Showing posts with label self-education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label self-education. Show all posts
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Monday, July 11, 2011
AS SEEN ON NYDAILYNEWS.COM
Newly elected Jumaane Williams didn't let Tourette's stand in his way-now wants to help others
Flatbush community organizer Jumaane Williams - who toppled incumbent City Councilman Kendall Stewart in last week's primary - is used to standing up for himself.
Williams was diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome as a teenager growing up in Brooklyn and spent years battling school bureaucrats who wanted him out of gifted classes and into special ed.
Now Williams, 33, wants to draw from the experience to help others.
"Especially as a kid of color, if my mother hadn't been so involved I would have been in special ed," said Williams, who tested into the Philippa Schuyler Middle School for the Gifted and Talented and Brooklyn Technical High School before attending Brooklyn College, where he earned his bachelor's and master's degrees.
Friday, July 8, 2011
My review of Secrets of a Buccaneer Scholar
Secrets of a Buccaneer Scholar: How Self-Education and the Pursuit of Passion Can Lead to a Lifetime of Success by James Marcus BachMy rating: 5 of 5 stars
Taking Back Control
Self-education in this economy is necessary for success, but self-education is most often discouraged within the education system. In my own self-education, I came across this book and many others that are helping steer me in the right direction. One could say the only thing I really needed to learn in school was how to read, how to write, and how to check out a library book. Everything else was superfluous.
This however, is a list of invaluable information I gleaned just from Bach's book:
1. Education can only happen in an environment in which people feel respected, and that their learning is necessary. They need love and encouragement from their teachers to succeed, not by way of high marks, but by formulating a personality that comes from knowing things and the curiosity to know more.
2.In school, and even in the working environment, most often others succeed when they have a sense of uniquely belonging. They want to be apart of something, but they want to bring to that something their own unique contribution. This is necessary in the classroom to a student who wants to learn, but doesn't simply want to follow along in the textbook, and regurgitate facts. Think of a pack of wolves rather than a school of fish. We want children and adults who devour their own sought out information, not passive fish who glean what they "can".
3.Criticism and intimidation are not the same thing, but in the school system are hand-in-hand. Most people who are "bad" at science and math, say it is because they are intimidated by numbers. People who are "bad" readers say they are intimidated by words. Numbers shouldn't be threatening, and speed reading should be discouraged. Criticism should be healthy, and failure should be funny.
4. People should be encouraged to take pride in what they can uniquely do, which encourages them to be successful at it, and other things. They should be encouraged to learn outside of school, and for that learning to count.
5. Adults in the workforce need to enrich their lives by continuing to learn. Learning after college, in the workplace, should always happen! Experts know that being an expert means knowing who to ask. Create your own syllabus of books to study. Create a syllabus of questions to spark your curiosity. Don't ignore your curiosity. Learn, explore. Know that you are smart, and no matter what your vocation, become a professional intellectual.
As a graduate do you have all the information you need to succeed in the working world? Of course not, no one does. I especially do not, that is why I am continuing to learn, and doing so for free. I may not have the degree but I will know as much as someone who does. I am taking control of what I am learning. I am in the driver's seat again. Are you in the driver's seat of your education?
View all my reviews
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
My review of DIY U
DIY U: Edupunks, Edupreneurs, and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education by Anya KamenetzMy rating: 5 of 5 stars
I think this book is an excellent example of the great divide between generations. Now, much larger than a gap, this "new" divide is between those who are still pursuing education/information/reason, and those who are clinging to it with the last breath in their ancient body.
It is a wonder that already intelligent, free-thinking individuals find themselves caught holding a very empty bag. Well, actually, that bag is not quite so empty as it is filled with the surmounting debt required for this "education".
Bottom-line, those same students have the power of language and a love of knowledge and want more control over the process of attaining more and pursuing their highest self. This was once the purpose of a higher education. Unfortunately, the purpose of higher education now is to line the pockets of higher-up administrators, politicians, and lobbyists. Often villainized, tenured professors only see a fraction of that payout.
It comes nowhere near the grubby little hands of undergrad students, destitute grad students, and hopeful yet slighted non-tenure track profs and adjunct faculty. In this economy one can't afford to go into the red for the job they will never find with the help of their college or university. This book encourages the self-reliant, like a dissatisfied customer, to take their business elsewhere.
This book continues to fight that good fight against that sad, pathetic problem in higher education, festering and growing by the day.
