Back To School

Your advice sounds about right for the gifted few. But for all of us in the middle of the gene pool another strategy is required.

Remember when Kennedy said, “A rising tide lifts all boats.”? That was true for the generation after WWII. To get there again we will have to do the same things our country did before. That means

(a) going to a shorter standard work week (30 instead of 40) with time and a half for overtime.

(b) a general moratorium on immigration without regard to race, religion, or national origin.

(c) a stiff tariff on imports from a certain 800 pound gorilla (assuming we cannot find a fair and efficient way to redistribute income).

If we did those three things most people wouldn’t need a college degree, and wouldn’t be strapped with the costs of getting one.

I would love to see a link to this piece posted on the homepage of every college and university; no doubt many would say “do you really need to tell us all that…”

You’ve put forth a lot of wisdom in this posting, Mr. Mead.

And you’re so right. Most of the elders of today’s college kiddies are clueless about the world that is out there, or I should say, the world that is soon to be out there..

The easy ride is over. It’ll be competition and work, work, work. But nobody wants to hear that.

That is why the public schools are so disgraceful. Even today, public education seems more concerned with boosting the self-esteem of the students than in truly educating them.

Then, when these kiddies get to college, they tend to demand accommodation rather than displaying an attitude ready for hard work & learning.

For too many, college is an excuse to extend childhood (no responsibilities) and to party on. Oh yes it is.

And affirmative action does not help matters. It lets many unqualified and the marginally qualified people into college. And once in, if there is a critical mass of these AA admittees, they are not weeded out but instead linger on due to political correctness and drag down the overall academic standards of at least the departments where they tend to concentrate.

All this will change; it has to. But, it will take time. And until then, many students will go through their college years under a illusion that just being there equates to being educated. This will come back to bite them once they’re out in the real world, but you can’t tell them that now.

You’re posting should be read by every one starting college this Fall — and their parents.

I should further note that I did *not* go to a fancy school, I attended a land grant college and I’m quite proud of my alma mater. You don’t *have* to attend a pricey school to get a first quality education.

Much good here but where in the world does the author think a student these days is going to find a good liberal education? University arts departments are fraught with trendy, politically correct material. The classics are in the process of being forgotten. If a student wants to read them, he must do it in his spare time, of which many have little, given that they are working one, sometimes two or three part-time jobs to pay their tuition and expenses.

Uhm… Things have already changed a bit in the last 15-20 years outside of Academia. This world you describe, the world of “will be” is exactly how things are for my generation. I’m a private sector knowledge worker (software engineer) in my late 30s.

I think I’ll put a link to this up on my Blackboard site for my own students. I know they’d never believe it if I say it, but since they apparently believe just about anything that they read on the internet …

I have to disagree about getting a liberal arts education. It simply doesn’t cut it anymore. I *do* agree about getting the kind of education that allows for broad thinking and adaptability, but that hasn’t been a liberal arts education for a long long time…

Physics is the new liberal arts. You learn to think, reason, and *model* the world. Test your models against reality, and use them to make predictions and carry out useful activities in the world. Most physics programs also require you to learn to program (not a great career, but a required life skill going forward), and require enough of the history, econ, writing etc sorts of courses to actually round you out. Most physics programs also require a year of chemistry and a year of another science and 2 years of a foreign language.

*That* will give you the general skills you need to succeed in life. I’ve not seen a liberal arts degree in the nation that actually provides a ‘liberal’ education anymore, or that provides the skills you really need to make it in a rapidly changing world. Physics does.

Agree with quadrupole,

The main problem with the mostly excellent article here, is common with almost all editorializing on this topic. The writers themselves have liberal arts educations, and little concept of the value of a technical or hard science education. They stress the imporance of a general liberal arts education either because they have to justify their own lives, their college jobs teaching liberal arts, or just don’t have any idea what a hard science education is about. (I suspect the latter is the biggest factor)

I’m, sorry, but anyone with a library card or internet connection can get themselves trained up on the classics and read reviews of hundreds more (and better) scholars than they will encounter in school. You just need the will and the time. The liberal arts degree is a bit like paying Huck Finn 5 cents to paint a fence.

As for the specific point on ‘not getting specific skills’, that is quite wrong. You NEED specific skills, even knowing they have a short shelf life, because the specific skills include many basic subskills that will apply again to speed your learning of more skills down the road. (Learning to use a mimeograph teaches you the importance of getting the original perfect, formatting margins well, etc.)

