View Full Version : Dumbing down of university courses?
Has the content of university courses deteriorated or am I missing something here? This course is not the first of its kind but does it undermine the credibility of a degree?
http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcommunity/2014/01/university-offers-course-on-jay-z-and-kanye-wests-relationship.html
Some quotes:
The relationship between hip-hop titans Kanye West and Jay Z has been well-documented over the past decade: they've performed on stage together, have produced songs together, appear regularly with each other's families in photos, and even put out a collaborative album in 2011.
It is the rap bromance to end all bromances - a friendship so tight and prolific, it seems, that one university has deemed it worthy of academic study. ...
"Now, you go into any English department, and there is going to be a film element," Hoberek says. "When you are sitting around with your friends and arguing over what's better or worse, you're already working like a critic... If you learn more about how the structure of rap works, then you get better at making the arguments you're already making."
As C.O.S. reports, Jay Z and Kanye West have both been studied at the university level before. Georgetown University's sociology department offered a class called "Sociology of Hip-Hop - Urban Theodicy of Jay-Z" in 2011, and Julius Bailey's academic text book The Cultural Impact of Kanye West is set to be released this spring.
IMO, having been a traditional and nontraditional student throughout much of my life, and as the parent of a 21-year-old university senior, I would say that university courses, in many cases, are not what they were 20 years ago.
University classes are taught differently. Expectations of students have changed and standards are often lower. One of the things that I find most fascinating is how few textbooks my adult daughter purchases each semester. Another is how students use technology to facilitate the learning process. For instance, I remember taking notes until my hand almost fell off in lecture classes. She doesn't take notes in class. Instead, she goes to the professor's website, before or after a lecture, to print the notes for it. I can see how this allows for greater class participation and may be of benefit to certain types of learners.
Another change I've seen over the past decade or so is parental involvement in college students' academic life. Helicopter parents now engage their child's professors in conversations about their child's academic performance and students and parents frequently argue with professors about grades, which is something I never did, as I typically assumed I earned the grade I received.
I just saw this, which I thought might be of interest.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/28/us/ncaa-athletes-unc/index.html
Mrs. Hermit
1-28-14, 7:48pm
I am currently a grad student after oh-so-many-years since getting my last degree. I had a professor comment to me that I earned my degree "back when earning a degree meant something." So yeah, I think expectations have changed. Most of my grad classes have been tough, but they are very different from what I experienced undergraduate. Technology has made a huge impact on classroom dynamics, research, class presentations, just about everything. Some changes I get all geek-happy about. Thanks to citation generators, I now don't have to type footnotes--the generator puts them in for me (not always correct, but cleaning them up is certainly less time consuming than typing them all up in the first place), then it generates a bibliography for me. Some changes are not so good: since most of my texts are on-line, they may not continue to be available to me after I finish a class. So I can not go back to reference them later.
iris lilies
1-28-14, 9:03pm
There is evidence that dumbing down started with the GI bill students in 1945. Since then, it's been downhill. But then, there is also evidence that when ivy-league education opened up to the meritocracy (rather than the aristocracy) things became tougher in that arena. Some sons of gentlemen were twits who couldn't hold a classical thought in their head and the uber bright (but poor nobodies) smoked 'em in the classroom.
I remember my dad talking about what he read in high school English and I was impressed at the time of the rigor of these readings in a small town high school in central Iowa.
But the example that you give, one of popular culture, well--there were always been classes about that stuff. They can use the pop-culture product to explore roots of same, and I'm sure (without reading anything about it) that slave and African dialects and rhythms are some of the historical influences that can be explored as just one of the topics for study.
Another aspect is the hiring of contract professors who are subject to the students' performance evaluations. They are then understandably reluctant to enforce very strict academics and grading because students will complain. So if they teach courses less strictly and are easy graders, their student feedback is more positive and hence they are more likely to keep their jobs.
Is your question because the course is about hip-hop & rap? I have been listening to the album 'good kid, m.A.A.d city', by Kendrik Lamar, the rapper many think should have won Rap Album of the Year (instead of Macklemore), for this work. It's really quite powerful. Read the lyrics as poetry. He documents his life growing up in Compton, CA (Richard Sherman's hometown), and with the help of the online Urban Dictionary, I've begun to understand the story he's telling. I believe everyone in the US needs to understand it. Rap and hip-hop are both significant cultural art forms, and deserve scholarship and respect.
I studied significant writers when I was in college. The referenced course description, below, is quite worthy of college level inquiry, IMO.
"1. Where do they fit within, and how do they change, the history of hip-hop music?
