12, and college is for specialization, why wouldn't we have specialized bachelor's degrees for athletes?

@Marshy, how do you think college athletes are recruited?  Are you just contrarian to be contrarian?

Sports scholarships are, as far as I know, pretty *uniquely American. As is the huge infrastructure related to athletics on American campuses, as many have mentioned here. To me it would make perfect sense to have athletic training institutions, where people train to be athletes, and where "sportships" would be available for those exceptionally gifted, just as scholarships are given to students who are gifted academically.

(In principle, Phys Ed or Kinesiology are disciplines for which sports scholarships might make sense as being related.)

*Many countries don't have such obscenely high tuition, and so don't need to have so many unusual ways of offsetting the cost......

[Wahoo Redux]

If we are trained in the essentials by K-12, and college is for specialization, why wouldn't we have specialized bachelor's degrees for athletes?

@Marshy, how do you think college athletes are recruited?  Are you just contrarian to be contrarian?

Sports scholarships are, as far as I know, pretty *uniquely American. As is the huge infrastructure related to athletics on American campuses, as many have mentioned here. To me it would make perfect sense to have athletic training institutions, where people train to be athletes, and where "sportships" would be available for those exceptionally gifted, just as scholarships are given to students who are gifted academically.

(In principle, Phys Ed or Kinesiology are disciplines for which sports scholarships might make sense as being related.)

*Many countries don't have such obscenely high tuition, and so don't need to have so many unusual ways of offsetting the cost......

Gosh Marshy, never heard any of that before.

[marshwiggle]

If we are trained in the essentials by K-12, and college is for specialization, why wouldn't we have specialized bachelor's degrees for athletes?

@Marshy, how do you think college athletes are recruited?  Are you just contrarian to be contrarian?

Sports scholarships are, as far as I know, pretty *uniquely American. As is the huge infrastructure related to athletics on American campuses, as many have mentioned here. To me it would make perfect sense to have athletic training institutions, where people train to be athletes, and where "sportships" would be available for those exceptionally gifted, just as scholarships are given to students who are gifted academically.

(In principle, Phys Ed or Kinesiology are disciplines for which sports scholarships might make sense as being related.)

*Many countries don't have such obscenely high tuition, and so don't need to have so many unusual ways of offsetting the cost......

Gosh Marshy, never heard any of that before.

Regardless of what you think of my commentary, I've highlighted what specifically addresses your question. There are one or two disciplines which would potentially fit athletes recruited for their sport.

[dismalist]

*Many countries don't have such obscenely high tuition, and so don't need to have so many unusual ways of offsetting the cost......

Just to clarify, the causality runs the other way: Football teams and climbing walls add to costs. Thus they raise tuition. At the same time, however, they make it attractive for some customers to pay more tuition. Nothing but ordinary price discrimination. 

Simple, really. We add garbage and we have to find ways of paying for it.

Such methods do not work when there is intense competition. While we do have lots of colleges, we also have accreditors who make sure that competition is limited.

In contrast to football and climbing walls, Gen Ed is not voluntary for the college. The accreditors are those that see to it that Gen Ed can't be cut and still award a Bachelor's Degree after two or three full-time years.

So, football is a fun program that costs money and Gen Ed is a jobs program that costs money. :-)

[Wahoo Redux]

If we are trained in the essentials by K-12, and college is for specialization, why wouldn't we have specialized bachelor's degrees for athletes?

@Marshy, how do you think college athletes are recruited?  Are you just contrarian to be contrarian?

Sports scholarships are, as far as I know, pretty *uniquely American. As is the huge infrastructure related to athletics on American campuses, as many have mentioned here. To me it would make perfect sense to have athletic training institutions, where people train to be athletes, and where "sportships" would be available for those exceptionally gifted, just as scholarships are given to students who are gifted academically.

(In principle, Phys Ed or Kinesiology are disciplines for which sports scholarships might make sense as being related.)

*Many countries don't have such obscenely high tuition, and so don't need to have so many unusual ways of offsetting the cost......

Gosh Marshy, never heard any of that before.

Regardless of what you think of my commentary, I've highlighted what specifically addresses your question. There are one or two disciplines which would potentially fit athletes recruited for their sport.

Yeeeeeesssss Marshy, I'm well aware of kinesiology, as I assume everyone here is.

But why?

The kid wants to play baseball.  I doubt he has the brains for kinesiology.  He has the brains for baseball.

Why not give it to him?