Addendum to this winding post:
The Florida State Legislator that attempted to remove the four-year degree requirement for Florida PSM licensure has decided to retire, "saw the writing on the wall".?ÿ
And Florida Governor DeSantis has reinstated the original budget for University of Florida Geomatics School that others thought appropriate to cut.?ÿ
Trending Up.?ÿ
I apologize for the negative tone and the political comment.?ÿ
And the liberal arts requirements definitely need to go away.?ÿ I remember when I was in the survey program in Denver one of my requirements was a multi-cultural studies class-- I think the choices were african, asian, and native american.?ÿ Complete and utter waste of time and money, but there was no way around it.?ÿ If I'm in a STEM field I shouldn't be required to take any of that garbage, because all it does is contribute to the tuition bloat.
Putting on my flame-retardant suit here...
...STEM isn't any more special than other majors.
The education revolution that the space race kicked off sixty years ago has had some negative consequences. One of the most pernicious results is a large chunk of society, and STEM grads in particular, convinced that all they need to know is math and science, everyone else is dumber than them because they make lots more money, and stuff like history and literature are for suckers and fools. To be fair, business majors are almost as bad.
Yeah we need STEM graduates, but we certainly don't need arrogant myopic robots who can't even fathom the implications of their work beyond whatever specific problem they are attempting to solve. (Or business grads convinced that moving money from Column A to Column B and then back again is somehow a societal necessity.)
I couldn't stand the engineering grads whining about having to learn how to write in the same way I couldn't stand the literature grads whining about knowing how to solve for x. Suck it up buttercup, we're not asking you to write a bestselling novel or pioneer a new field of astrophysics.
But educated professionals need common ground and a fact-based worldview to function both separately and together in society. Siloed learning - and the rejection of any learning that didn't result in an immediate gain - is unquestionably a part of how we got to the era of "fake news" and alternate realities. It's also contributed to a lack of respect, and outright contempt, for people simply because they are on a different path than us or are competent in a field that we are not.
The intent of education, moreover, should never solely be about preparing individuals to clock in for a paycheck. That's what trade schools and on-the-job training are for. Not everything is about increasing profit margins for the private sector, which is demonstrably unconcerned with what is best for society - and by extension you and I.
I'm not suggesting the schools get rid of those liberal arts programs; I just think they should be elective.?ÿ You can't force someone to be interested in things they have zero interest in.?ÿ If the literature student wants no part of math then I'm 100% on board with that.?ÿ I actually find it wildly arrogant and obnoxious that a school administrator (or whoever makes these decisions) thinks they know so much better than the student that they should be able to ram material unrelated to the student's program of study down that student's throat.
As far as a worldview, well, a college or university is the last place I would trust to teach me something like that.?ÿ I can assure you almost every human on earth is perfectly capable of coming up with a worldview on their own.?ÿ But see, that's the actual problem, isn't it??ÿ The idea of having folks running around coming up with a worldview based simply on their day-to-day experiences scares some people.?ÿ When people get scared they seek to control the situation, and that seems to be what you are suggesting by forcing students to consume material they have no interest in.
coming up with a worldview based simply on their day-to-day experiences
That results in a very limited, even myopic, view. Education should broaden that view, putting experience in a larger perspective.
The word university is quite similar to the world universal.?ÿ The intent of a university, as opposed to a technical trade school, is to require some "cultural" type classes into all curricula requirements and to require some science and math in the non-technical curricula requirements.?ÿ Thus, music students get to take math and basic physics while you may find a veterinary medicine, architectural or engineering student sitting through some "gimme" classes in the College of Arts and Parties.
I'm not suggesting the schools get rid of those liberal arts programs; I just think they should be elective.?ÿ You can't force someone to be interested in things they have zero interest in.?ÿ If the literature student wants no part of math then I'm 100% on board with that.?ÿ I actually find it wildly arrogant and obnoxious that a school administrator (or whoever makes these decisions) thinks they know so much better than the student that they should be able to ram material unrelated to the student's program of study down that student's throat.