2. How is what they do similar to and different from what poets do?
3. How does their rise to both celebrity and corporate power alter what we understand as the American dream?"
Course activities include "listening to music and watching videos," as well as reading critical works on rap music, poetry studies, and Jay Z's 2010 biography Decoded.
http://rapgenius.com/albums/Kendrick-lamar/Good-kid-m-a-a-d-city
Listen to the brief statement he makes first. Keep an open mind, and read the lyrics slowly as you listen to this young man tell his story. Imagine that he is from another country. It's deeply moving.
ToomuchStuff
1-29-14, 9:32am
Has the content of university courses deteriorated or am I missing something here? This course is not the first of its kind but does it undermine the credibility of a degree?
A degree in what? This seems to be more a class aimed at making the school money, then about a degree. (student loan processing, the hell with an idea of educating them, as that is their responsibility)
Personally, I think education started dumbing down, between my brothers Jr. high days, and the conversion of my generation, into middle school.
I think just having a class on the cultural contributions of Kanye West and Jay Z does not signal the dumbing down of higher education. A lot of times there are lightweight electives thrown in with varying degrees of academic rigor. I remember in college we had a winter semester of 4 weeks and one of the classes we could take was Knitting in Florida. That, to me, was the ultimate in skate classes, and that was in the early 70s. But I can assure you that I got a very "smart," not "dumb" education. You can't judge a generation on one college class...
However, in general, I am dismayed at the lack of respect a basic well-rounded liberal arts education is getting these days. I am saddened that many, many young people can't tell you when the Declaration of Independence was signed. Classical literature is fading away. Requirements that students take a little of everything freshman year is going away. My son, a history adjunct professor at a community college, says that there is no history requirement anymore at his school.
So, I don't mind that Simon & Garfunkel was subject matter in the 70s, nor that Kanye and Jay Z are subject matter today, but I do mind that we are losing interest in teaching our students the broader context.
"Sociology of Hip-Hop - Urban Theodicy of Jay-Z"
Theodicy. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC-hysterical.gif
Gotta love academia: pretentious to the end.
I agree that the need to get good reviews from students drives a lot of this--along with lowering standards for high school students. From the feedback I get from parents of teens, public high school is kind of a holding pen for all but the most motivated.
SteveinMN
1-29-14, 10:18am
I am saddened that many, many young people can't tell you when the Declaration of Independence was signed. Classical literature is fading away. Requirements that students take a little of everything freshman year is going away. My son, a history adjunct professor at a community college, says that there is no history requirement anymore at his school.
So, I don't mind that Simon & Garfunkel was subject matter in the 70s, nor that Kanye and Jay Z are subject matter today, but I do mind that we are losing interest in teaching our students the broader context.
Agreed, but I don't believe people should have to attend college to learn these things -- they should be part of the elementary-/secondary- school curriculum. Without descending into a conservative "get-off-my-lawn" rant (I'm fine with the Jay Z/Kanye class though I don't see it running more than a few weeks), high-school graduates used to be able to multiply numbers without a calculator or cash register, knew how to use pronouns ("Her and myself went to the store" is bad grammar), and read Shakespeare and some classic American novels before they were graduated. Arts education of all kinds has been slashed, as well. Instead, students are taught to pass tests. I don't see that as a big step forward.
catherine
1-29-14, 10:39am
Agreed, but I don't believe people should have to attend college to learn these things -- they should be part of the elementary-/secondary- school curriculum.
Great point, Steve. And I agree that slashing the arts is misguided. They tried to slash the arts in Britain during WWII and Churchill's response was "then what are we fighting for?" (At least that's what I learned in a Facebook post the other day;)
So what I'm hearing is that a college level sociology course at Georgetown about two prominent black hip hop musicians is a lightweight, cash cow, placate kids for good reviews thing? These two artists are as important as Shakespeare, except they are modern. I suspect some race bias here.
So what I'm hearing is that a college level sociology course at Georgetown about two prominent black hip hop musicians is a lightweight, cash cow, placate kids for good reviews thing? These two artists are as important as Shakespeare, except they are modern. I suspect some race bias here.
Redfox, that is an unfair assumption to ascribe to me and judgemental of my motives. We could have similar discussions about university courses based totally on the role and benefits of Perry Como or Joan Baez or Buffy Sainte- Marie or any other such figures.
There is a place in culture studies, music studies, etc that would incorporate key figures (how they might be determined I am not sure though) and their contributions but to set up a course based on two figures because of rap raises questions in my mind. And, I have the right to do that without being promptly accused of being racially biased. Seems a very inappropriate response to me in order to derail any discussion.
ToomuchStuff
1-29-14, 11:38am
Redfox, nobody can change your prejudices (you will see it as you want to). All art is relative and has to speak to the person. (The Mona Lisa to me, might as well be a dart board) Shakespeare has only slightly more relevance (a couple of lines have rung with me) and I have had the opportunity to speak to Jay Z.
This as a class, MAY have some use if one was going for some kind of music degree, but for a business degree, studying his lyrics ain't going to cut it. He needs to get a better/longer track record as a business agent first.
