So you think the English majors should be forced to take Science and Math classes, but not the other way around for Accounting or Engineering to take some other 'extra' courses?

Were you an older student or a traditional student out of high-school?

p.s. you save A LOT of money by doing all that by the way... particularly the lighting/electrical aspects...

I just went and looked, b/c I was curious.
At RPI, the engineering program requires 6 humanities/social sciences gen eds. I don't think that they are setting this up to be the great liberal bastion of engineering...

"Academics
Our mission is to educate leaders of tomorrow for technology-based careers; to celebrate discovery, and the responsible application of technology; to create knowledge and global prosperity.

Have a solid foundation in mathematics, science, and engineering, and be able to apply these to practical use.
Be able to identify, model, analyze, and solve challenging real world problems.
Have specialized technical knowledge in their chosen field.
Have strong communication skills with emphasis on technical writing and interpersonal communication.
Be able to design innovative products, processes or systems.

Perform effectively on diverse, multidisciplinary teams, both as leader and contributor.
Be informed citizens broadly educated in the humanities and social sciences.
Be prepared to practice engineering in a socially responsible and ethical manner.
Have learned in a creative, stimulating environment that prepares and motivates them to continue to grow and learn."
http://eng.rpi.edu/

I'm sorta getting negative vibes about your opinions of people who pursued Liberal Arts degrees. Why would you think we're any different than someone who pursues and engineering or science degree and has no use for mandatory core classes? I pursued a degree in English, couldn't stand math and had no use for chemistry or physics. But I lucked out. Because of a special deal my freshman year I could waive math and pursue advanced courses in Spanish. Chemistry was a waste of time because it was easier than the high school course I took, and "Rocks for Jocks", the geology course I took had tons of field trips and a hot professor, easy "A's". But if I had my choice I probably would have skipped them, as well as Economics and Psychology, for which I've also had no use since college. But in the end I'm glad I muscled through them. Maybe in some small way I have used them and just don't realize it, because those core classes are intended to make us more well rounded, which may not be an entirely measureable trait.
OK, I'm ready for it, gimme the, "That's just what a Liberal Arts major would say."

Hi Jimbo;
Remind me what your career was in? How did your background help your work?

Many colleges today are grooming the next generation of "sheep" who were "sheep-dogged" by some of the worst academic leaders to date.
When the primary character of many grads is "entitlement" and "MY beliefs", it's not a shock when they are confronted by a logical intelligent argument that they "protest" that they're rights are being violated.

All they show me (like the morons driving daddy's BMW, AUDI or LEXUS) is that they are too stupid to know they threw away good money on a wasted "education".

I can guarantee you one thing.
Not sure how to prove this theory but I would guess that Bernie Sandars has a much higher ratio of college educated free thinking types vs while trump has the same ratio, but it's GED VS high school diploma.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"So you think the English majors should be forced to take Science and Math classes"

I said I think they should take science and math. I'm not in favor of forcing them. That would just be my suggestion.

"Were you an older student or a traditional student out of high-school?"

Traditional. But I was smart enough to know that I was getting scammed. My father was also an electrical engineer, and made it clear that I would learn little in the liberal arts courses that I would ever need. He was absolutely, 100% correct.

"you save A LOT of money by doing all that by the way... particularly the lighting/electrical aspects"

I doubt that.

These kids want to make college cheaper. You can't do that, without cutting expenditures. And I have to believe that the #1 discretionary expenditure, by far, is payroll. Therefore, if you ignore payroll, you can't make a huge dent in the cost. You just can't. You solve a problem by addressing the underlying cause, not what you wish the underlying cause to be. I learned that in science classes.

"Sandars has a much higher ratio of college educated free thinking types "

You may be right. And the reason, is that academia is radically liberal. If the people who teach those classes tell their students "you should demand that college be free, and at the same time, we all want raises", then they aren't helping those kids, and the kids are wasting time and money.

This is revealing.

He also taught me that if someone asks me a question about my beliefs that I cannot answer, I should question why I believe what I do.

Just sayin'.

That will all change when the freethinkers have jobs and families to support . Unless of course you and I are supporting their family's
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I say we should keep college expensive. If your parents are unable to afford it then learn how to use a shovel or clean tables.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

pretty sure Bernie Sandbars has a higher ratio of stoned supporters too!