One could say the same thing about, well, anything. I find it arrogant and obnoxious that my parents made me learn how to change a tire - I had no interest in that. Or that my boss made me learn MicroStation, which I didn't care about. Both those things paid off in the long run.
How about I get all steamed up about the NCEES and the state Board "ramming" vertical curves "down my throat" when I have no interest in construction staking? I just wrote a software program (learned rudimentary coding in college and kept on going) to automatically generate cut sheets from alignment files.
I learned some pretty important (and beneficial) things that a younger me didn't think he needed to know.
Letting a student control their own education (treating students like a customer who is always right) is a bad idea, and always has been. Simply put, they don't know what they don't know, and those "arrogant" folks in charge usually do know what they don't know, because it's both their job and their life's work.
As far as a worldview, well, a college or university is the last place I would trust to teach me something like that.?ÿ I can assure you almost every human on earth is perfectly capable of coming up with a worldview on their own.
Sure, anyone can come up with a worldview, and most people certainly will. But unless they are at savant levels in multiple areas of study, as well as somehow magically able to discern fact from fiction - especially these days - it's going to be a pretty warped view, and almost certain not going to be a "world" view.
I would fully expect someone to change their mind on some things, or at the very least consider other perspectives, during their time obtaining a university education. That's half the point. If you don't at least think about changing your mind at some point, or maybe consider how others might hold a different view than your own, and take that into account as you go about your life journey, then why'd you go to school in the first place? The whole point of learning things is to take in new information and gain increased understanding. Understanding something doesn't mean you agree with it.
I can't wrap my head around the idea that I should have ignored every single educator in my life in favor of listening to myself and deciding things based on whatever thought was passing through my head at the time. Probably a good thing I didn't, because I would likely be dead if I had.
But see, that's the actual problem, isn't it??ÿ The idea of having folks running around coming up with a worldview based simply on their day-to-day experiences scares some people.?ÿ When people get scared they seek to control the situation, and that seems to be what you are suggesting by forcing students to consume material they have no interest in.
Sounds like projection to me. No one at any university is scared of folks having regular life experiences. But to suggest that the regular life experiences one gets in their own little corner of the world is all there is? There's a word for that - it's called "provincial", and it is literally the opposite of a true "world" view. Those experiences aren't wrong, bad, or irrelevant - nor are the individuals who have them - but they are not all that there is.
My uncle never left his small-town home in Texas. He thinks that the USSR still exists because his local community is still living in 1976, the moon landing never happened because his dad said so, and that medical care is bunk because he married young into an "organization" that thinks that medical imperfections are a reflection of an individual's morality.
He's a wonderful human being...just wrong on a lot of counts because he never got any outside information, and rejected whatever he hadn't already decided in his own mind. In other words, the opposite of education.
No one's forcing students to do anything they don't want to do. Don't want to get an education because you're scared you might get mind-controlled? Don't go to school. The "I'm gonna take my ball and go home" philosophy is a hallmark of provincial thinking.
coming up with a worldview based simply on their day-to-day experiences
That results in a very limited, even myopic, view. Education should broaden that view, putting experience in a larger perspective.
Everyone, college graduate or not, is free to sit down anytime and read about art history, you know that, right??ÿ What is with this drive to ram it down people's throats and then charge them money for it?
I think these requirements exist simply to prop up programs that don't have the demand to exist on their own.?ÿ If the goal is to make tuition more manageable then I think it's perfectly fair to argue in favor of letting programs fall off the menu if the demand isn't there.
One could say the same thing about, well, anything. I find it arrogant and obnoxious that my parents made me learn how to change a tire - I had no interest in that. Or that my boss made me learn MicroStation, which I didn't care about. Both those things paid off in the long run.
How about I get all steamed up about the NCEES and the state Board "ramming" vertical curves "down my throat" when I have no interest in construction staking? I just wrote a software program (learned rudimentary coding in college and kept on going) to automatically generate cut sheets from alignment files.
I learned some pretty important (and beneficial) things that a younger me didn't think he needed to know.