That also doesn't change that colleges are a for profit business, looking at making money, or that it isn't their responsibility to watch for what is best for those attending.
Redfox, that is an unfair assumption to ascribe to me and judgemental of my motives. We could have similar discussions about university courses based totally on the role and benefits of Perry Como or Joan Baez or Buffy Sainte- Marie or any other such figures.
There is a place in culture studies, music studies, etc that would incorporate key figures (how they might be determined I am not sure though) and their contributions but to set up a course based on two figures because of rap raises questions in my mind. And, I have the right to do that without being promptly accused of being racially biased. Seems a very inappropriate response to me in order to derail any discussion.
My comment isn't directed at you, Razz, it's regarding the overall convo. And yes, we could be talking about any of the other artists you mentioned, but we're not. We're talking about two controversial, black men who practice an art form that tends to raise hackles outside of their community. Race factors in this conversation.
catherine
1-29-14, 11:49am
These two artists are as important as Shakespeare, except they are modern.
Only time will tell if they are as important as Shakespeare, and race won't have anything to do with it. In my post I put them alongside Simon and Garfunkel. Same thing--you can use today's lyricists to have great discussions and learn a lot about modern culture, but I don't see that topic as being as academically rigorous as many other classes--sorry. Race has nothing to do with it.
I daresay you are playing the race card, redfox ;)
Miss Cellane
1-29-14, 12:07pm
So what I'm hearing is that a college level sociology course at Georgetown about two prominent black hip hop musicians is a lightweight, cash cow, placate kids for good reviews thing? These two artists are as important as Shakespeare, except they are modern. I suspect some race bias here.
Agreeing with catherine here. Shakespeare has stood the test of time, while other very popular writers of his era have faded away, studied only by specialists in that time period.
Same with every era. We all know about Charles Dickens, even if you haven't personally read one of his works. But equally popular writers of the time have been forgotten or reduced to a joke in the Bulwer-Lytton contest.
Or Gallileo? Do you think his peers ever thought school children would be learning about him 300 years later?
There's a place for the study of hip hop and other current, trendy, music and art forms. Mostly as electives and not as core courses for a degree. However, I won't be alive long enough to determine if these two musicians will end up being as important as Shakespeare.
ApatheticNoMore
1-29-14, 12:26pm
What seems wrong to me is there is a whole course on just one artist. That seem unnormal ok. The music courses I saw at colleges were whole surveys of a type of music "jazz" say, and there were those on popular music also. It's like I couldn't imagine ever there being on a course on just about one pop artist, could you imagine a course on the Rolling Stones even? Neither could I. But then I never went to private schools, and state schools do have to really justify their courses, they actually can't be all basket weaving (maybe private colleges can). A class on Simon and Garfunkle, uh no, I can't imagine. I class on "American folk music" or even "American folk music in the 60s and 70s" - yes that's possible. If they were going to do a single artist, it would be Beethoven or Mozart or something :)
The race card is definitely being played. I'll tell you what it means: it's not asking what assumptions people are actually working from (mine would be college courses in the catalog when I was in college that's my template for "normal college courses" - at best you can say it's a limited template - right - I didn't go to any non-state institutions for instance etc.) and assuming it's about race instead. I was a music major briefly in community college. Needless to say there were no music courses like that in community college. Again, they have to justify their funding ... it being tax supported and all. And no not everything should be a college course just because it's something you happen to be really into. I don't consider everything this way past college age adult does in their free time EVEN IF it's somewhat academic to be "college material" if you will. I do consider it the freedom of being able to learn from the full of life and not just academia". If the class was given by open university or something ...
Yes, I am raising the inquiry regarding race and the criticisms of these artists. That's a "card"? I do not get it.
PS - to your good point, ANM ("not asking what assumptions people are actually working from"), I am raising the possibility that race bias factors into the criticism of this particular course. I can imagine many examples of weird college courses that make no sense to me.
My intent is not to shut down dialogue; quite the opposite. It's to open it up, and to include considering race bias as a factor.
My intent is not to shut down dialogue; quite the opposite. It's to open it up, and to include considering race bias as a factor.
Too late. Once you accuse everyone daring to have an opinion of racial bias, without any supporting evidence, you've effectively shut down polite discussion.
After seeing it happen in two different threads (http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?9831-Your-Take-On-The-State-of-the-State-Speech) in one day do you now understand the concept of "pulling out the race card"?
Great point, Steve. And I agree that slashing the arts is misguided. They tried to slash the arts in Britain during WWII and Churchill's response was "then what are we fighting for?" (At least that's what I learned in a Facebook post the other day;)
Likewise, I remember seeing a b&w photo from the mid-1930s on the wonderful site www.shorpy.com. It was of art students in a high school classroom. I was blown away by the fact that art was being taught in the middle of the Great Depression, yet somehow today the art/drama/music curriculum is constantly having to defend itself from cuts as being frivolous.
