Colleges firing humanities professors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to a college fair this week. Ivys and public schools had long lines. Many small private colleges without name recognition had nobody showing interest. I'm not sure how they will survive but they will probably need to start by cutting programs that don't make money.

100% correct.

Families cannot pay outrageous costs of attendance for a four year humanities degree without decent employment prospects.

In state schools cost more than those small liberal arts colleges after FA.

Many, many, many potential college students are price sensitive but don’t qualify for FA.

The rich no longer just pay for a private college for slacker son, they pay for them to get into an elite school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the hate against liberal arts is not a bug but a feature of a system that more and more seems to be capitalizing on people’s fears so the status quo isn’t challenged. And I say this as someone who works in a science based/“practical” field.

Side note: Why is this phrase so popular now? Within the past year or two, everything is said to be "not a bug but a feature."

The status quo would be to keep the liberal arts departments, wouldn't it? They're eliminating departments that fewer students are majoring in bc they don't need as many profs to teach those classes, since not as many students are taking the classes.

Well the idea of studying a broad range of the liberal arts is to develop critical thinking, and get “an education fitting for a free citizen.” Trade schools are useful but don’t serve these other functions.

[Anonymous]

I think we could lose a few thousand more humanities professors without undermining the economy. And I say that as someone who studied history at university and has done well.

Fewer liberal arts majors and more plumbers, electricians etc would be ok in my book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we could lose a few thousand more humanities professors without undermining the economy. And I say that as someone who studied history at university and has done well.

Fewer liberal arts majors and more plumbers, electricians etc would be ok in my book.

So advancement for thee but not for me.

Lovely.

[Anonymous]

Humanities professors don't tend to bring in big grant money (grants worth millions) to the universities like the STEM side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the hate against liberal arts is not a bug but a feature of a system that more and more seems to be capitalizing on people’s fears so the status quo isn’t challenged. And I say this as someone who works in a science based/“practical” field.

I think it's a class thing. Liberal Arts has been associated with wealthy intellectuals that pontificatevand then solve the world's great mysteries and problems. Rest are hoping for a job after graduation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Responding to all the people who think college is job training and general education in the liberal arts is a waste of time. They’re all over this forum.

general education requirement is fine
majoring in them? No

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the hate against liberal arts is not a bug but a feature of a system that more and more seems to be capitalizing on people’s fears so the status quo isn’t challenged. And I say this as someone who works in a science based/“practical” field.

I think it's a class thing. Liberal Arts has been associated with wealthy intellectuals that pontificatevand then solve the world's great mysteries and problems. Rest are hoping for a job after graduation.

Rich White folks can afford to major in easy stuff and just get a title

[Anonymous]

Pretty soon one of the most popular double-major combinations will be a B.S. In Computer Science/HVAC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we could lose a few thousand more humanities professors without undermining the economy. And I say that as someone who studied history at university and has done well.

Fewer liberal arts majors and more plumbers, electricians etc would be ok in my book.

So advancement for thee but not for me.

Lovely.

So what are you proposing, make ethnic studies a graduation requirement to keep those professors employed? Wait, they already do that!

A lot of these majors don’t teach any skill, just provide information that these days can be easily accessed. Just like everyone else universities need to adapt to a changing society needs. Seems humanities are not that needed anymore.

[Anonymous]

The world does not need more history, philosophy, literature, religious studies students. Students who are going into these fields have not been advised properly.

Everyone is learning humanities. Including STEM students. Look at their course work, more than 60% in humanities.

You dont need a major in history. Who would need history majors? History teachers/professors, yes. That is a tiny portion of the population. The numbers graduating in that major are multiples of those actually needed.

How do we know? The market is a good mechanism for what skills are valuable. If you paid attention in humanities courses, you would have learned about it.

- STEM professional

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The world does not need more history, philosophy, literature, religious studies students. Students who are going into these fields have not been advised properly.

Everyone is learning humanities. Including STEM students. Look at their course work, more than 60% in humanities.

You dont need a major in history. Who would need history majors? History teachers/professors, yes. That is a tiny portion of the population. The numbers graduating in that major are multiples of those actually needed.

How do we know? The market is a good mechanism for what skills are valuable. If you paid attention in humanities courses, you would have learned about it.