Letting a student control their own education (treating students like a customer who is always right) is a bad idea, and always has been. Simply put, they don't know what they don't know, and those "arrogant" folks in charge usually do know what they don't know, because it's both their job and their life's work.
The difference being your parents probably stopped forcing you to act a certain way when you became an adult.?ÿ It's been my understanding that this is why elementary, junior/high school is the way that it is with generic subjects like "social studies" and "government" and "science".?ÿ Kids get a dozen plus years of this broad, perspective-widening education before they even set foot in a university as a paying adult where they are then told they must learn how to write haikus or do algebra regardless of what they're there to study.
As for the rest, I think my previous post answered it.
So I guess that the low demand for surveying/geomatics classes should result in their demise?
So I guess that the low demand for surveying/geomatics classes should result in their demise?
Nope, it should simply be offered by only enough universities that the program can pay for itself.?ÿ I had to hunt around for the program that I went through and I didn't complain about that at all, in fact, I expected it.?ÿ You raise a good point though; where is the survey requirement for liberal arts students so their "perspective can be widened"??ÿ ?????ÿ
?ÿ
The difference being your parents probably stopped forcing you to act a certain way when you became an adult.
My parents didn't force me. They taught me. Much as my elementary school teachers, sports coaches, Boy Scout leaders, university professors, mentors, etc. did as well.
"I'm [insert adult age] therefore I know everything and should never have to do anything that I don't want to do and I'm going to never accept an idea that I didn't have myself on my own without the aid of anyone around me" is the opposite of "becoming an adult". Education doesn't automatically become indoctrination at some arbitrary age.
Becoming an adult doesn't mean that you know everything. Quite the opposite, in fact. It's one of the things that a university education touches on many, many times. It's why we call it "practicing" surveying rather than "knowing" surveying.
I learned a couple of new things this week. I didn't yell at the people who taught me for teaching me something I didn't ask them to teach me. Sometimes you have to accept that you don't know everything and you're not the authority on everything.
Sometimes you get taught something that doesn't have any bearing on the technical aspects of your profession, or that you don't necessarily need to know. That's good too. Your brain doesn't have a memory limit, and sometimes those "unnecessary" things turn out to be helpful in ways that don't relate to making money in your chosen profession. It doesn't mean you got brainwashed.
Lo, those decades ago when I was a Freshman in college I had a fellow student in my English I class who told me one day his major was Plant Therapy.?ÿ I immediately had a vision of a potted plant on a couch being talked to by a psychiatrist.?ÿ He explained that the program focused on using plants as therapy for senior citizens and others living in institutions for indefinite periods.?ÿ I had never heard of such a thing.?ÿ Many years later I met a fellow who had been a Music Therapy student.?ÿ It was for the same purpose.
Just because you haven't heard about a particular educational program, does not mean it has no value.?ÿ Part of being required to take more general classes is to make you aware of far more than you probably would otherwise.
"All I know is that I know nothing"?? Socrates
The difference being your parents probably stopped forcing you to act a certain way when you became an adult.
My parents didn't force me. They taught me.
I guess my understanding of the words "made" and "taught" are quite a bit different. ???
The straw man argument really isn't necessary.?ÿ I'm not disagreeing that it's good to learn things, but there comes a point in everyone's life when they need to be able to put a foot down and say thanks but no thanks.
When I went through the survey program that I did I was in my 30s.?ÿ I am 99.9% certain I paid far more attention in every class than the various 20-year olds in there.?ÿ And I did this because I think I had a better understanding of the value of the information that was being passed along to me in the manner that it was, and it also didn't hurt that I was writing checks out of my own bank account each semester.
This behavior I was exhibiting wasn't the result of anything anyone taught me; it was simply the result of having lived life for a little while and having learned the real value of time and money.?ÿ These are 2 of the more important things anyone can learn, imo, and I find it particularly interesting how these things are trampled by colleges and universities at the very point in a typical student's life when they are naive and trying to get into a position to lead a productive life.
I agree, Rover83. In fact I??d distinguish between what you describe, and the alternative of just learning the ??relevant stuff? as the difference between a university education and ??learning a trade?.?ÿ
