At the very
beginning of the semester, we were required to read a piece by Louis Menand,
entitled “Live In Learn.” At the
inception of the article, Menand mentions an incident that occurred during his
tenure as a professor at an Ivy League school.
A student asked Menand, “Why do we have to read this book?” (Menand ). Many times throughout the
semester, I have found myself
subconsciously wondering this same question. This week was no different. While
reading the communist manifesto, many times I was frustrated and unsure. Searching for meaning in the reading, I went
back and read Menand’s piece. Unfortunately, I didn’t find
solace, only doubts about my own decisions regarding education.
 |
| Pondering Why? |
This past
Monday I scheduled my classes for the second semester. I first scheduled the classes
that I knew I had to take. These classes
only filled 8 credits, and I was left with 7-8 credits that I needed to fill.
Although I would love to learn about astrology or the American economic system,
I found myself searching through rate my professor for the easiest classes.
To me, the easiest class meant the best chance of receiving an “A” at the end
of the semester while doing the least amount of work.
Louis
Menand lays out two concrete theories of higher education pertaining to liberal arts education. The first theory deems
college a sorting mechanism, believing that grades, and more specifically,
G.P.A., are the only true measure of intelligence (Menand ). Thus, it is behooves
us for future employment to obtain the highest G.P.A. we can. The second theory
prefers a liberal arts education that allows students to take courses in all
facets of academia. The second theory focuses on “expos[ing] future citizens to
material that enlightens and empowers them, whatever careers they end up
choosing” (Menand ).
Ideally, I
would like to be a theory 2 student, but with the job market being as
competitive as it is today, I would be foolish to associate with this theory. Who
are we kidding? Grades do matter.
Abby Ellin explains that's most professions and graduate programs “scour” the
country for the highest G.P.A.’s when selecting applicants in her New York
Times article “Do Grades Matter” (Ellin). She also explains that in professions that
don’t require a high G.P.A., field experience is the most important application
tool. However, one still can’t escape the importance of grades. Field
experience in college means internships, and make no mistake, most internships
require you to include your G.P.A. on the application. Today’s society is a
race to the top, and this race has led to an obsession with grades. While a
student may be bettering themselves as a person by exhibiting theory 2 values,
they are shackling themselves as a future professionals.
 |
| My Potential Cap in 2015 |
This is the
dilemma I faced when scheduling classes. I feel as though I am depriving myself
of the comprehensiveness that the University of Michigan offers, but I also know
that my future can’t afford any more “B’s” or “C’s.” Academic success means
something different to every student and to me, it will be measured by the job I have once I leave Ann Arbor. After reading Ellin’s article, I don’t feel so bad
about scheduling classes that will give me the easiest chance to get an “A.”
Scheduling these easy “A” classes will allow me to focus more of my attention
on the courses that are relevant to my future while improving my G.P.A.
At the end of his article, Menand finally
states his position as a theory two person. Easy for him to say, he already has
a job.
David,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your blog post, because I too, am going through scheduling at looking at which classes I “have” to take, and which classes I would love to take, but simply seem too risky, because I could either be really adept at the material, or like it and still learn a lot, but completely bomb the class, or hate it and get a bad grade too. Being one of many, many students at the University of Michigan who plans on going into a profession where graduate school is more than necessary, grades truly are at the top of my priorities along with resume boosters and extra-curriculars, because getting into graduate school will be just as competitive as getting into undergrad, and getting a job will be difficult if I end up at a low quality graduate school. As much as I, too, want to believe in a education system that broadens our perspectives and forms well-informed, well-rounded human beings, I simply cannot get past my own desire for success and a promising future. In a way, this is somewhat of a collective action problem, because in terms of making society a better place, students taking the classes that would educate them best regardless of the grade they got in the class and being a proactive student for the purposes of being a citizen beneficial to society someday would benefit all of society collectively, but our individual drives to take easy classes to boost our GPA’s into a ballpark that will allow us to be admitted into a prestigious grad school overrides that collective benefit in each of our minds. Unless the system is radically changed, college will continue to function as a meritocracy meant for sorting people out for the vast majority of us.
David,
ReplyDeleteI think your article provides a sobering example of a modern student's dilemna. Although everyone would love to have a theory 2 education where we learn as much as we can about everything, the working world isn't built for this type of education. Rather, the job market is becoming more specialized. As more people go to college, simply having a degree doesn't go as far as it used to, and grades are increasingly important in differentiating between the multitude of graduates.
I think this is an unfortunate reality of the time. However, I think that Michigan offers us the opportunity to get a theory 2, even a theory 3, education while pursuing a theory 1 education. I think that Michigan does this by implementing the distribution requirement. Even though you may be taking easy a's, you still have to spread them across multiple fields of study. I think that this system helps us get a little bit of both worlds, although it doesn't completely solve the problem.
