An essential discussion here. My take is that education should be as much about inspiration as information. Professors in all courses, but maybe particularly of the general ed courses, have a high calling to inspire their students to life-long curiousity. How this was able to happen I am not sure, but in 8th grade my social studies teacher spent the entire first month on the JFK assassination. Inspired me to drill through information and forever be curious about politics and American history.
I think it's true that general education *should* have that effect. An issue is that many courses are "coded" for general education which are also departmental requirements. For example, a student taking "20th Century American Art" could be taking it for general education or as a core class for an art-related major/minor or as a free elective. Those different populations benefit from a different approach to the course, but there's only one class, so how do you teach it? When a university lacks a general education "core," this split in student audiences only makes any targeted "purpose" behind general education coursework more difficult.
Good point. Yes, that is a challenge. Seems that is yet another skill for good teachers to master. Not impossible. I have a music class with beginners and some intermediates. I have to be creative but it works. More generally, college without a core requirement I think you could argue is really not college - it's more fundamentally career training. IMHO
An essential discussion here. My take is that education should be as much about inspiration as information. Professors in all courses, but maybe particularly of the general ed courses, have a high calling to inspire their students to life-long curiousity. How this was able to happen I am not sure, but in 8th grade my social studies teacher spent the entire first month on the JFK assassination. Inspired me to drill through information and forever be curious about politics and American history.
Thanks for the comment!
I think it's true that general education *should* have that effect. An issue is that many courses are "coded" for general education which are also departmental requirements. For example, a student taking "20th Century American Art" could be taking it for general education or as a core class for an art-related major/minor or as a free elective. Those different populations benefit from a different approach to the course, but there's only one class, so how do you teach it? When a university lacks a general education "core," this split in student audiences only makes any targeted "purpose" behind general education coursework more difficult.
Good point. Yes, that is a challenge. Seems that is yet another skill for good teachers to master. Not impossible. I have a music class with beginners and some intermediates. I have to be creative but it works. More generally, college without a core requirement I think you could argue is really not college - it's more fundamentally career training. IMHO
Well written, Matt. The concept of this as a "tax" is new to me and a useful metaphor.
I also thought of another metaphor for general studies which involves throwing particular material onto a wall, just to see what sticks.
So much to talk about from this. Thanks