And to that I say: "God Bless, America!"
View all my reviews
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Weird Al's idea of growing up.
Bravo, Weird Al.
Today I read this article on NPR's website. It details Weird Al Yancovic's literary genius and the creation of his first children's book: "When I Grow Up". In the article, "Al", explains that he wants his readers, children mostly, to get a sense of possibility with the book. He wants kids to know that whatever they want to be is fine, as long as they are happy and excited about it. Not to mention, maybe another kick in the teeth of narrow-minded, nit-wits who have streamlined education and imagination.
It's obvious that Al is a talented lyricist, and that shows up in his brilliant, poetic verse. What strikes me, is how poignant the book is. It reaches out the kids in that first moment they are forced to label themselves; a label society hopes will stick with them so they will undoubtedly coast unhindered to their "desired" finish line. Unfortunately, as this blog has noted time and again,that's just not how it works.
I joked in an earlier post, that the only way to finish college in four years, is to know your eventual vocation by Kindergarten, and then never ever change your mind, no matter what life throws at you. Again, I was snidely poking fun at the narrowness of the education system, not to mention how costly it is to be "indecisive". But is Weird Al suggesting that indecisiveness could be a form of personal optimism? The little boy in the story comes up with multiple possibilities for his future, not once regretting his inability to choose. Maybe if we are told early on that we are capable of many things, we will ultimately have the confidence to make a decision. Maybe if children have the freedom to pursue their own interests, instead of being bombarded with what they are "not good at" they would just be happier kids. Personal choice could weigh-in, instead of the inevitability of settling for what others think will make them successful.
"When Yankovic himself was 8, he told his guidance counselor he wanted to be a writer for Mad magazine. But the guidance counselor convinced him that there was "not much of a future in comedy" and advised him to pursue a real career, like architecture" cit.
Unbelievable.
Today I read this article on NPR's website. It details Weird Al Yancovic's literary genius and the creation of his first children's book: "When I Grow Up". In the article, "Al", explains that he wants his readers, children mostly, to get a sense of possibility with the book. He wants kids to know that whatever they want to be is fine, as long as they are happy and excited about it. Not to mention, maybe another kick in the teeth of narrow-minded, nit-wits who have streamlined education and imagination.
It's obvious that Al is a talented lyricist, and that shows up in his brilliant, poetic verse. What strikes me, is how poignant the book is. It reaches out the kids in that first moment they are forced to label themselves; a label society hopes will stick with them so they will undoubtedly coast unhindered to their "desired" finish line. Unfortunately, as this blog has noted time and again,that's just not how it works.
I joked in an earlier post, that the only way to finish college in four years, is to know your eventual vocation by Kindergarten, and then never ever change your mind, no matter what life throws at you. Again, I was snidely poking fun at the narrowness of the education system, not to mention how costly it is to be "indecisive". But is Weird Al suggesting that indecisiveness could be a form of personal optimism? The little boy in the story comes up with multiple possibilities for his future, not once regretting his inability to choose. Maybe if we are told early on that we are capable of many things, we will ultimately have the confidence to make a decision. Maybe if children have the freedom to pursue their own interests, instead of being bombarded with what they are "not good at" they would just be happier kids. Personal choice could weigh-in, instead of the inevitability of settling for what others think will make them successful.
"When Yankovic himself was 8, he told his guidance counselor he wanted to be a writer for Mad magazine. But the guidance counselor convinced him that there was "not much of a future in comedy" and advised him to pursue a real career, like architecture" cit.
Unbelievable.
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Self-Education:Take Back Control.
The title of my blog: "Where are we going?", once provoked this very specific image for me. It was meant to be a question to the many others whether or not of my generation, facing insurmountable debt, confusion, with little hope for the future they worked for. They feel cheated, lied to, when they climb the mountain of expectation only to find another abyss. One we were not at all prepared for.
Taking time to reflect, research, and study the "alternatives" I find that the title of my blog provokes a new image. The title questions not only the future of those in my situation, but is now a rhetorical question to the person no longer in the driver's seat. The one who steered us off course. We have lost control over our own education, and therefore control over what we can do with it.
I want to reach out to anyone who feels they have veered off course. Those who feel that they followed the rules but were still lead astray. Everyone, whether or not they feel they belong outside the confined walls of the education system, or those who still have faith in it. Both should recognize the benefits of being in control and continuing to learn and thrive. This was the advice given to me by author James Marcus Bach.