Many of those skills can only be learned hands-on, in some kind of laboratory.
Learning a programming language, learning how to use/maintain a piece of equipment, learning how to write a technical report with readable graphs, learning how to calculate a rate of a reaction or the movement of an object; maybe you’ll never need those specific abilities in the working world, but they lay the foundation to adapt to other problems.

If you stick with a liberal arts degree, then be sure one of your part-time jobs during school teaches you a trade. Being a plumber’s assistant rather than a waitress could be the ticket to paying rent 10 years from now.

And please, please, do not spend $100,000 to get a generalized liberal arts degree.

Lots of engineers & scientists weighing in against the value of a “liberal arts” degree. I’ll add one more amen, but note the the author recommended a “liberal education,” not a “liberal arts degree.” There is a difference. I studied engineering as an undergrad, and am generally glad I did. But if I had majored in Physics as an undergrad, I could still have gotten the same MS in engineering, but I would have been able to take more econ, anthro, and Spanish along the way.

I got to take Econ 1 from the estimable Russell Roberts. And having learned the moral superiority of the free market from Russ, I wanted more Econ. But the engineering curriculum is really tight-fisted with the electives. I had a similar experience with anthro, and when I finally got decent in Spanish I had no room in the schedule to study Cervantes.

I will say this though—learning how to design a Mars lander from a real German rocket scientist made up for a lot of that.

I’m torn on the liberal arts vs. hard sciences debate. I really think it comes down to personality and talent of the individual.

I graduated in 2005 with a liberal arts degree (history). For 4 out of 5 years in my career, I’ve worked in software development moving from testing, to analysis, to actual programming (and yes, I have the hard skills/languages – recursion was a wonderful concept to learn). I’ve been promoted far ahead of peers who had CS or math degrees, mainly because of a) writing skills and b) analytical skills. I think the latter is key, and I’m not sure if liberal arts or hard sciences provide the better framework.

There are features of the hard sciences which emphasize analytical skills, especially in physics and math (which is the basis for the historical concept of analysis). And some liberal arts degrees, especially history and certain forms of poli sci or IR, seem to be able to develop one’s ability to critically analyze issues fairly effectively.

I think the key is in the content of what is being taught – it has something to do with the constant attacking of theory and/or the model, or maybe it’s the constant struggle to not oversimplify or deny other possible conclusions. You can learn to think this way in either Physics or History, but you can also learn the exact opposite just as easily in either discipline.

While I agree that a traditional liberal education would be the best option for most students, the problem is that most colleges only offer liberal arts “lite” in their curriculum.

From what I’ve read and seen, most liberal arts college graduates are woefully illiterate in math and science. They lack familiarity with the fundamental ideas of western culture and only know a smattering of “world” culture. Their writing skills are so inadequate that they often need remedial writing instruction even after graduating.

Generally speaking, science and math continue to be rigorous courses of study within higher education, but the liberal arts option has been dumbed down. It’s sad.

Wonderful article. I agree with everything you have written except regarding the specific science to study. I recommend studying physics instead. Physics is the most fundamental science. When taught well, it can give you a deep understanding of HOW to learn and understand other complex phenomena.
Many liberal arts colleges have excellent physics departments. They are always looking for high quality students and will often subsidize the education to make it much more affordable.

Level 3 wrote: “Many of those skills can only be learned hands-on, in some kind of laboratory.”
A physics education at a liberal-arts college will provide you with many skills: programming, experience with technical equipment, technical report writing, etc. It will also require you to take courses in history, economics, humanities, etc, and provide you with greater perspective on the world at large.

quadrapole wrote: “Physics is the new liberal arts.”
I love physics, but could never go that far. An education in physics is incredibly useful, but by itself can not replace the understanding of history, culture, and economics that is provided by liberal arts.

Get the best of both worlds: Study physics at a liberal-arts college or university.

“If we did those three things most people wouldn’t need a college degree, and wouldn’t be strapped with the costs of getting one.”

Of course we’d be paying 25$ for a t-shirt which would make people immensely unhappy. China doesn’t make goods too cheaply… Americans want to pay too little for goods, or alternately get paid too much to make them.

For good reason, student interest in the liberal arts has been declining for years because of the focus on narrow specialization, the decline of teaching and the deification of research. Could Jacques Barzun style generalist get a job at Columbia today? These pages are good place to revitalize the study of the humanities. There is not much competition, an unmet demand and a waiting audience of millions, available at the striking of a key.

The problem with our country today is that too many people have chosen the “liberal arts” degree. Few are graduating from universities with a marketable skill — i.e., those which someone will pay you money to apply in their business. Engineering and other applied sciences should be stressed if we want this country to haul itself out of the ditch. We have enough folks who don’t have “real” skills (starting at the Oval Office).

