It's another hammer to hold over the heads of the citizenry. Look at the number of times the threat of social security being used as an excuse for Austerity Measures over the last 40 years.
Chemistry 101 is likely a better example. Intro to chemistry is a required to class for almost all STE (not M, but M often takes it too for a physical science degree), along with anything that touches on nutrition, medical...
> Chemistry, as the central science, is relevant to many other disciplines and is therefore part of the core curriculum of numerous degree programs on campus. By the time they graduate, 55 percent of undergraduates have taken a chemistry class at UW-Madison. As enrollment grew over the years, department and campus leaders noticed that students were often not able to schedule needed courses. This meant it took them longer to earn a degree.
There are about 10,000 under grads for each year at UW Madison. Chem 103 gets about 5000 students per year.
While that roughly matches the Psych 101 with 2000... this shows that "here's a real number."
Maybe there’s value to classes outside of what employers want Especially for survey-level classes that aren’t specific to a specialization or major.
I think alternatively we need employers to stop asking for degree’s altogether so the enrollees are people who are there to learn for themselves not for employers. It’d reduce the crazy demand and cost around education.
1. Some people want to study psychology (or other classes) for pure intellectual reasons. They’re curious about the world. Shouldn’t that be enough?
2. “Survey” courses have 2 values through helping people learn new topics (1) gain broad understanding of the world, and (2) discover fields they may wish to major or study deeper in if they haven’t decided yet.
My caveat here is that I suspect (unsubstantiated) that some topics become filler by universities.
3. There are lots of jobs people do with a psychology major, besides a psychologist/researcher, but I don’t know how many of them require that deep knowledge explicitly.
Many jobs are probably better performed if you learn some psychology (eg a few classes worth) - marketing, non-therapeutic counseling (coaches, teaching, etc), HR, recruiting, doctors, nurses, organizational management, etc.
I want to reiterate point 1 - there’s value in education beyond employment, but it’s plausible that employers should care less. I doubt most employers expect candidates to take survey level courses, but requiring a degree of any sort implicitly assumes they have taken those courses.
gut the brusar and fire half the administrators. We can replace 80% of the school administration with AI anyway. that will free up enough money and PAY professors a living wage.
replace "saving 50k" with "eliminating tech debt" for many
we all know we could rebuild or refactor systems to improve them, but all we would be doing is spending time and money to earn no more money, because the "improved" product/service wouldn't appear different to the outside world
my new attitude is to not even both with tech debt unless the product will be enhanced or improved in some user-obvious way
this is starting to smell like "fake concern"...technically-astute people who are nonetheless ignorant of this tech trying to "participate" by shrieking in terror over imagined dangers
we need a "middlebrow dismissal" link