Arts Degrees.... Who Cares

Ostrom

Lets save each other the bother, these threads always end the same

What is the 'proper' way? (Since your problem with 'arts' subjects inevitably leaves you feeling the better off about your own subject choice - and may I assume poor performance - as comments such as these usually reflect)

How are you defining value? Does the line stop at technical subjects? Sociology? History? Biology? Geography? Is there a scale of merit? What separates sociology/history/geography/music/biology/physics?

Specifically. - not 'I did nothing and passed' - since we already know you did as little as possible - which is a disciplinary universal in third level for borderline passes, irrespective of content

Extrafree

Was that a reply to me Efla??
The morale of what I was trying to say is with arts you can learn as much or as little as you want to learn and still possibly manage to pass the course either way?Agreed??:D

Ostrom

Extrafree wrote: »

Was that a reply to me Efla??
The morale of what I was trying to say is with arts you can learn as much or as little as you want to learn and still possibly manage to pass the course either way?Agreed??:D

No.

You can learn as much or as little as you want to and still possibly manage to pass any course in third level. It has nothing to do with the subject and everything to do with the individual.

Unless you want to reveal your inter-faculty dataset of student psych profiles, marking trends, curve-grading systems and external standards over time?


Before you reply - I have done 'real' subjects (by your imagining) - I passed first year engineering calculus without any notion of what I was doing, little work, and.....a crappy grade! (but a pass nonetheless - a pass: 40, is not a good grade), same with physics.

You see, sadly it doesnt take much to get a passing grade in anything. (And there is a whole other argument about marks and standards - it is criminal what people get away with)

Arts subjects are as challenging as you make them, everything is a choice. Just like your weekly timetable, no one forces you to come, and equally, no one forces you to challenge yourself - our marks and standards take care of that.

So, you chose. You chose to immerse yourself in millenia of thought from the best minds of our civilisation, examine the profound effects of social thought on social policy throughout the 20th century, learn about the development of capitalism and world democracy and how its form conditions everything about your daily life (including your study habits and internet usage, ironically) - or download the diet moodle notes and scrape your way through.

Then congratualte yourself for 'knowing the inside story' about how easy it is.

We all know how 'easy' it is, the other way is much more rewarding.

Extrafree

I've never seen someone say so little in so many words. This has become a pointless thread. Later Elfa.:rolleyes:

starflake

Who's ''Elfa'' ?? Extrafree... stick with it, at least you might come out of your degree with some level of literacy

Extrafree

Cheers .Think it's clear elfa gained nothing anyway.:D

starflake

Whats your problem with Efla? Just out of curiosity?

Extrafree

Oh no problem just took what I said out of context and went ape on it!:D Was trying to make a simple point and he made it out as if I was a waster.

Ostrom

Extrafree wrote: »

Oh no problem just took what I said out of context and went ape on it!:D Was trying to make a simple point and he made it out as if I was a waster.

Argue back

I'm speaking from experience

starflake

Extrafree wrote: »

Oh no problem just took what I said out of context and went ape on it!:D Was trying to make a simple point and he made it out as if I was a waster.

Sounds extremely like you have a problem to me...

barleybooley

Arts...degree?

Effluo

efla wrote: »

No.

You can learn as much or as little as you want to.......

No offence but this has nothing to with the title post and you seemed to have missed the point on several occasions during this thread.

Are you per chance involved in politics?

Ostrom

In fairness, it was about all I could reasonably argue against.

"Do you think all your 1000 word essays and books that you're supposed to read are actually benefitting you?
Or is most of it indeed a big pile of douche?(as i have experienced...)"

Doesnt really give much to go on.


By my understanding, the thread is about both the values of arts degrees, and the value/amount of work required to earn them. My point is that marks and standards are such that the argument for minimum work/minimum reward (a pass) holds across all faculties, not just arts.

A point I made in my earlier posts.

What then exactly were you asking in the title post?

Effluo

efla wrote: »

In fairness, it was about all I could reasonably argue against.

"Do you think all your 1000 word essays and books that you're supposed to read are actually benefitting you?
Or is most of it indeed a big pile of douche?(as i have experienced...)"

Well you just said it there!
It's about if you think the arts subjects you have done have benefited you in any way?
It was about the educational value of ARTS!!!!!!

Is it worthwhile or is it douche!
How much more clear could it be?


Also if you say you weren't sure what it was about to begin with why would you post on it? That's almost as foolish as "protest voting" in the local elections!!!

Ostrom

Effluo wrote: »

Is it worthwhile or is it douche!
How much more clear could it be?

Wow, thanks. 'Douce' is crystal clear. Its a wonder I didnt just speak in terms of worthwhile vs. Douche.

You know, instead of the above arguments.

Why did you really start this thread?

kowloon

I think there's too much of a spread of subjects for my liking. I much prefer the idea of studying just the subject I want from day one. There's something unfair in comparing someone who studied archaeology (for example) solidly for the duration of their degree with someone who only focused solely on that subject in their final year, previous years mixing in plenty of random subjects.

Is there actually a distinction made?

Ostrom

kowloon wrote: »

Is there actually a distinction made?