That's why they are free from thinking ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Professor Rockhound, my career was with the world's largest global satellite communications provider. I took a 1 year program and got a diploma in computer programming that got my foot in the door and spent the next 30 years jumping on things my college education prepared me for, like developing a distance learning program, writing procedures, writing documentation, writing press releases, writing patents to protect the company's intellectual property, asset management. If I encountered a situation where I was in an engineering function, which happened frequently, like doing equations of some sort, I got someone to show me the steps on their calculator and I memorized them. I think they call it "on the job training, or learning by doing". I think a lot of professional jobs are like that. You get the basics of something in college and take that to the workforce and apply it.
What I'm profoundly confused about is how the statement can be made that math and science for the non-technical person is recommended, but public speaking, creative or technical writing, or history for the technically bound is a load of crap.
I don't necessarily think kids really want college to be cheaper, I think many just want to bypass things they think are trivial, bypass entry level jobs and jump into a CEO's salary because they think they're owed that.

Bingo.

Additionally, the engineering or actuary job Jim wants to fast track to is evaporating. His is a 1993's mindset at best.

The innovation economy of the future doesn't reward narrowly minded thinkers, it requires a multi-perspective approach to everything that can synthesize dissimilar ideas, market them, manage them etc…

I'm an artist in a sales job working with engineers on operational strategy. It's exactly what the ancient Greeks wanted.

Just remember that if you have a background like you do, you might not believe that the pyramids were built to store grain. ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not so fast, Nebe. If nothing else, my background taught me to "think outside the pyramid".

Ha! Yes!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hey, Nebe, maybe the poor and middle class Egyptians originally built them to store grain so that they would have a supply of food in the bad times like when global warming dried up the Nile and so forth. You know . . . that fair distribution of stuff that poor and middle class folk believe in. But, as always seems to be the case, the top .01 percent, Pharaohs and such, scarfed up the pyramids which were built on the backs of the poor, for their own personal use. You know . . . that income inequality thing . . . The poor and middle class Egyptians sure could have used a Bernie back then.

Good points. Especially pointing out Jim's outdated 1993's mindset. Such backward thinking has no place in the innovative future of the ancient Greeks. :cheers2:

"but public speaking, creative or technical writing, or history for the technically bound is a load of crap"

Those things aren't a load of crap. But that's not the core of liberal arts courses. The core of liberal arts programs is to create a sense of entitlement, victimhood, and liberalism. Turn on the TV , watch what has been happening at Yale, maybe the finest liberal arts school in the world. The students there are idiotic, they couldn't form a coherent thought if their life depended on it. They are not learning the skills that you itemized, no one would be opposed to genuinely learning those skills. Those skills are critical. That's not what is being ingrained in these kids.

"I don't necessarily think kids really want college to be cheaper"

Due respect, then you're not paying attention to what they are saying, which is probably why you think liberal arts courses are designed to teach the valuable skills you itemized".

Conservative ideas persist no?

Tell it to the progressives.

"the engineering or actuary job Jim wants to fast track to is evaporating."

Clearly you know better than I do what skills are required for entry-level actuarial jobs.

"doesn't reward narrowly minded thinkers"

I never said narrow-minded thinking is the goal. What I said is that liberal arts courses aren't the path to open-minded thinking you claim they are. Again, look at Yale. A professor says "you don't have the right not to be offended", and the kids went berserk. Academia is one of the most narrow-minded bastions of thought in the universe.

If the point of these schools is to promote diversity of ideas, please explain the reaction when Condaleeza Rice or Ann Coulter is invited to speak? I'm all ears.

When Dr Rice was invited to speak at Rutgers, the faculty protested. Now, you are going to ask me to believe that those same faculty members promote diversity of thought in their class? I can give you as many examples as you want. The Mizzou professor who asked for "muscle" to haul off a student whose viewpoint she didn't agree with? She's going to teach her kids to be open-minded?

Ann Coulter gets invited to UCONN, the students storm the stage to silence her.

There is a Himalayan mountain of evidence to show that there is zero diversity of thought, or tolerance for opposing views, taught to these poor kids.

Let me guess, your response is "apples and oranges"

AT Amherst College, another one of the premier liberal arts colleges in the world, students want to punish a student who carried a sign saying, get ready for the horror, "all lives matter".

Among their demands...get a load of all this open-minded thought, Spence!!

"we do not tolerate the actions of student(s) who posted the ‘All Lives Matter’ posters, and the ‘Free Speech’ posters"

Wow! That's open-mindedness, and respectful of opposing points of view, eh? They are insisting on silencing those who feel that all life matters. If that's the "reward" for a world-class liberal arts curriculum, forgive me if I'm not impressed.

Read the wording..."we do not tolerate..." I wonder where they learned all that tolerance?


http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/13/am...d-free-speech/

Of course, it sounds great to say that we need well-rounded folks. I don't disagree. But the empirical evidence suggests that liberal arts courses are not the path to acquiring those skills.

I love it, College is preparing you for tomorrow. What happens next is up to you.

If these kids think you make college "free" by increasing the fixed costs, and judging by their demands that's exactly what they think, then no, college isn't preparing them for tomorrow. All it's preparing them for is a lifetime of self-identified victimhood.