I am determined to keep writing until I make somebody mad. I honestly think that when it comes to the atrocities of modern education, we have been anesthetized or fed “happy” pills that blind us from the foolishness all around us.
Last Friday’s front page story in the Arizona Daily Star was a whiny, hand-wringing, “woe is me” announcement that there will be three large classes held in Centennial Hall this fall. The story went into long digressions about large lecture classes at other universities, what it will cost to outfit the room with wi-fi, how daytime classes might or might not inconvenience the artists’ series there, and the economic woes which necessitate large lecture classes. There were, of course, disclamatory remarks by U of A officials saying (in essence) “it’s really not that bad” and the (scandalaous?) revelation that an administrator who was partly responsible for the decision is on the way out (non-renewal of contract). He was quoted as saying that it’s probably not a good idea after all.
Innocuously buried in a sidebar was information about the three courses that are scheduled for Centennial Hall. Now, our first guess would be “large lecture classes” of a required nature, right? For anyone who matriculated before the twenty-first century, we would expect old standby’s like Western Civ 101, Psych 101, maybe a humanities class, or the like. Take a gander at two of the three course titles being offered there.
Seven hundred students (mostly freshmen) will study “Human and Animal Interrelationships from Domestication to the present … (which) examines the relationship humans have had with animals from evolution to domestication.”
Twelve hundred students will cram the auditorium for “Eroticism and Love in the Middle Ages… (which) examines how courtly love was portrayed in literature, the arts, philosophy and religion during the Middle Ages.”
O, tempore! O, mores!
In order to command these large audiences, these are courses which satisfy core requirements in the social and natural sciences. I’m trying to imagine what possible content the “animals” class can have that is not (1) based entirely on supposition; (2) horribly denigrating toward humans, and (therefore) politically correct; (3) a poor excuse for hard science.
The Middle Ages course is just Freudian, not history. There just isn’t enough sex on television, I guess. The university needs to prove that it’s “cool,” too.
Before you start feeling smug that you got your education “back when,” or feeling thankful that you don’t have a student going to U of A this fall, can you please remember that you are a taxpayer, and this is a government-supported school? Can you remember that this is the education of the future leaders of the state and nation? Does anybody care that the emperor of higher education is stark, raving, streaking, naked? Huh?
Are you ready for the kicker?
There are fifty-three reader comments to the online version of the story: lots of comments on class sizes, economics of higher education, etc. There is no mention of the course descriptions (except one alum who wishes the erotic course had been offered when he was an undergrad).
Last Friday’s front page story in the Arizona Daily Star was a whiny, hand-wringing, “woe is me” announcement that there will be three large classes held in Centennial Hall this fall. The story went into long digressions about large lecture classes at other universities, what it will cost to outfit the room with wi-fi, how daytime classes might or might not inconvenience the artists’ series there, and the economic woes which necessitate large lecture classes. There were, of course, disclamatory remarks by U of A officials saying (in essence) “it’s really not that bad” and the (scandalaous?) revelation that an administrator who was partly responsible for the decision is on the way out (non-renewal of contract). He was quoted as saying that it’s probably not a good idea after all.
Innocuously buried in a sidebar was information about the three courses that are scheduled for Centennial Hall. Now, our first guess would be “large lecture classes” of a required nature, right? For anyone who matriculated before the twenty-first century, we would expect old standby’s like Western Civ 101, Psych 101, maybe a humanities class, or the like. Take a gander at two of the three course titles being offered there.
Seven hundred students (mostly freshmen) will study “Human and Animal Interrelationships from Domestication to the present … (which) examines the relationship humans have had with animals from evolution to domestication.”
Twelve hundred students will cram the auditorium for “Eroticism and Love in the Middle Ages… (which) examines how courtly love was portrayed in literature, the arts, philosophy and religion during the Middle Ages.”
O, tempore! O, mores!
In order to command these large audiences, these are courses which satisfy core requirements in the social and natural sciences. I’m trying to imagine what possible content the “animals” class can have that is not (1) based entirely on supposition; (2) horribly denigrating toward humans, and (therefore) politically correct; (3) a poor excuse for hard science.
The Middle Ages course is just Freudian, not history. There just isn’t enough sex on television, I guess. The university needs to prove that it’s “cool,” too.
Before you start feeling smug that you got your education “back when,” or feeling thankful that you don’t have a student going to U of A this fall, can you please remember that you are a taxpayer, and this is a government-supported school? Can you remember that this is the education of the future leaders of the state and nation? Does anybody care that the emperor of higher education is stark, raving, streaking, naked? Huh?
Are you ready for the kicker?
There are fifty-three reader comments to the online version of the story: lots of comments on class sizes, economics of higher education, etc. There is no mention of the course descriptions (except one alum who wishes the erotic course had been offered when he was an undergrad).
No comments:
Post a Comment