David,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this post because it made me think about my own situation as I begin to register for classes. First off, I too am looking for the easiest classes since my GPA is crucial to my acceptance to Ross school of Business (Unfortunately, as I have progressed through this semester, I have realized that this is an ever fading goal mainly due to my Calculus grade). As I went through this process, I began to question the credit system of the LSA School. If I am trying to study Economics or some other business major, why do I need to take a set number of credits devoted to language, the humanities, and writing? I realized that because of these required fields of credits, the LSA School is creating students based on Menand’s second theory which attempts to create a well-rounded student. Much like you said, I would love for this to happen. Unfortunately, in today’s day and age, a student geared toward the third theory is necessary in order to obtain a job (for the most part). All in all, I have begun to think about Menand’s theories (just as said you are yourself) throughout this whole process of registering for class. I could look for easy classes and be a first theory student who cares only about his GPA and hope that my grades will help me as I look for a job. Additionally, I could look to take classes that have little or nothing to do with my major and thus become a well-rounded student of the second theory. Finally, I have the option to enroll in classes that only have a direct relation to my (hopefully) future job and become a student that falls in line with Menand’s third theory.
David,
ReplyDeleteI found your post very accurate but also very disheartening that this is the way our education system operates. It is funny, I read this post to take a break from the stressful process we call backpacking. After hours of flipping between the course guide and ratemyprofessors.com I figured I should do some actual work towards getting an A in a class, not just scouring the internet for the easiest future A. Low and behold, I came to your article and basically found my current thoughts put on paper. I too would love to look through the course guide and take any class that strikes my fancy, but the issues you presented of finding "easy" classes or classes that will "look good" are all too real. I agree with Daniel's comment above about how the LS&A requirements strive to place our education in the realm of Menand's second theory, however this isn't as effective because we all seem to be stuck in theories one and three. We seem to put all of our eggs in the basket of our intended major. The average student focuses so much in being successful in their major or in classes required to apply to say, the business school, that the attempt of the university to create a theory two type education with the variety of requirements just becomes a quest to find the easiest A to compliment the A we've worked so hard for in classes in our majors. I agree with you that this is an unfortunate situation, but while attempting to be successful in such a competitive job market and so many qualified students it is imperative that we boost our GPA's and resumes. Otherwise, it seems we will fade to the bottom of the stack of applications with the B's and C's of the hard classes we took just for the sake of learning.
Extremely interesting read! Especially because I find myself pondering the same questions often.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading this, I became very confused when analyzing Menand's first theory of higher education because it does not seem to account for the differing levels of difficulty found within separate universities and even different curriculums within the same university! For example, Student A could maintain a 3.5 GPA at UofM through dominating easy classes, as rated on RateMyProfessor and Student B could maintain a 3.3 GPA at UofM through doing well in tough classes while dominating other easy ones. It appears as is Student A is smarter, as his GPA is higher, but Student B could actually be more intelligent, but is just challenging himself more. This dilemma illuminates a flaw in the theory that higher education selects the most talented students from the pack, which may not always be true if difficulty of a student's curriculum is not considered. It is certainly fascinating to ponder how college would operate if everyone was forced to enroll in the same courses, to eliminate this distinctions through different difficulty levels.
Ben
David,
ReplyDeleteI thought your post talked about a great topic. I had never thought to compare my class scheduling to Menand, but you emphasized something many students do. I always make sure to check that I know the difficulty of the class and professor before I schedule it. Sometimes even without realizing it the first question that comes to my mind is how hard is it? This truly does show Menand’s theory in action. This has come about though, because society has forced theory one to be more important in society.
Especially at the University of Michigan, one of the most expensive public schools in the nation. Students are paying for such a huge tuition, and they feel the pressure to get a highly regarded and well paying job after graduation. Our society also puts more pressure on technological advancement, specifically math and science, so those classes are emphasized as good ones to take. The pressure to be very successful after college is so extremely high now, that the only option is to take classes that will look good on resumes, impress employers, and set you apart from the rest.
Though theory two creates a more wholesome, worldly person, it can be argued that theory one benefits society better. According to Menand,”Society wants to identify intelligent people early on so that it can funnel them into careers that maximize their talents. It wants to get the most out of its human resources.” Society acts almost as a machine, weeding out those who are weaker and less intelligent, and finding those who will help the advancement and progression of it instead. This explains why the pressure is so high to do well at school, because society demands it. Not for all, but many students who do poorly in college are much less likely to do well after college. So, your example of scheduling is just one piece of a much larger plan to succeed in college and after. Those easy classes, though they will enrich or be enjoyed by the student much more cannot be taken due to the demands of society.