This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
STEM education is all the rage, while the arts and humanities are being vilified. Will this make us better humans?
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics education are supported in media, school board meetings, and the dinner table while the arts and humanities are dismissed as no longer significant or relevant to our 'growth' and prosperity. Many scientific and educational leaders have referred to the study of humanities in universities as 'a waste of time' and an 'affectation' no longer a 'luxury we can afford'. International competitiveness is often cited as the motivation. When we look at those four disciplines, do you think they will make us better humans, and lead us to where we want to go, without the accompanying study of the humanities and arts? If so, how? If not, why not?
Debra Smith 200+
Philip Crume
Any scientist that does not know the former precedent of the evolution debate is actually ignorant of science at large. How many scientists know where empiricism comes from or the circumstances under which it was born (without looking it up)? I would argue that it would be better for general students to take classes in intellectual history and DOE than an actual science class, and maybe require math history before taking an actual math class. Instead of STEM education being a grind that eliminates the unworthy, it can become a way of providing genuine scientific literacy to our whole society.
R H 20+
Philip Crume
I've taken astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, and geology; all of the natural sciences, plus data analysis; and it wasn't until after college when I happened upon a course in intellectual history that I truly understood science. If we could redesign science education, I'd require that intellectual history and the history of mathematics be taught first, so as to create context for everything that follows. I'd also require that the learning that takes place within each field uses the scientific method for acquiring concepts - learning by proof (similar to geometry). Ideally students should start with a 17th century world view, and through experimentation make their way to modern times. Also along the way, there should be some false starts so that students aren't conditioned to always expecting positive results. Sometimes skepticism is warranted. In this way, no one is memorizing sets of facts and figures, and people are free to challenge and preserve skeptical inquiry required in good science. This would also be good training ground for writing scientific papers to share results.
Hopefully in the process of verifying the reliability of past experiments, we may discover new insights.
R H 20+
Robert Winner 50+
If examined closely all subjects stem from the same base. In music, art, science, engineering, everywhere is the influence of the GOLDEN NUMBER - PHI 1.618. I have found that most of our honor graduates are well rounded. They are involved in music, sports, core curriculum and are interesting well rounded people. Little bores me more than a one subject expert who does not notice the rest of the world going by.
Perhaps there is a need for pre-university mandate of Liberal Arts College. The last President who endowed the Arts was Kennedy. Since then TV, cheap novels, rap music, and other deterrents to good taste have invaded our society. To eliminate these infleneces is to endorse the alternative.
Summary: Make litature, music, art, and the arts fun. Come down from the ivory tower and enjoy the moment. We need to maintain these to be truely rounded and complete. Is this anothe dark age? Maybe we need to study what and why that happened and the results to understand where we are and where we are going.
All the best. Bob.
R H 20+
Robert Winner 50+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I think, though, that there may be a wave of interest in doing art in a self-taught way or through technological applications rather than through formal instruction in, say, painting.
R H 20+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
When I was young great proportions of kids did not take nearly as much math or science or foreigh language as the rest of us did. They took something called business math while the rest took algebra and further. They took life science and then stopped, while those presumed to be college bound took at least a year and often several of physical science. This made one group prepared for college and the other not prepared for work or further education that required quantitative literacy. To some this felt like sorting young people very soon and almost irreparably.
I believe the interest in increasing the demands for math and physical science is an equity issue that tries to secure for all children a basic level of literacy that fotmerly was reserved for what some might call the elite.
Meanwhile, I live in a state that is very miserly about expenditures on public education. What I have seen over the years is less formal training in studio art, perhaps than in my childhood in the Los Angeles Unified School District but a much higher level of participation in music. The graduation requirements, the minimum level one must take of studio art and of music is, in fact, no less than in my childhood. And the incorporation of art and visual representions post grade school in courses across the curriculum is much higher than in my youth.
R H 20+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
There was an editorial today in my local paper on a related topic. The author addressed the issue that is sometimes raised now in relation to budgetary short-falls of rethinking the assumption of "college for everyone."
The author writes "Posing the question of college for all is a connivance. The people raising the issue are talking about your kids, not theirs. Do they truly have cosmic doubts about the value of a college degree? Perhaps for others, but not regarding the economic and social value of their own credentials- and , of course, for their kids."
If rigorous math and science education were not being pushed, the children of the highly educated will be getting solid grounding in those subjects anyway on their ways not necessarily to careers in science, engineering, or technology, but to having the option to pursue those fields. Part of universal education through grade twelve is about making sure all kids have a chance to learn the things that are sometimes hardest to learn anywhere else and that open the most doors.
Laurens Rademakers 50+
Take Apple, the world's most valued company. They offer computers and phones. But it's their image and the cultural shift they created, which adds the value.
Furthermore: all important technologies and scientific breakthroughs face philosphical, social and cultural questions. Scientists and technologists themselves don't have good answers. It's the philosophers and thinkers from the humanities who formulate the best answers.
In short, I think a real "university" education should be just that: creating people who have a universal view on things - like a homo universalis - apt at formulating good ideas on a range of topics. The urge to generate expert-slaves is disastrous. A geek without knowledge of some broader issues is a slave to technocrats and capitalists. Nothing more.
R H 20+
Erik Richardson 500+
Stewart Gault 30+
R H 20+
Stewart Gault 30+
R H 20+