- STEM professional

This is short-sighted thinking, and also written by someone who doesn't understand how college finances work. At many universities, the number of majors per department is not as useful a number as the number of students taught per professor. So, you'll have lots of people who need to take classes in math, statistics, foreign languages, history, literature, world religions, philosophy, etc., but they won't necessarily major in them. Universities need these faculty.
The market is not always a good indicator--it's a short term indicator. It can take years of education to fully train people who become experts in the Middle East or East Asia. If you want to save historically important art or literature, you also need to train students for a long time.
Humans are not just robots, there are a lot of factors that lead to a full and meaningful life. Maybe you and your family personally don't appreciate the arts, design, history, religion, or foreign cultures, but a lot of people do, and investing in people who can create and preserve these aspects of humanity is worthwhile for those who can appreciate their importance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The world does not need more history, philosophy, literature, religious studies students. Students who are going into these fields have not been advised properly.

Everyone is learning humanities. Including STEM students. Look at their course work, more than 60% in humanities.

You dont need a major in history. Who would need history majors? History teachers/professors, yes. That is a tiny portion of the population. The numbers graduating in that major are multiples of those actually needed.

How do we know? The market is a good mechanism for what skills are valuable. If you paid attention in humanities courses, you would have learned about it.

- STEM professional

This is short-sighted thinking, and also written by someone who doesn't understand how college finances work. At many universities, the number of majors per department is not as useful a number as the number of students taught per professor. So, you'll have lots of people who need to take classes in math, statistics, foreign languages, history, literature, world religions, philosophy, etc., but they won't necessarily major in them. Universities need these faculty.
The market is not always a good indicator--it's a short term indicator. It can take years of education to fully train people who become experts in the Middle East or East Asia. If you want to save historically important art or literature, you also need to train students for a long time.
Humans are not just robots, there are a lot of factors that lead to a full and meaningful life. Maybe you and your family personally don't appreciate the arts, design, history, religion, or foreign cultures, but a lot of people do, and investing in people who can create and preserve these aspects of humanity is worthwhile for those who can appreciate their importance.

Where do we draw the line that some majors and specializations are just worthless? It was in the news a while ago a story about Columbia students getting a masters in 1939s French cinema while getting saddled with hundreds of thousands in debt.

Perhaps the people that want to preserve those aspects of humanity should pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The world does not need more history, philosophy, literature, religious studies students. Students who are going into these fields have not been advised properly.

Everyone is learning humanities. Including STEM students. Look at their course work, more than 60% in humanities.

You dont need a major in history. Who would need history majors? History teachers/professors, yes. That is a tiny portion of the population. The numbers graduating in that major are multiples of those actually needed.

How do we know? The market is a good mechanism for what skills are valuable. If you paid attention in humanities courses, you would have learned about it.

- STEM professional

This is short-sighted thinking, and also written by someone who doesn't understand how college finances work. At many universities, the number of majors per department is not as useful a number as the number of students taught per professor. So, you'll have lots of people who need to take classes in math, statistics, foreign languages, history, literature, world religions, philosophy, etc., but they won't necessarily major in them. Universities need these faculty.
The market is not always a good indicator--it's a short term indicator. It can take years of education to fully train people who become experts in the Middle East or East Asia. If you want to save historically important art or literature, you also need to train students for a long time.
Humans are not just robots, there are a lot of factors that lead to a full and meaningful life. Maybe you and your family personally don't appreciate the arts, design, history, religion, or foreign cultures, but a lot of people do, and investing in people who can create and preserve these aspects of humanity is worthwhile for those who can appreciate their importance.

Where do we draw the line that some majors and specializations are just worthless? It was in the news a while ago a story about Columbia students getting a masters in 1939s French cinema while getting saddled with hundreds of thousands in debt.

Perhaps the people that want to preserve those aspects of humanity should pay for it.

You don't get a MA in 1939 French cinema--that was probably the topic of the MA thesis. The student probably got her MA in French, History, or Film Studies. That student should have been better educated about how much an MA costs, and universities need to be more transparent about what student debt means. Also, the student could find employment as a teacher, interpreter, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to a college fair this week. Ivys and public schools had long lines. Many small private colleges without name recognition had nobody showing interest. I'm not sure how they will survive but they will probably need to start by cutting programs that don't make money.

100% correct.

Families cannot pay outrageous costs of attendance for a four year humanities degree without decent employment prospects.

More colleges will follow the Bridgewater College lead which dropped tuition from $40k to $15k. The game of a high rack rate, with a low net rate after merit is no longer working.