Take the next step and encourage it for people who aren't talented enough for conventional education. Then you might as well include everyone who is exactly the right amount of talent... The notion of "talent" with respect to conventional schooling is just circular logic: if someone thrives in that environment, then they are deemed to be "talented enough but not too talented." But this is a fallacy. It's not talent. It's FIT. Some people, regardless of whatever talents they may or may not have, are good fits for that system.
"Buccaneering" or Self-Education
Secrets of a Buccaneer Scholar is his book, one that has pinpointed some serious issues in the education system and thankfully, offers solutions. One solution in particular: Take back control of your own education!
Bach became one of the youngest technical managers at Apple computer with less than a high school diploma. Is he a genius? Technically, but he no longer attends Mensa meetings. More on that later. The genius of the man is not measured in numbers necessarily. Despite his high IQ, he did "poorly" in grade school. He was depressed by being classified by numbers, and not challenged intellectually, and how however unintentionally, began to take control of what number he was designated.
He intentionally failed tests, he ignored his homework assignments. Was it because he didn't care about learning? No. Did he do nothing with his time? On the contrary. Bach spent his time building and programming the very first computers. He studied physics in his spare time---but was failing physics! "See that 49 in physics? Looks like a low score doesn't it? But I loved physics. I studied it at home... I taught myself how to use sliderule and calculated trajectories...but none of that was part of my schoolwork, so it didn't count." So why would a genius not be a good student?
Something he refers to as "mental mutiny". Your mind is free to accept or not accept, to grow or not grow. Refusal of homework, failing tests on purpose, etc., are a natural response to not being challenged, to being disinterested.
The topic of interest, frequently reoccurs in this blog, because the argument of it's necessity in education. As noted before, colleges feign interest in your interests. They create "fluff" courses so you can have fun and become a well-rounded person. Education should be fun, and make you a well-rounded person, yes, but not for a one-sided pay out. As addressed before, the school gets your money, and you get nothing in return. No marketable skills or even usable credits, just memories.
But interest IS a necessity to learning. The brain only retains what it deems necessary! A professor, a teacher, a counselor, even an employer may not deem it necessary, but your brain has.
Buccaneering is Unstoppable Curiosity
Beginning in grade school, we are taught various subjects, math, art, science, etc. Are we ever asked to make connections between these varying subjects? Most often they are distinct and separate. But learning connections between various subjects is key to understanding why learning is important. A child needs to learn at a very young age that all learning is important, if he or she is to retain any information, and to continue to believe that as an adult. At high school and even college age a student continues to be confronted with old information in a brand new context, and most often reacts to it in the very same way. It is only when someone teaches new connections, charts new territory, and braves the unknown,that students are interested. Imagine a professor who teaches that a literature major can and should be interested in astrophysics for _____ reason, and makes that reason exciting. Students will make the connection. The education system is caught up in the alternative, and you are caught up in the hypocritical dichotomy of "why are these classes required of me, if I am not SUPPOSED to even be interested in them?" Alternating the dynamics of doing things excites the mind. Learning the exact same things over and over does not. It only causes burn out, mental mutiny, and, worse, depression. So many young people are depressed by what they consider their lack of ability, simply because they do not coalesce to a system that has no designation for them. Are they slow, stupid? Are they just *too* "gifted"?
"Guaranteed Not Stupid"
As a member of Mensa, Bach was told having a high IQ meant simply that he was "guaranteed not stupid" and therefore should never again doubt his ability to learn. Shouldn't that be the designation for everyone? What makes this particular group so elite, if they can't even call themselves "smart"? IQ is just another number designation by a grade, only dictated by a test that means just a little as a 7th grade history exam. Test and homework grades, IQ and SAT scores are all supposed to be the building blocks of our prospective list of credentials. But what do these credentials mean? What again does a high school diploma signify if a genius cannot earn one? What then does a Bachelor's degree signify, if the person possessing it has no idea what to put it towards?
Bach says his book "isn't about school". In his email response to me, he even seemed to argue that there was nothing wrong with the system and with people who fit in with it. But he does point out that there is something wrong with how education is fundamentally presented. It is purely presented as "facts", in context of the classroom situation. Anyone who has ever really learned anything, did so through reflection, by partially teaching him/herself. A person learns by literally becoming a better person of their creation, influenced by the information presented. Education is construction and reconstruction of your mind, and as Bach says, “Education is the you that emerges from what you learn”
Taking Back Control
Self-education in this economy is necessary for success, but self-education is most often discouraged within the education system. In my own self-education, I came across this book and many others that are helping steer me in the right direction. One could say the only thing I really needed to learn in school was how to read, how to write, and how to check out a library book. Everything else was superfluous.