Good essay. Liked especially the elegant English, proper use of the semicolon which is so rare today; I do so love these properly placed. Did Chem Engineering in three years in a state school, upon return from Viet Nam in 1971, not much time for “traditional liberal education”. Have read extensively, collected works of Shakespeare, many others, in my “spare” time while raising my first five children and before/after. But there are those amongst the other recommendations that I would second; (ok, playing with you now with the second semicolon here) I did two years each in high school French and Spanish, in that order, overlapping the second year French with first year Spanish (fun time). Married first a Puerto Rican wife, and had very good Spanish at the time, still can converse basic French. Two assignments in Germany got my German literacy up to “pretty good”. Now married to Chinese woman, and we speak Mandarin at home. Work in India for almost 2 years now, so next effort is Hindi. Our son (only 3, speaks chinese) will be returning here soon to be educated in English, after year in China with mom to get his “mother” language settled, but obviously he will pick up Hindi while playing with his classmates. Big plus(es) in today’s world.

I was driven to do my studies by my desire to do well by myself. Not by or for others. From my first five kids, only one had the same spark. All were offered by me to pay full 4-5 years state college, 3 of 5 completed same. And, as said, only one (sadly none followed my, and still lucrative, path into engineering) has that. The child brings that to the school, with the careful guidance of the parent and, maybe society (jury still out on the latter). The college or university did not provide it when I when there (1971-74), nor from my feedback from first five kids, or my readings lately, does it now. Unlikely to do so in future. Not to be a downer, I liked the attempt to explain to the elite in university they should help. Their major contribution would be in not extinguishing such sparks they see, and if at all possible, blowing on the dim ambers in the other possibles to enhance their faint glimmers into something akin to what I brought to university; (ok third time with the semicolons, what can I say, I like them) a desire to make me what I wanted to be, despite any obstacle in the way. I am not assured that what I read about the current professoriate that they will even do the first, much less the second. To accomplish a love of learning, which I brought to university, and have held ever since, will require a major restructuring of university.

Again, loved the essay.

“embers” not “ambers” in my post above @12:16 pm on this thread. I am suitably chastened.

For a traditional education with the Classics in mind: try Hillsdale College in Michigan, or the St John’s Colleges in Annapolis and Santa Fe.

The key is to NOT shut down immigration—you always want to skim the cream, and have a society open to talents—I would rather have a gifted Hungarian immigrate than close the borders to protect a home grown rapist. You also want to eliminate scumbags from coming in, so you need to control the borders, as well, strongly. For example, 10 percent of US babies are born to undocumented aliens (50% of the births in LA County!). That needs to stop.

Very thoughtful, challenging and invigorating essay. And the best comments grouping I believe I’ve ever seen. Congrats to all. I believe there’s hope.

Lea Luke said:
“Your advice sounds about right for the gifted few. But for all of us in the middle of the gene pool another strategy is required.”

“Remember when Kennedy said, “A rising tide lifts all boats.”? That was true for the generation after WWII. To get there again we will have to do the same things our country did before. That means

(a) going to a shorter standard work week (30 instead of 40) with time and a half for overtime.

(b) a general moratorium on immigration without regard to race, religion, or national origin.

(c) a stiff tariff on imports from a certain 800 pound gorilla (assuming we cannot find a fair and efficient way to redistribute income).

If we did those three things most people wouldn’t need a college degree, and wouldn’t be strapped with the costs of getting one.”

Holy mackerel! A person couldn’t come up with a worse prescription, or a more certain route to national serfdom, than this one! A modicum of study of the last 200 years of economic history would demonstrate the folly of restricting trade, the benefits of immigration, and the unintended ill effects of having the state dictate workers’s work schedules and/or wages. What intuitively may appear to be a good idea, when examined in light of careful economic analysis shows its true nature. All those ideas involve increasing the scope and power of government–a sure path to economic decline. If the government would get out of the way, and quit making enterprise so difficult and costly, free people would find all sorts of new ways to be productive and achieve their particular ends. You are proposing the government as the solution to what ails us; the truth is that it is the government that ails us. The policies you propose would not have the effects you intend.

If one tenet of good writing is an ability to make vague, timeless advice sound profound and novel, you have pulled it off here:

Learn math & science
Learn to write objective prose
Focus and discipline is more important than content
GIGO

I disagree that the world is becoming less bureaucratic, but I agree that social mobility will become more and more about either kissing ass or taking risks that will seem, and probably be, unfairly stacked against you. Perhaps a background in casino gambling would be useful then? But I digress.