If we can do it in the 1930s, we can do it today.
AmeliaJane
1-29-14, 8:35pm
Honestly, it doesn't trouble me much that MU students might spend 1 course out of 40 for their degree (assuming 5 per semester, 8 semester, which is what the University recommends on their website) in a course that attempts to have thoughtful conversation on a contemporary topic. One would probably find that skill more useful in later life than, say, analyzing Restoration poetry. The English department has plenty of courses with traditional subject matter and it seems to me that evaluating contemporary material and drawing a reasoned conclusion about its worth/context without vetting provided by 300 years of history is a worthwhile skill to work at. (Of course, not all the students will get there but it's a worthy goal to reach for). I teach a yearly course for adult learners and see little connection between age and writing/academic skill on the individual level. Some of my youngest students are great writers and thinkers, and some who came out of America's best colleges in the "golden age" are atrocious at those skills but have other gifts.
iris lilies
1-29-14, 9:27pm
Well this is really hitting home! I had not read the linked article until now. It's from our very own city alternative newspaper. It's well known for race baiting as are all of the established print sources here in this town where everything is about race. And I get to pay for this class at a public University in my state, yay for me!
Too late. Once you accuse everyone daring to have an opinion of racial bias, without any supporting evidence, you've effectively shut down polite discussion.
After seeing it happen in two different threads (http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?9831-Your-Take-On-The-State-of-the-State-Speech) in one day do you now understand the concept of "pulling out the race card"?
Thank you, Alan, you've highlighted something I had not expected. Are folks here scared of talking about race and racial bias? Am I to take it that you think it's impolite?
iris lilies
1-30-14, 12:05am
Thank you, Alan, you've highlighted something I had not expected. Are folks here scared of talking about race and racial bias? Am I to take it that you think it's impolite?
I think it's obvious that accusing those here of racism or any "ism" is impolite. I think it's interesting the way you turned around that focus from you and into a question.
Having lived for 2+ decades now in the land where Everything Is About Race I have learned the drill: this conversation is racist because society is racist because everyone is racist 'though they do not realize that, no one is born racist and if we can only have enough "convos" facilitated by earnest social engineer wannabees then we will--what exactly, I loose track of what we accomplish. The racism isn't going to go away, too many are too invested in it, so I see an endless program of yakking and convos, covering the same ground over and over.
I am not "scared of talking about race and racial bias" I am bored by it. But I have to admit that at this stage of life I am bored by many things, having been there and done that for decades. When those convos start IRL, I side-eye the starters and slink off, whispering to someone to please tell me when it's all over. It seems that the "convos" are never over. Hence the boredom.
So what I'm hearing is that a college level sociology course at Georgetown about two prominent black hip hop musicians is a lightweight, cash cow, placate kids for good reviews thing? These two artists are as important as Shakespeare, except they are modern. I suspect some race bias here.While I do agree with you on the content of this as art and an important field of study both culturally and as social science, I don't think it is racial bias but more one of cultural bias. Sometimes those in academia think art and social studies is only about the staid old classics and the traditional fields of study. So whether it's Mozart, Shakespeare, and Michelangelo; or Pete Seeger, Kerouac, and Jackson Pollack; or Jay Z, Stephen King, and that crazy-awesome street tagger artist in NYC - it's all art, it's all culture, and it's all socially relevant. Therefore it's all worth study imho. I say the exact same thing of hip-hop dance styles. They are as relevant and important to the field of dance as classical ballet.
While I do agree with you on the content of this as art and an important field of study both culturally and as social science, I don't think it is racial bias but more one of cultural bias. Sometimes those in academia think art and social studies is only about the staid old classics and the traditional fields of study. So whether it's Mozart, Shakespeare, and Michelangelo; or Pete Seeger, Kerouac, and Jackson Pollack; or Jay Z, Stephen King, and that crazy-awesome street tagger artist in NYC - it's all art, it's all culture, and it's all socially relevant. Therefore it's all worth study imho. I say the exact same thing of hip-hop dance styles. They are as relevant and important to the field of dance as classical ballet.
Interesting! Thanks for your thinking. I definitely agree that it's art, and each expressive form is highly influenced by race, class, gender, age, etc. What is considered worthy of study and what is not is an inquiry that interests me, and gets to the OP's point, which was the quality of study topics. Who decides? What standards? Who's in, who's out? Shakespeare was mocked and reviled in his time, now he's venerated. I work in a theatre that asks these questions via the art all season long.
Race is a critical part of US society, and art & scholarship are ways into understanding race, class, etc.; all aspects of our society and time. For folks like Alan & IL, who think it's impolite or prefer to not discuss it, no need to participate. I prefer to move our thinking forward on these topics, to engage critically, so our society becomes more equitable, and ultimately ends racism, sexism, and so on. The OP's question triggered this thinking, and I appreciate your engagement, Spartana.