This however, is a list of invaluable information I gleaned just from Bach's book:
1. Education can only happen in an environment in which people feel respected, and that their learning is necessary. They need love and encouragement from their teachers to succeed, not by way of high marks, but by formulating a personality that comes from knowing things and the curiosity to know more.
2.In school, and even in the working environment, most often others succeed when they have a sense of uniquely belonging. They want to be apart of something, but they want to bring to that something their own unique contribution. This is necessary in the classroom to a student who wants to learn, but doesn't simply want to follow along in the textbook, and regurgitate facts. Think of a pack of wolves rather than a school of fish. We want children and adults who devour their own sought out information, not passive fish who glean what they "can".
3.Criticism and intimidation are not the same thing, but in the school system are hand-in-hand. Most people who are "bad" at science and math, say it is because they are intimidated by numbers. People who are "bad" readers say they are intimidated by words. Numbers shouldn't be threatening, and speed reading should be discouraged. Criticism should be healthy, and failure should be funny.
4. People should be encouraged to take pride in what they can uniquely do, which encourages them to be successful at it, and other things. They should be encouraged to learn outside of school, and for that learning to count.
5. Adults in the workforce need to enrich their lives by continuing to learn. Learning after college, in the workplace, should always happen! Experts know that being an expert means knowing who to ask. Create your own syllabus of books to study. Create a syllabus of questions to spark your curiosity. Don't ignore your curiosity. Learn, explore. Know that you are smart, and no matter what your vocation, become a professional intellectual.
As a graduate do you have all the information you need to succeed in the working world? Of course not, no one does. I especially do not, that is why I am continuing to learn, and doing so for free. I may not have the degree but I will know as much as someone who does. I am taking control of what I am learning. I am in the driver's seat again. Are you in the driver's seat of your education?
Next time: What does it mean to be "gifted"?
Friday, April 2, 2010
The System is Down
"If life's really as short as they say, then why is the path so long?" M. Ward
A brilliant poet, M. Ward, and a valid question as well. I entitled this blog "The System is Down" because it addresses some of the of the final issues in the collegiate portion of this blog. First, the collegiate system, as we have established in previous posts, is failing. Why has it failed us? Well like any antiquated piece of machinery that isn't kept up to par, it starts to deteriorate and the holes start to show. Yes, antiquated academia has ailed us, and failed us, but I like to think there is still hope. I know it may have seemed that I am here as simply a whiny, dissenting voice. I am here, however, to instill that hope. I have some solutions to the problem. But until I get to them, let's review what we have learned so far.
As you may recall, we learned that a lot of the "success" of students comes from an early, and in some ways, premature relationship with professors. Now I know that most people read that and immediately their thinking goes south. I am not suggesting that everyone who succeeds does so because of an inappropriate relationship with their professors, although that has been the case for quite some time; let's be realistic. However, being on a friendly basis with your professors, when you are 18, 19 years old, can seem disingenuous, and feel like kissing up, but it works. I haven't exactly addressed why that is, but I will in a future blog dealing with the student/teacher dynamic. It seems that if you want anyone to perform their job appropriately, and act logically, kissing up is the only option you have. You can make a stink, but it has to be a pretty big stink. I have been told on more than one occasion that I should have sued the college I graduated from for what they put me through. I am not that kind of person. Some said I just didn't keep my mouth shut, and didn't suck up enough. Oh well, I'm not going to lose sleep over that.
We also learned that the average college student's career is dictated by the school's requirements. You may be in a "liberal" school of learning, but they still insist that you have at least a basic understanding of certain concepts regardless of what your Major is or if they even apply. We know these now as our old "friends" the GEN ED requirements. The concept of being well-rounded thinker is completely understandable in some respects. You really shouldn't give a degree to someone who can't add and subtract or write a full sentence, even though in some instances that is discriminatory. But the system of grooming "well-rounded" learners, which is hardly the case still causes many problems. 1)The schools do not always offer what they ask, no, INSIST you take. That does not bode well for completion of degree. 2)Some people are able, because of the ass-kissing, to squeak around the previous problem, is that fair to everyone else? Those people save money and others lose out? 3)Some people drop-out before their senior year as a result of the undue stress and confusion about the difficulty. The numbers are there, 33%, otherwise known as less than half, graduate. So the other 67% are too stupid? I think not. They got in, didn't they? C'mon now.