One piece of advice I would give to any university student, especially in America: live elsewhere. Integrate yourself into a foreign country either during or soon after university. Preferably live and work there, but you can also go to school – vacation or sightseeing trips don’t count. Aside from the basics of the language, don’t waste your time learning about a culture and the finer points of a foreign language from a professor. If you’re serious about actually learning, you need to live there to understand it. As an added bonus, it will teach you at least as much about America as it does about the other place.

If you want to really be in the game for this century, you had damn well better have at least a basic mastery of Calculus and Physics. I consider anyone who cannot quote Shakespeare, apply the Chain rule and decompose vector forces as uneducated.

Great post. Your students are very lucky. I just moved to Beijing from Boston and you are definitely correct when you say that competition is global.

My one quibble would be to say that learning a specific skill or discipline (such as physics, engineering, etc.) is NOT a mistake. Yes, it will likely be superseded by new discoveries in the coming years, but you’ll have a base of knowledge from which to learn and understand these changes. You can learn from the classic sciences, just as you can learn from classic literature.

I thought this essay was going to end by telling us it was a slightly updated version of advice give to beginning freshman advisees 2, 3, and 4 decades ago. Much of what the man says IS the advice that some of us gave for years. Always nice to see it again, and thanks for the Medicare.

The best advice ever given me was to look around and see what you’d like to do, and then meet and talk to people who are doing it and find out how they got where they are. It will provide direction. Also, know the territory: will there be room for you when the time comes? Is everyone going there? Good to venture into areas you wouldn’t ordinarily go into. Going to college midlife introduced me to anthropology and oceanography, geology and architecture, providing me with a good base of understanding when the BP Gulf crisis and 911 Ground Zero events occurred. And children should be learning two other languages beginning at a grade school level. Our love for bureaucracy has left this country far short of where it should be in education. Our kids need to be drilled in the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic, and to know basics of languages, world history and solid science. I’m heartbroken at the legacy left for our children by the generation of greed.

I am @gmcinva, retired now after a 40 year career, who never met or worked with a “liberal arts major” who accomplished anything worthy of note:
well excuuuuuuuse me! I guess you haven’t met me yet. And you’d better hurry up, since after a 40 year career you can’t be any younger than I am. Google “Laurence B. Siegel” and decide if I’ve accomplished anything worthy of note. Larry

I’m a freshman at one of the notoriously top ranked party schools, and I must say that I am pretty pessimistic of my fellow peers. When did it ever become cool to get smashed every night? Why do people drink to get drunk? Why can’t they just drink to a point of having a good and responsible time? And why are people taking notes in my biology class about electrons?

Well, besides that little tangent, I must say that this article is definitely inspiring. As a freshman, I have a lot of options ahead of me. I have been exposed to many areas of discipline (thanks to a rigorous high school), and my path is still not concrete. I am however trying to make myself as marketable as I can; I am taking a public speaking course, learning a foreign language, and getting murdered at the moment in a writing analytically course. I also got a headstart this summer by taking a psychology course for the fun of it, and the professor has changed my perspective in life. By the way, for all my fellow peers out there, don’t judge a professor by their GPA. If you really want to learn and better yourself, your professor will see that and you will earn what you deserve. Don’t go for the easy route! You won’t regret the challenge.

I have also been considering starting a business, but due to substantial start up capital (the money is coming straight from my college savings), I have been discouraged. After reading this article multiple times, my vision is becoming more and more clear, and I think I am going to go with my gut instinct on starting this project. I love creativity, and I hope I can provide innovation to the world later in my life.

As far as the liberal vs sciences debate, I have no stance as I believe I do not have enough insight on the matter. I do believe the future is becoming inevitably more technological, and as a result humans are going to have to acclimate to this change. Soon we will see computers as classroom desks, television in our eye glasses, and automation transportation. I am loving reading everyone’s opinions though.

One last thing about the confidence and life part. I am a strong advocate of health and fitness. Make sure you get enough sleep, you eat healthy, and you stay active. There is nothing better than waking up energized, eating a balanced diet, and a runner’s high. I feel like these natural functions can lead to natural happiness if kept up.

Oh yeah, don’t forget to dance your pains away!

I went to a school that describes exactly what Mead suggested- it was the hardest thing I had ever done..but I learned more in that small amount of time than I learnd in 4 years of honor classes in public highschool. I transferred out to a mainstream university… I must say I regret my decision. Though I can breathe a bit more..I have to work 4 times as hard to get a REALLY good education.