Are SLACS losing their luster?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

You say it like these are the only types of courses offered at Wesleyan. We all know that's not true.

And anyway, what's so bad about taking 1-2 of these courses during four years in which you will take a total of 32 semesters' worth of courses? There is plenty of time to also take programming 100 through programming 450 and also Physics 100 through Physics 475 if you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

Yes, because there's nothing a person could possibly gain from learning about Black Feminism or Queer Literature.

Just come out and admit that you think there is nothing to be learned from anything that involves literature, arts, music, or the rest of the humanities. The only thing worth studying is how to code, or do quant analysis. Look how well things turned out when we let a bunch of amoral quants run the economy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

You say it like these are the only types of courses offered at Wesleyan. We all know that's not true.

And anyway, what's so bad about taking 1-2 of these courses during four years in which you will take a total of 32 semesters' worth of courses? There is plenty of time to also take programming 100 through programming 450 and also Physics 100 through Physics 475 if you want.

Agree with pp. My DC is a junior at a SLAC and has not taken any classes like the ones posted above. Math major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

You say it like these are the only types of courses offered at Wesleyan. We all know that's not true.

And anyway, what's so bad about taking 1-2 of these courses during four years in which you will take a total of 32 semesters' worth of courses? There is plenty of time to also take programming 100 through programming 450 and also Physics 100 through Physics 475 if you want.

Plenty of time for those courses at Wesleyan since Shakespeare is optional for English majors, as is study of the American founding and Civil War for history majors. That might be considered rigorous compared to Amherst, which no longer maintains a core curriculum or even distribution requirements. Apart from completing a major, students need only take a First-Year Seminar on a topic such as “Reading Gender,” or “Eros and Insight.” Everything else—including math, science, foreign languages, American history, and all of Western civ—is optional. English majors can skip the history of the language, Shakespeare, even all of British or American literature—instead mastering film, creative writing, or cultural and gender studies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

You say it like these are the only types of courses offered at Wesleyan. We all know that's not true.

And anyway, what's so bad about taking 1-2 of these courses during four years in which you will take a total of 32 semesters' worth of courses? There is plenty of time to also take programming 100 through programming 450 and also Physics 100 through Physics 475 if you want.

Plenty of time for those courses at Wesleyan since Shakespeare is optional for English majors, as is study of the American founding and Civil War for history majors. That might be considered rigorous compared to Amherst, which no longer maintains a core curriculum or even distribution requirements. Apart from completing a major, students need only take a First-Year Seminar on a topic such as “Reading Gender,” or “Eros and Insight.” Everything else—including math, science, foreign languages, American history, and all of Western civ—is optional. English majors can skip the history of the language, Shakespeare, even all of British or American literature—instead mastering film, creative writing, or cultural and gender studies

This is a typical right wing rant, as if you and you alone (and your ilk) know what each student should be taking. A student studying German intellectual history does not need the history of the US founding (which everyone gets in high school, right?). Ditto a student studying the history of science, east Asian history. You get my point. Why Shakespeare and not the romantics? Or Washington Irving? There is no objectively determined cannon. Decisions are made. If you want them made for you, go to a school with that kind of structure. If you don't, don't. Everyone will be just fine even with such choices out there.

[Anonymous]

Yep, as a Swarthmore grad, I definitely think you shouldn't send your kid there. More room for mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with going to grad school? I went to a SLAC and then went to grad school for an MBA. I've been very successful.

As an executive at a consulting company, I wish my company would stop hiring "newly minted" MBAs who went straight from undergrad. Even from a top school like Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Sloan, etc. I think people get much more out of an MBA degree if they have 3-5 years of real world work experience between undergrad and grad school.

When I see a resume where someone went right to B school, I wonder why they couldn't get a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You say it like these are the only types of courses offered at Wesleyan. We all know that's not true.

And anyway, what's so bad about taking 1-2 of these courses during four years in which you will take a total of 32 semesters' worth of courses? There is plenty of time to also take programming 100 through programming 450 and also Physics 100 through Physics 475 if you want.

Plenty of time for those courses at Wesleyan since Shakespeare is optional for English majors, as is study of the American founding and Civil War for history majors. That might be considered rigorous compared to Amherst, which no longer maintains a core curriculum or even distribution requirements. Apart from completing a major, students need only take a First-Year Seminar on a topic such as “Reading Gender,” or “Eros and Insight.” Everything else—including math, science, foreign languages, American history, and all of Western civ—is optional. English majors can skip the history of the language, Shakespeare, even all of British or American literature—instead mastering film, creative writing, or cultural and gender studies

Way to miss the point, big guy (or big gal). The point is, the mere existence of "Eros and Gender" doesn't prevent your kid from taking 100% science courses if she so desires. https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/first_year_seminars/courses Oh, look! Amherst also offer first year seminars on Genes, Genomes and Society, Mind & Brain, and Evolution.