As intelligent readers and thinkers we know now, thanks to some valuable sources, that these schools do not care whether or not their graduation numbers are down, even though they pretend to. Schools only care about recruitment numbers, those are the numbers that get them funding. As a result, schools really only care about what is beneficial to the finances of the school and not what is beneficial or convenient for you. Especially if their numbers are high enough to do without you. And they will do without you.
So what are the solutions?
Well, maybe colleges should start caring about it's students again. That would be a start. But in a world with an economic crisis, I don't see that happening any time soon. Maybe we should start with something small. A simple change in format.
I think the collegiate system should do away with "required" GEN EDS. For the first two years make everyone a liberal arts major. Let them take whatever classes they want. Colleges are attempting to groom young people into adults right? So give them the option to make their own choices. I did this for myself somewhat when I changed my major from Communications to Liberal Arts. I had already gotten some of my requirements out of the way which is when I discovered many majors have mostly but not all of the same requirements. Still, it promoted growth and success in a way that my previous major did not.
To find out more check out this link, and I will post some of the examples here.
1)Self-Designed Major Program
The Self-Designed Major Program offers opportunities for self-directed students to arrange the courses offered by the University of Southern Maine in a way ... www.usm.maine.edu/cas/sdm2/index.htm
2)PROPOSAL FOR THE SELF-DESIGNED MAJOR
File Format: Microsoft Word - View as HTML
The General Management: Self-Designed major is intended for students who wish to develop an area of expertise outside of the major programs offered by the ...www.csom.umn.edu/Assets/35610.doc -
I like this idea of self-design. I think this is the best option available, but there is always room for improvement.
Now what I find interesting are some of the responses the OP received, which were little bit snarky in my opinion, to say the least.
Especially this statement:
"The purpose of an education is to receive one. All facets are important, otherwise we would only have technical schools."
Once again I pose the question, if all facets are important, then why do we have the distinction of major? Quit talking in circles, that's what I say.
And this statement:
"Oh dear. Do not make your own degree. That will not be worth anything to anyone, unfortunately, or very few people anyway. then you won't graduate. you need to take required courses in order to graduate. without degree, you can't get a job."
Why can't someone have a BA degree after taking a certain number of credits? That's ridiculous. And yes, you CAN get a job withOUT a degree, just ask all the unemployed college graduates making less money than their "less-educated" peers.
And the tongue in cheek response about taking a double major:
"...since you will be going for a bachelor's degree, there are plenty of courses that not only they allow you to take.....but you are required to take several courses that have nothing to do with your major. they do this to make you a well rounded learner. plus its a good way for them to get more money out of you, lol."
How is this a solution? Sounds to me like a symptom of a problem.
My sister also suggested that colleges should just give you the list of classes you will take each semester leaving no room for error. Completely mapping out your four years, and then if there is a mistake made the student cannot be held responsible.
But are you seeing the trend here? This is like the itinerary, and it lets those useless advisors keep their jobs. But, I think that with any pencil-pushing there is always room for error, and I don't think schools would be open to this idea. As I said they would have to claim full responsibility for any mistakes. I don't see that happening.
Another and final suggestion I would make would be to do away with stringent course requirements entirely. Not just getting rid of GEN EDS, but all required classes. This would, I think be another really easy change. Just set the requirement to be a certain amount of credit hours, and let them be filled however the student chooses. No forms to fill out, nothing to be approved. Just "take 125 credits and you have your degree".
You may remember from previous posts that by graduation I had completed 129/125 credit hours, but I was not allowed to graduate "on time" because I was "missing" the "correct" class requirements. Not five of the wrong classes, but one measly lower level French class. This one meaningless, pointless class was standing inbetween my well-rounded, well-educated 26-year-old self, and my degree. This is hooey. Are you with me?
Colleges shoot themselves in the foot completely, and do things that do not make sense. Sometimes extracurricular activities make credit hours available. Sometimes these credits go completely to waste because they are not a required part of the student's major. I say if a student is willing to pay for a class, make it count.
If all they care about is my money, take the money, and give me my credits. They feel that's a fair trade on their end, so make it fair!