ToomuchStuff
1-30-14, 2:38am
Well this is really hitting home! I had not read the linked article until now. It's from our very own city alternative newspaper. It's well known for race baiting as are all of the established print sources here in this town where everything is about race. And I get to pay for this class at a public University in my state, yay for me!
When Precious Doe was found here, years ago, a prayer group was told to go away, because they were white, until the media arrived. As long as people can use it to their advantage they will.
Thank you, Alan, you've highlighted something I had not expected. Are folks here scared of talking about race and racial bias? Am I to take it that you think it's impolite?
Emotional, ignorant (in this case, due to no attempt to even ask as a basis), a lie (last I checked we are human, so it isn't a "race"), impolite from a position of power, and accusatory.
While I do agree with you on the content of this as art and an important field of study both culturally and as social science, I don't think it is racial bias but more one of cultural bias. Sometimes those in academia think art and social studies is only about the staid old classics and the traditional fields of study. So whether it's Mozart, Shakespeare, and Michelangelo; or Pete Seeger, Kerouac, and Jackson Pollack; or Jay Z, Stephen King, and that crazy-awesome street tagger artist in NYC - it's all art, it's all culture, and it's all socially relevant. Therefore it's all worth study imho. I say the exact same thing of hip-hop dance styles. They are as relevant and important to the field of dance as classical ballet.
I do agree that it may be culturally significant. However culture is what one makes of it (some part environmental, some part free will).
The fact I am not into rap music, doesn't make one a racist. I am also not into country music (several other groups I have met through my same friend), so would that make me a racist there?
Last I checked, rap music was made by people of different color/pigment, but the same race. (Jay C as I was calling him them and M&M both met my friend at a function in another city)
Playing the race card involves little thought. It is an emotional attack (if you don't agree with me your racist/no other answer possible).
Impolite from a position of power (I'm a moderator, and I can do things to you and nothing you can do but go away).
Accusatory and damaging without any benefit of knowledge of the person or a trial. (could you tell me which one was me, if I posted a family photo, with the white side, the black side, the Japanese side and those that are biases against other sides? I doubt it). I've grown up seeing both sides as well as other prejudices and biases (not always the same thing).
I am trying to keep this polite, but am beyond peeved at this point. Very poor taste from a "moderator" in my mind.
For folks like Alan & IL, who think it's impolite or prefer to not discuss it, no need to participate. I prefer to move our thinking forward on these topics, to engage critically, so our society becomes more equitable, and ultimately ends racism, sexism, and so on.
I don't think it's impolite to discuss the topic, although I do think it's impolite to assert that the participants in the original discussion formed their opinions as a result of your perception of their bias. Sometimes your perceptions are wrong. You shouldn't be surprised by a negative response.
Miss Cellane
1-30-14, 9:04am
Well, getting back to the subject heading of this thread, here's the course description:
"1. Where do they fit within, and how do they change, the history of hip-hop music?
2. How is what they do similar to and different from what poets do?
3. How does their rise to both celebrity and corporate power alter what we understand as the American dream?"
1. This is an English course. Not sure how they are fitting the history of hip-hop music into an English course. Would have thought this was more for the Music Department.
2. This is actually an interesting idea. I'm just not sure I'd limit it to two musicians. I'd make this the focus of the course, and compare lots of poetry to lots of music lyrics. You could do some neat things--the sonnet has a very strict and rigid form; are there any musical forms that are similarly strict and rigid, yet popular? To me, this would be the basis of the course, as an offering of the English Department.
3. This seems more sociology than English to me. Or maybe appropriate for a Business class.
Also, the course is one of the Major Author courses for the semester--Major Authors from 1890 to the Present. Here's the blurb, from the course catalog, about Major Author courses: "Focuses on the works of a single writer (e.g., Shakespeare) or set of writers (e.g., William Faulkner and Flannery O'Connor). Topic announced at time of registration. Prerequisite: English [ENGLSH] 1000. No more than six hours may be taken in the Major Authors series."
I'm just not sure these two musicians rise to the level of authors like Shakespeare, Faulkner and O'Connor. And the description of Major Author courses clearly states that the focus is on the author's works. While the description of the specific class has nothing studying their works, just comparing their works to "what poets do." I'm pretty impressed that a professor managed to get this course to float. The English Department at my university probably would have rejected it as not scholarly enough, or because the course description has very little to do with English.
The good news is that this course may be a one-time offering, and that students can only take two of the Major Author courses.