(PP, I didn't assume this person was a conservative. This person reasons like that nasty European poster, i.e. badly.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with going to grad school? I went to a SLAC and then went to grad school for an MBA. I've been very successful.

As an executive at a consulting company, I wish my company would stop hiring "newly minted" MBAs who went straight from undergrad. Even from a top school like Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Sloan, etc. I think people get much more out of an MBA degree if they have 3-5 years of real world work experience between undergrad and grad school.

When I see a resume where someone went right to B school, I wonder why they couldn't get a job.

Wait, what? Where did I say I didn't work before getting my MBA? Actually my business school (a top ranked one) requires work experience. No 3-2s or people coming direct from college. I suspect the same is true for the ones you named too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

Instead of those STEM courses that become obsolete so soon, Wesleyan offers "unforgettable" courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.”

Most people defending SLACS have no idea how much they have changed.

You say it like these are the only types of courses offered at Wesleyan. We all know that's not true.

And anyway, what's so bad about taking 1-2 of these courses during four years in which you will take a total of 32 semesters' worth of courses? There is plenty of time to also take programming 100 through programming 450 and also Physics 100 through Physics 475 if you want.

Plenty of time for those courses at Wesleyan since Shakespeare is optional for English majors, as is study of the American founding and Civil War for history majors. That might be considered rigorous compared to Amherst, which no longer maintains a core curriculum or even distribution requirements. Apart from completing a major, students need only take a First-Year Seminar on a topic such as “Reading Gender,” or “Eros and Insight.” Everything else—including math, science, foreign languages, American history, and all of Western civ—is optional. English majors can skip the history of the language, Shakespeare, even all of British or American literature—instead mastering film, creative writing, or cultural and gender studies

You seem to have problems with the entire concept of liberal arts. The purpose of an LAC education is exactly this type of exploration. Those are excellent universities which offer a broad range of rigorous courses. Students can take pretty much anything there and learn something, develop their thinking, reading and writing skills. Both Wesleyn and Amherst does have requirements for their majors, which are typical of any university. Students can chose to create their own plan of study, but if they do, they aren't majoring in English or Biology or whatever.

And what is your gripe with film or writing as a major? Both of them lead to jobs. Writing and film are major industries in the US. Gender studies doesn't lead straight to a job, but would be fine for anyone who is planning on going to professional school or grad school (law, medicine, history, English)

You're pretty ignorant about this subject. You should stop talking now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with going to grad school? I went to a SLAC and then went to grad school for an MBA. I've been very successful.

As an executive at a consulting company, I wish my company would stop hiring "newly minted" MBAs who went straight from undergrad. Even from a top school like Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Sloan, etc. I think people get much more out of an MBA degree if they have 3-5 years of real world work experience between undergrad and grad school.

When I see a resume where someone went right to B school, I wonder why they couldn't get a job.

Uhm . . . nobody goes to HBS, Wharton (for MBA), Kellogg or Sloan straight from undergrad. But I guess you would know that since you're an "executive" at a "consulting company", right?

Oh, and BTW, plenty of STEM kids these days plan to go on to grad school -- I know mine do.

[Anonymous]

They are overpriced at $60,000 a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with going to grad school? I went to a SLAC and then went to grad school for an MBA. I've been very successful.

As an executive at a consulting company, I wish my company would stop hiring "newly minted" MBAs who went straight from undergrad. Even from a top school like Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Sloan, etc. I think people get much more out of an MBA degree if they have 3-5 years of real world work experience between undergrad and grad school.

When I see a resume where someone went right to B school, I wonder why they couldn't get a job.

Uhm . . . nobody goes to HBS, Wharton (for MBA), Kellogg or Sloan straight from undergrad. But I guess you would know that since you're an "executive" at a "consulting company", right?

Oh, and BTW, plenty of STEM kids these days plan to go on to grad school -- I know mine do.

Um, I went to Wharton and there were some kids there who came straight from undergrad. So save your snark. (I'm not the consulting exec you're talking to.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with going to grad school? I went to a SLAC and then went to grad school for an MBA. I've been very successful.

As an executive at a consulting company, I wish my company would stop hiring "newly minted" MBAs who went straight from undergrad. Even from a top school like Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Sloan, etc. I think people get much more out of an MBA degree if they have 3-5 years of real world work experience between undergrad and grad school.

When I see a resume where someone went right to B school, I wonder why they couldn't get a job.

Uhm . . . nobody goes to HBS, Wharton (for MBA), Kellogg or Sloan straight from undergrad. But I guess you would know that since you're an "executive" at a "consulting company", right?

Oh, and BTW, plenty of STEM kids these days plan to go on to grad school -- I know mine do.

Um, I went to Wharton and there were some kids there who came straight from undergrad. So save your snark. (I'm not the consulting exec you're talking to.)

Wharton will take more straight from ug kids than HBS...it is pretty rare at Kellogg as well. I think sloan takes higher rate of 'straight from ug' types as well compared to hbs and Kellogg.