Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

This

That’s not what the proposal is about. It’s about terminating useless degrees at $100k a year schools that end up with salaries less than a high school graduate. Go back and read the actual proposal. My expensive “psych”undergrad degree at a $$ SLAC was worthless

Anonymous wrote:I think liberal arts do provide students with the education that this nation needs. This nation needs a lot of things.

I do think there is value in considering how many loans a young person should take on if pursuing certain degrees. Maybe that is a return on investment concept. But we’ve had waves of people pushing for loan forgiveness because they can’t handle their student loan debt. Much of that push was from people who had degrees, which lead to jobs that didn’t pay them enough, or at least that was the argument.

Maybe no fed loans will equal lower tuition costs for those degrees. People can still get them but without the debt burden.

I’ve struggled with my thoughts on this issue. I think it is irresponsible for young adults to go $300k in debt for a degree in education and do not support public loan forgiveness for choices like this. My nephew incurred a lot of debt for engineering degree - but he chose an OOS option. He will be paying for that degree for years. But it was his choice to go OOS.
My own kids are going in state, public school. Total tuition will be under 70k for all 4 years.
Why should taxpayers pay for poor educational choices young adults are making? Why aren’t parents guiding their children to make financially responsible decisions?

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

This

I think liberal arts do provide students with the education that this nation needs. This nation needs a lot of things.

I do think there is value in considering how many loans a young person should take on if pursuing certain degrees. Maybe that is a return on investment concept. But we’ve had waves of people pushing for loan forgiveness because they can’t handle their student loan debt. Much of that push was from people who had degrees, which lead to jobs that didn’t pay them enough, or at least that was the argument.

Maybe no fed loans will equal lower tuition costs for those degrees. People can still get them but without the debt burden.

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

Two issues with this statement:
- Well rounded people also become worker bees. Just because someone has a "well rounded" degree in art history does not mean they are going to magically become the CEO of a business.
- Almost all bachelor degrees require gen ed. which creates well rounded people. Example - Penn State, all majors require 45 gen ed credits:
Credits - Requirement
9 - Writing/Speaking
6 - Quantification
3 - Health and Wellness
6 - Natural Sciences
3 - Arts
3 - Humanities
3 - Social and Behavioral Sciences
6 - Inter-Domain courses
3 - United States Cultures
3 - International Cultures
Plus 6 more that can fall into Natural Sciences, Arts, Humanities or Social and Behavioral Sciences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

The well rounded education doesn’t disappear. Students still need liberal arts requirements to graduate. It just means there’ll be less people who leave undergrad without jobs. If the colleges are upset about this, they should lower their costs.

Agreed. I think we should challenge universities to provide more pipeline for humanities grads into careers. I don’t like this admin, but this is a reasonable pressure point.

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

+1

Anonymous wrote:We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

The well rounded education doesn’t disappear. Students still need liberal arts requirements to graduate. It just means there’ll be less people who leave undergrad without jobs. If the colleges are upset about this, they should lower their costs.

We are idiots if we starve the liberal arts. The obsession with creating worker bees for companies instead of fostering a well-rounded education is bonkers.

On face value, the idea of forcing students to consider the return on investment for a degree should be bipartisan. Tying the ability to get any federal loans to that seems like a hard line and I feel like there’s another policy solution. When neither side trusts the other and the assumption is that changes like this are part of a broader attack on colleges it really limits any real discussion.

Anonymous wrote:What do you think of this?

Will this prediction come to pass: "He predicted that many universities will “cut their losses” by closing programs in the fine arts, humanities, social sciences and ethnic and sexual studies."

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/jan/13/education-department-approves-rule-ending-federal-funding-low-paying/

Hmmm. This is a questionable source, but here's the quote:

“This doesn’t mean that colleges should cease to offer instruction in areas for which there is low demand for degree holders,” said Peter Wood, president of the conservative National Association of Scholars and a former associate provost at Boston University. “It just means that the resources of the federal government should be spent supporting students who are preparing for the work that the nation needs.”

He predicted that many universities will “cut their losses” by closing programs in the fine arts, humanities, social sciences and ethnic and sexual studies.

So if you want to be an art major, English or creative writing major or Women's studies or Middle Eastern Studies major, you have to be Full Pay. No Pell or federal loans?

where are they measuring the student outcomes? so many students have humanities degrees then go into law school which can have high paying outcomes?

Also, in the age of AI, there may be a market for english, history and philosophy degrees?

So these majors will be the new markers of the wealthy and elite? Because they'll be the only ones who can afford to take humanities, fine arts and social sciences?

Feds should cut govt funding to executive and legislative branch members who file multiple bankruptcies. Obviously such idiots should be limited in ability to spend govt $ on idiot projects like gold plated toilets and ballroom additions.

What do you think of this?

Will this prediction come to pass: "He predicted that many universities will “cut their losses” by closing programs in the fine arts, humanities, social sciences and ethnic and sexual studies."

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/jan/13/education-department-approves-rule-ending-federal-funding-low-paying/