So while I can see this course fitting into an English Department's offerings with modifications, honestly, it appears to be trying to do too much in one course, and it doesn't really seem to fit into any one department's area of study. Now, perhaps it is an offering for an American Studies program or a Pop Culture program, which would make a difference. I don't know if I'd call this "dumbing down," but the course description doesn't give me much confidence that whoever planned the course really knows what he/she is doing and what their goal is for the students to learn.
To me, it's the equivalent of a course in the 60s trying to determine the culture impact of the Beatles, and analyzing the friendship among the band members--interesting, but is is appropriate for the time and for the department offering it? Does it rise to the level of scholarly academic work? It could, but it also might not.
I went to college in the 70s. I went to grad school in the 90s, and taught Freshman English to help pay my way. Most universities now offer remedial math and English courses to their students. If you want to talk about dumbing down--should universities need to offer remedial courses at all? Surely students should arrive at college able to read and write basic English and do basic algebra? I had students in the standard Freshman English classes who couldn't identify the subject and verb of a sentence, who couldn't write a paper longer than 5 paragraphs, who struggled to read the books assigned to them.
I'm not talking about "Math for Liberal Arts Majors," or "Literature for the Scientist" type courses. There's room for those in the curriculum. Not everyone needs to learn calculus and not everyone needs to read William Dunbar, a slightly obscure Middle Scots poet.
I do think colleges are dumbing down the graduation requirements, to suit the caliber of the students our high schools are providing. Is this course an example of that dumbing down? Not necessarily. I'd be more concerned with the number of students taking remedial courses their freshman year--learning things their high schools should have taught them.
iris lilies
1-30-14, 10:14am
I'm glad you brought up remedial courses. I remember when that was being debated back in the 70's. I was going to mention that in my post, too. And no, colleges shouldn't have to offer remedial level classes.
I haven't read all the posts but where I work, this course would be taught under the American Studies program, ie American culture. There would be all manner of similar classes offered that many of us would raise an eyebrow about but these end up being very popular for undergrads as popular culture is what many of them base their attitudes and opinions on. I think the dumbing down starts much earlier where teaching for testing has superseded any real learning. I look at a lot of resumes of recent college grads and the writing is often atrocious. Basic grammar, etc things that should have been learned long before college.
I haven't read all the posts but where I work, this course would be taught under the American Studies program, ie American culture. There would be all manner of similar classes offered that many of us would raise an eyebrow about but these end up being very popular for undergrads as popular culture is what many of them base their attitudes and opinions on. I think the dumbing down starts much earlier where teaching for testing has superseded any real learning. I look at a lot of resumes of recent college grads and the writing is often atrocious. Basic grammar, etc things that should have been learned long before college. This would also likely be an American Studies kind of course at my old university (AKA Granola U - San Fran State) - and probably just as popular. Maybe it's in an English class because the style of rap is similar to the poetic expression of the 1950's beat poets (bongos anyone?) with it's angst ridden counter cultural leanings. More poetry than music.
I for one don't consider these types of classes a "dumbing-down". As I said above, I see them as an important part of culture which has had huge influences on society - therefore an important topic of study. I also don't think that those who dislike Rap are racist at all - or that it has anything to do with racism. I like some of it but my Mom would hate it all - whether it was Kayne West or Eminem. She wouldn't see it as musical and wouldn't understand the cultural poetic style and lyrics and would think it all trash. They said the same thing of other artist of all stripe and some of them became icons of a generation. I personally don't get Jackson Pollack paintings. Is that art? To me no, I can't tell the difference between that and what the elephant at my local zoo painted, but his works, and those of many other modern artist's are considered some of the greatest art in civilization.
ApatheticNoMore
1-30-14, 12:51pm
I took remedial courses in math because I forgot all my math, I've probably forgotten it all again, I'm quite sure! :0! This despite having a brain that's really good at computer logic, like I've realized many people don't seem to have that kind of brain to just intuitively understand that stuff, and I really don't find it any big deal. But isn't it supposed to all be the same thing? Shrug, don't know, so I hear. I wasn't bad at the remedial classes when I took them (ok and it wasn't how to add and multiply - I know that stuff, it was algebra ok, I can solve a simple equation for a variable still yet, but it was especially the algebra II plus trigonometry - I again couldn't tell you what the quadratic equation is if you asked me), I learn it and then forget it ALL.
Gregg asks what causes people who might be successful to fail, too much to name and there's not jobs for them anyway. But I could definitely name one thing: having math classes required to graduate college. It's a huge part of why a sibling is terrified of going back to college and a major reason they dropped out, and thus contributes to them doing nothing with their life (not like they've taken advantage of getting a job without a degree). I'm not saying they are super ambitious or they'd probably find a way around it (heck even if the way was learning purely for the test or even if the way was cheating! that may not be honest but it is a way ambitious people would find to succeed if they had no other way), but I think the requiring math for all degrees (not just the degrees you obviously need it which makes sense) is a problem. Why math to get a English degree? They think they are producing a better society where everyone is numerate, but really it destroys some people's chances.
