One could see that freeing up the student’s schedule to take electives of his or her choice could help the student become more well-rounded. This notion of well-roundedness is not just an idea that a graduate will have broad learning in multiple unrelated areas not directly linked to the concentration of their studies. It is also important that a student build perspective from taking classes outside their major, so that when performing on a job after college they can see the “big picture” of what they are trying to accomplish. They should be able to see the societal impacts of their actions and how they fit into historical and business contexts, even in highly technical areas. However, there are already general education requirements and an amount of free electives (for most majors) for this exploration and perspective building to take place without taking away from the major requirements.
One argument against more free electives, however, is that many students looking for the “path of least resistance” through college will jump on the opportunity as a way to just become more disengaged from college learning by taking the easiest classes possible and minimally participating in using this opportunity to gain understanding of more diverse perspectives.
As mentioned in my previous blog post, I feel that all of the required courses in my major served to give me knowledge that I was expected to already have entering into my internship with ADM. This is not to say that I did not at times sense the presence of outdated or nearly-irrelevant material in some of my required courses.
One of my professors from the department of chemical & biomolecular engineering once explained that undergraduate ChemE courses are kind of like a hazing. They are forced upon us young ones because the older ones had to go through it, and thus as graduates we can be welcomed into the camaraderie of those who persevered in spite of an often grueling curriculum.
This is just to say that some courses in a major might seem non-utilitarian (“when am I going to ever use this?”), but they facilitate perspective-building within the major so a student can know the historical contexts, foundational development, important innovators, and major societal issues under otherwise technical subjects. Often, these supporting classes come under the heading of “technical electives” which are focused on this supporting knowledge or specific technical branches of study.
So, then a better question than the one first put forth is perhaps, “If employers want college graduates to be well-rounded and experts in their technical area, is the current balance of free electives and required courses giving them what they want?” At this time, it would seem that required courses should not be dropped.
The remark about hazing and building a culture of the discipline that way is interesting and probably should be expanded upon. An issue nobody has yet brought up is whether there needs to be a capability of working in an interdisciplinary environment - chemical engineers with electrical engineers, for example. Does the culture enable this or not?
ReplyDeleteIn economics, when I was in graduate school and for at least the next twenty years thereafter, the programs were intensely mathematical, with a degree in economics akin to a degree in applied math. The consequence is that economists tended to look down upon other social scientists, who dealt with more qualitative information. Sociologists and anthropologists were viewed as lesser mortals. Some of this is changing now, particularly at the most elite graduate programs. But it has been an uneasy transition. At least in this case the acculturation created a blockage from taking these broader perspectives and incorporating interest ideas from other fields.