Taking college classes should be like shopping at the supermarket.
In a way it's the same, you wouldn't go to the frozen food section first, you would go there last. Alright, fine. Let's pretend your GEN EDs are your canned goods, your dry foods, and your major is frozen pizza and your senior year is the carton of eggs and bread. But you can definitely get your chips and cereal at the same time, and you can't NOT get cereal if they are out of chips. You are getting enough food to sustain yourself on. You can live without chips. You have cereal under your belt. What if you already have cereal at home, why would you need to buy more cereal? They wouldn't not let you leave the store if you don't buy cereal. You can buy whatever you want, as long as you pay for it. And no need to make special friends with the produce guy. I mean he is hot, but you are really hungry and don't have time to talk. Are any of you still with me?
The next post about "Planning Ahead" will just be a silly, but somewhat serious collection of questionnaires, to give people an idea of how to plan ahead and what is in store for them. It may also be fun for people who already went through it. Hindsight is 20/20, as they say.
The final post will be a collection of interviews I had taken of college students and recent graduates and their experiences. If you don't take it from me, take it from them.
Stay Tuned.
A brilliant poet, M. Ward, and a valid question as well. I entitled this blog "The System is Down" because it addresses some of the of the final issues in the collegiate portion of this blog. First, the collegiate system, as we have established in previous posts, is failing. Why has it failed us? Well like any antiquated piece of machinery that isn't kept up to par, it starts to deteriorate and the holes start to show. Yes, antiquated academia has ailed us, and failed us, but I like to think there is still hope. I know it may have seemed that I am here as simply a whiny, dissenting voice. I am here, however, to instill that hope. I have some solutions to the problem. But until I get to them, let's review what we have learned so far.
As you may recall, we learned that a lot of the "success" of students comes from an early, and in some ways, premature relationship with professors. Now I know that most people read that and immediately their thinking goes south. I am not suggesting that everyone who succeeds does so because of an inappropriate relationship with their professors, although that has been the case for quite some time; let's be realistic. However, being on a friendly basis with your professors, when you are 18, 19 years old, can seem disingenuous, and feel like kissing up, but it works. I haven't exactly addressed why that is, but I will in a future blog dealing with the student/teacher dynamic. It seems that if you want anyone to perform their job appropriately, and act logically, kissing up is the only option you have. You can make a stink, but it has to be a pretty big stink. I have been told on more than one occasion that I should have sued the college I graduated from for what they put me through. I am not that kind of person. Some said I just didn't keep my mouth shut, and didn't suck up enough. Oh well, I'm not going to lose sleep over that.
We also learned that the average college student's career is dictated by the school's requirements. You may be in a "liberal" school of learning, but they still insist that you have at least a basic understanding of certain concepts regardless of what your Major is or if they even apply. We know these now as our old "friends" the GEN ED requirements. The concept of being well-rounded thinker is completely understandable in some respects. You really shouldn't give a degree to someone who can't add and subtract or write a full sentence, even though in some instances that is discriminatory. But the system of grooming "well-rounded" learners, which is hardly the case still causes many problems. 1)The schools do not always offer what they ask, no, INSIST you take. That does not bode well for completion of degree. 2)Some people are able, because of the ass-kissing, to squeak around the previous problem, is that fair to everyone else? Those people save money and others lose out? 3)Some people drop-out before their senior year as a result of the undue stress and confusion about the difficulty. The numbers are there, 33%, otherwise known as less than half, graduate. So the other 67% are too stupid? I think not. They got in, didn't they? C'mon now.
As intelligent readers and thinkers we know now, thanks to some valuable sources, that these schools do not care whether or not their graduation numbers are down, even though they pretend to. Schools only care about recruitment numbers, those are the numbers that get them funding. As a result, schools really only care about what is beneficial to the finances of the school and not what is beneficial or convenient for you. Especially if their numbers are high enough to do without you. And they will do without you.
So what are the solutions?
Well, maybe colleges should start caring about it's students again. That would be a start. But in a world with an economic crisis, I don't see that happening any time soon. Maybe we should start with something small. A simple change in format.
I think the collegiate system should do away with "required" GEN EDS. For the first two years make everyone a liberal arts major. Let them take whatever classes they want. Colleges are attempting to groom young people into adults right? So give them the option to make their own choices. I did this for myself somewhat when I changed my major from Communications to Liberal Arts. I had already gotten some of my requirements out of the way which is when I discovered many majors have mostly but not all of the same requirements. Still, it promoted growth and success in a way that my previous major did not.