The idea used to be (still is, in my mind) that you got a well-rounded exposure to a number of disciplines--a "liberal education." I had to take a number of PE classes (Fly and bait-casting, anyone?)--that have no relevance in my life, but I learned 1)that I didn't inherit my Grandmother's love of fishing, and 2) that running around after a ball wasn't something I wanted to spend my time doing.
Now, college has been reduced to job training for most students. Humongous loans require a high-paying career.
As far as popular culture classes go, an educator named Mary West said it better than I could:
"Continuing with my research, I have become aware of another education villain. Aside from non-marketable degrees and degrees that no longer provide security, colleges offer an abundance of frivolous and trendy courses. Disengaged students have an ample selection of what they refer to as Mickey Mouse courses, some of which are useless in the extreme, such as heavy metal music studies. I have no doubt that this substitution of fluff for rigorous, substantive courses does not serve society well."
The idea used to be (still is, in my mind) that you got a well-rounded exposure to a number of disciplines--a "liberal education." I had to take a number of PE classes (Fly and bait-casting, anyone?)--that have no relevance in my life, but I learned 1)that I didn't inherit my Grandmother's love of fishing, and 2) that running around after a ball wasn't something I wanted to spend my time doing.
Now, college has been reduced to job training for most students. Humongous loans require a high-paying career.
As far as popular culture classes go, an educator named Mary West said it better than I could:
"Continuing with my research, I have become aware of another education villain. Aside from non-marketable degrees and degrees that no longer provide security, colleges offer an abundance of frivolous and trendy courses. Disengaged students have an ample selection of what they refer to as Mickey Mouse courses, some of which are useless in the extreme, such as heavy metal music studies. I have no doubt that this substitution of fluff for rigorous, substantive courses does not serve society well."
Great quote.. And I agree that sometimes you learn how much you hate things like field hockey and World Civilization 101, but somehow the things you love and the things you hate all wind up making connections in your brain and you start.... thinking!
I remember the moment I saw that my college kids' brains were growing... just as I remember their first smile.
Miss Cellane
1-30-14, 4:36pm
I took remedial courses in math because I forgot all my math, I've probably forgotten it all again, I'm quite sure! :0! This despite having a brain that's really good at computer logic, like I've realized many people don't seem to have that kind of brain to just intuitively understand that stuff, and I really don't find it any big deal. But isn't it supposed to all be the same thing? Shrug, don't know, so I hear. I wasn't bad at the remedial classes when I took them (ok and it wasn't how to add and multiply - I know that stuff, it was algebra ok, I can solve a simple equation for a variable still yet, but it was especially the algebra II plus trigonometry - I again couldn't tell you what the quadratic equation is if you asked me), I learn it and then forget it ALL.
Gregg asks what causes people who might be successful to fail, too much to name and there's not jobs for them anyway. But I could definitely name one thing: having math classes required to graduate college. It's a huge part of why a sibling is terrified of going back to college and a major reason they dropped out, and thus contributes to them doing nothing with their life (not like they've taken advantage of getting a job without a degree). I'm not saying they are super ambitious or they'd probably find a way around it (heck even if the way was learning purely for the test or even if the way was cheating! that may not be honest but it is a way ambitious people would find to succeed if they had no other way), but I think the requiring math for all degrees (not just the degrees you obviously need it which makes sense) is a problem. Why math to get a English degree? They think they are producing a better society where everyone is numerate, but really it destroys some people's chances.
Not all colleges have a math requirement. Or at least you don't have to take a math class to meet it. Many colleges are now incorporating the math and English and computer skills requirements in classes in other departments. The classes have a significant component of math or reading or paper writing, but they are engineering classes or sociology or history or ethics or what-have-you. And if they don't have that, they have courses that are more or less "Math for Dummies." Some kids who struggle with math take a course over the summer at a community college, where the classes are usually smaller and they can get more one-on-one attention from the teacher.
And the level of math and English I'm talking about is not very advanced. I would expect, barring a learning disability, that any college graduate could simple math--calculate a percentage, balance a checkbook, solve a simple equation. Just as they should be able to read and comprehend something on the level of the New York Times, and write simple, declarative sentences, and write up a basic report. Thirty years ago, I'd expect this of a high school graduate, but not today.
Which isn't to say that many high school grads today can do all that and more. It's just that high schools seem to be failing to teach basic life knowledge to more and more kids these days.
ApatheticNoMore
1-30-14, 4:50pm
The math requirement for the state schools here is college Algebra which is somewhat more difficult than high school algebra (the remedial course are high school algebra) and yea I did eventually complete college Algebra.
Many majors require calculus or statistics, but college algebra is enough to get some degrees, but it is more than just calculating a percentage, balancing a checkbook or solving a simple equation. But yea you can probably get around it by going to a private school.
"[...]I have no doubt that this substitution of fluff for rigorous, substantive courses does not serve society well."
Yabbut that B- I got in Organic Chemistry really hauled down the ol' GPA!
Lisa Simpson sits in the classroom at school, daydreaming. She dreams that she failed her test:
-dream sequence-
Miss Hoover: And the lowest grade in the class ...
Ralph Wiggum (brimming with false achievement): She's going to say MY name!
Hover: Lisa Simpson, zero!
Principal Skinner: Lisa, the President of Harvard would like to see you.
President: Nasty business, that zero. Naturally, Harvard's doors are now closed to you, but I'll pass your file along to ... Brown.
Skinner: Mmmm, Brown. Heckuva school. Weren't you at Brown, Otto?
Otto (in his drug-slurred monotone): Yup. Almost got tenure, too.
Lisa: [gasps in horror] No, not Brown, Brown..
-end dream-
Lisa: ...Brown, Brown..
Miss Hoover: Lisa, you're saying Brown an awful lot. Are you okay?
I have the TV on while cooking, and I just heard Diane Sawyer say that Rutgers has a course on Beyonce and Princeton has a course on Springstein. I live right between those two universities.. hmmm. Now, if they had a class on the 50th anniversary of the Beatles playing on Ed Sullivan, I might be tempted to audit.
early morning
1-30-14, 7:18pm
Well, as someone who attended college 20 years late, I see a good reason for remedial math, at least.
[QUOTE=JaneV2.0;168019]The idea used to be (still is, in my mind) that you got a well-rounded exposure to a number of disciplines--a "liberal education."
I agree that some of these classes just confirm you will never be interested in that subject again, but the converse happens too. Many anecdotal stories of history majors having to take an ecology course, or computer science majors having to study poetry, etc. and then seeing themselves becoming really entranced in these parts of our world that they would not have chosen to experience on their own.
iris lilies
1-30-14, 11:45pm
I have the TV on while cooking, and I just heard Diane Sawyer say that Rutgers has a course on Beyonce and Princeton has a course on Springstein. I live right between those two universities.. hmmm. Now, if they had a class on the 50th anniversary of the Beatles playing on Ed Sullivan, I might be tempted to audit.
Sure, you've got to get up to speed to the required level, but should the colleges offer it and should you get credit for it? I think not. And I say that as someone who took remedial(I think it was remedial, it certainly was basic) Algebra in a Jr. college.
Teacher Terry
1-31-14, 12:27am
Remedial classes do not give you credit yet you pay for them. It is just that you pay to get up to speed-no credit given in any of the 5 states that i have lived in.
early morning
2-1-14, 2:17pm
No credit given for remedial classes in Ohio, at least at state schools. And they are the same price per CH as any other class, so I really don't see why offering them should be a cause for complaint. And I know I'm going to hear about "high schools should do a better job" yadayada.... the fact is, until it really matters to someone, they are quite capable of avoiding learning. Not all low performing students are slow, or ill served by their schools - there are a fair number of active non-learners out there.
ApatheticNoMore
2-1-14, 2:42pm
I don't think they give credit here in state schools (that's why the classes had different numbering, they weren't considered colleges classes), anyway that was community college, so that's what is being complained about, that community college offers them.
The high schools were bad, so yea many of the students were lazy AND the teachers were also unqualified - sheesh why can't they both be true (the better teachers actively avoid certain school districts), and people income segregate and buy houses by school district (and pay a premium of some 6 figures for a house in a "good school distinct"), ensuring "bad school districts" will have students whose parents who either don't care about education or are flat broke and can't afford a "good school district" or private school. But against all expectations, some schools have improved somewhat since then anyway (that was some kind of rock bottom I guess in retrospect).
Miss Cellane
2-1-14, 3:42pm
My university, a state university, gave credit for the remedial English class, but it only counted as credits towards graduation. It didn't fulfill any requirements, not even the Freshman English one. You still had to take the regular Freshman English.
I checked the current requirements and there is no longer a University-wide Freshman English requirement. The College of Arts and Sciences requires it, but the other schools have widely varying required courses. Arts and Sciences also requires two courses with a quantitative component, but only one has to be a math class. You could say this is dumbing down, or you could say that the requirements are more in line with what the students will do with their degrees. I was an English and Communications major and I took two semesters of calculus. Did well in them, but can't remember anything now, because I have had absolutely no reason to use calculus in the intervening decades.
Gardenarian
2-1-14, 4:29pm
At the college where I work, credit for remedial (high school level courses) can't be used for transfer or graduation.
I think the requirements are quite difficult.
We recently instituted a mathematics path for non-mathy students, but it still requires 9 units of study. Yes, we have course that deal with hip-hop and Tolkien, but that doesn't mean they're easy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.