To find out more check out this link, and I will post some of the examples here.
1)Self-Designed Major Program
The Self-Designed Major Program offers opportunities for self-directed students to arrange the courses offered by the University of Southern Maine in a way ... www.usm.maine.edu/cas/sdm2/index.htm
2)PROPOSAL FOR THE SELF-DESIGNED MAJOR
File Format: Microsoft Word - View as HTML
The General Management: Self-Designed major is intended for students who wish to develop an area of expertise outside of the major programs offered by the ...www.csom.umn.edu/Assets/35610.doc -
I like this idea of self-design. I think this is the best option available, but there is always room for improvement.
Now what I find interesting are some of the responses the OP received, which were little bit snarky in my opinion, to say the least.
Especially this statement:
"The purpose of an education is to receive one. All facets are important, otherwise we would only have technical schools."
Once again I pose the question, if all facets are important, then why do we have the distinction of major? Quit talking in circles, that's what I say.
And this statement:
"Oh dear. Do not make your own degree. That will not be worth anything to anyone, unfortunately, or very few people anyway. then you won't graduate. you need to take required courses in order to graduate. without degree, you can't get a job."
Why can't someone have a BA degree after taking a certain number of credits? That's ridiculous. And yes, you CAN get a job withOUT a degree, just ask all the unemployed college graduates making less money than their "less-educated" peers.
And the tongue in cheek response about taking a double major:
"...since you will be going for a bachelor's degree, there are plenty of courses that not only they allow you to take.....but you are required to take several courses that have nothing to do with your major. they do this to make you a well rounded learner. plus its a good way for them to get more money out of you, lol."
How is this a solution? Sounds to me like a symptom of a problem.
My sister also suggested that colleges should just give you the list of classes you will take each semester leaving no room for error. Completely mapping out your four years, and then if there is a mistake made the student cannot be held responsible.
But are you seeing the trend here? This is like the itinerary, and it lets those useless advisors keep their jobs. But, I think that with any pencil-pushing there is always room for error, and I don't think schools would be open to this idea. As I said they would have to claim full responsibility for any mistakes. I don't see that happening.
Another and final suggestion I would make would be to do away with stringent course requirements entirely. Not just getting rid of GEN EDS, but all required classes. This would, I think be another really easy change. Just set the requirement to be a certain amount of credit hours, and let them be filled however the student chooses. No forms to fill out, nothing to be approved. Just "take 125 credits and you have your degree".
You may remember from previous posts that by graduation I had completed 129/125 credit hours, but I was not allowed to graduate "on time" because I was "missing" the "correct" class requirements. Not five of the wrong classes, but one measly lower level French class. This one meaningless, pointless class was standing inbetween my well-rounded, well-educated 26-year-old self, and my degree. This is hooey. Are you with me?
Colleges shoot themselves in the foot completely, and do things that do not make sense. Sometimes extracurricular activities make credit hours available. Sometimes these credits go completely to waste because they are not a required part of the student's major. I say if a student is willing to pay for a class, make it count.
If all they care about is my money, take the money, and give me my credits. They feel that's a fair trade on their end, so make it fair!
Taking college classes should be like shopping at the supermarket.
In a way it's the same, you wouldn't go to the frozen food section first, you would go there last. Alright, fine. Let's pretend your GEN EDs are your canned goods, your dry foods, and your major is frozen pizza and your senior year is the carton of eggs and bread. But you can definitely get your chips and cereal at the same time, and you can't NOT get cereal if they are out of chips. You are getting enough food to sustain yourself on. You can live without chips. You have cereal under your belt. What if you already have cereal at home, why would you need to buy more cereal? They wouldn't not let you leave the store if you don't buy cereal. You can buy whatever you want, as long as you pay for it. And no need to make special friends with the produce guy. I mean he is hot, but you are really hungry and don't have time to talk. Are any of you still with me?
The next post about "Planning Ahead" will just be a silly, but somewhat serious collection of questionnaires, to give people an idea of how to plan ahead and what is in store for them. It may also be fun for people who already went through it. Hindsight is 20/20, as they say.
The final post will be a collection of interviews I had taken of college students and recent graduates and their experiences. If you don't take it from me, take it from them.
Stay Tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
It's all about me.