In terms of marks? Doesnt seem to be much of an issue in Maynooth since most single honours degrees are first year reg. Are you talking in terms of major/minor choices?

jane says

kowloon wrote: »

I think there's too much of a spread of subjects for my liking. I much prefer the idea of studying just the subject I want from day one. There's something unfair in comparing someone who studied archaeology (for example) solidly for the duration of their degree with someone who only focused solely on that subject in their final year, previous years mixing in plenty of random subjects.

Is there actually a distinction made?

Do you know the structure of an arts degree at Maynooth?? It's not the same as liberal arts, or something like UCD Horizons. There's not that much freedom generally in nuim.

But you are right, there is a significant difference between doing something as arts and as a single subject, in terms of the credits studied.

Effluo

efla wrote: »

Wow, thanks. 'Douce' is crystal clear. Its a wonder I didnt just speak in terms of worthwhile vs. Douche.

You know, instead of the above arguments.

Why did you really start this thread?

????
You know douche?
As in douche-bag

And wtf do you mean? "why did you start this thread?"

hahahaha
Oh right now i know why I "really" started this thread!

It's obviously because i'm a douche bag and it's what douche bags do!
They talk DOUCHE!

And my aim from posting a query to arts students about what i believed to be their douchey subjects was to rather than see their point of view, but to just annoy evertone talking about douche and in particular annoy you about doucheing me off.................


Only joking but in fairness...
You really seem to have got this thread completely mixed and mashed(maybe you looked into this a wee bit too much) and i'm sorry i said anything to begin with

kowloon

jane says wrote: »

Do you know the structure of an arts degree at Maynooth?? It's not the same as liberal arts, or something like UCD Horizons. There's not that much freedom generally in nuim.

But you are right, there is a significant difference between doing something as arts and as a single subject, in terms of the credits studied.

I haven't a clue how it's all structured, I gather UCD have a similar style to the US colleges in that they're more akin to secondary school with a very wide range of subjects than degrees in a single area.
Is this correct?

LoLth

from a moderator standpoint: Keep this thread civil. any more personal comments will not be tolerated. Efla and Effluo (are you sure you're not a couple?) , take a step back, breathe and feel free to make a point if you still feel like it but keep it civil. Effluo , perhaps something a little more descriptive (and relevant) than "douche" would help your point.

from my own point of view: care to clarify your question ? I certainly dont think someone working as a surveyor would regret studying geography and going on to study remote sensing. I doubt a journalist would regret studying English and i seriously doubt anyone who works in a project based environment would regret having to regulate their own time and adhere to deadlines.

As for your question: ""Do you think all your 1000 word essays and books that you're supposed to read are actually benefitting you?
Or is most of it indeed a big pile of douche?(as i have experienced...)"

I would say it varies from student to student. If the student read/wrote the essays and just did the bare minimum, remembered it for an exam and forgot about it afterwards then no, i dont think they benefitted. if however, they did the work as it was intended, if they related it to other information on their course, found undertones and/or used it as an opportunity to improve their level of understanding then I fail to see how anyone can say they didnt benefit or call it a waste, even if they end up working in an unrelated sector. Education , of any type (well except starcraft or klingon) is never a waste.

the material is the same for everyone in the class. I would say it says more about the student and not the degree if they feel like they've wasted their time when they reach the end.

Effluo

I wondered about the actual course work I did and the guys in my house were doing.

Yes of course studying english "should" help someone going into journalism.
But i had the feeling that the modules were very bitty and might not benefit the aspiring journalist at all!

Thus bringing back to what i have been trying to get at from the start... the educational value!

jane says

I think it is now time for an application of


OP is not going anywhere with this.

Effluo

I (the op) agree.....

LoLth

Effluo wrote: »

I wondered about the actual course work I did and the guys in my house were doing.

Yes of course studying english "should" help someone going into journalism.
But i had the feeling that the modules were very bitty and might not benefit the aspiring journalist at all!

Thus bringing back to what i have been trying to get at from the start... the educational value!

well, the educational value of any course really depends on the student studying it and their career expectations when they have finished it.

You want to be a researcher in a pharmaceutical company you study chemistry or biology. Obviously studying history and Classical french literature wouldnt have much educational value. Similarly, I wouldnt see biology as having much relevance to a career in , say, mechanical engineering (I could be wrong about this though so anyone please feel free to correct me).

As for the course being "bitty". well, you could be right. maybe the course doesnt do enough on 16th century english romantic literature but without specialisation (and thus the risk of marginalisation) there is a lot of ground to cover in Arts courses - I used to sit in on sociology lectures in Maynooth even though I wasnt studying sociology and I was very impressed with the range the course covered. If you feel that the course didnt go into enough depth in an area you were interested in then perhaps the course wasnt right for you or, perhaps you should have done more reading in your own time to go further along that particular track? (I'm saying "you" but I am meaning any student that feels the way you do). When it comes to exams: the faculty can only examine what they have taught on the curriculum. It would be unfair to include a question on a very obscure poet if that poet wasnt explicitly included on the course as not everyone would have the interest in that section to continue their studies to a degree that covered that particular poet in enough detial to be able to answer a question on his works or be familiar enough to be able to compare him to another author.

If you mean "educational value" in terms of quantifiable education then I would humbly suggest that most , if not all, arts courses measure up quite well to science courses in terms of material learned, ok, it might look easy to some but that just makes it harder to stand out from the crowd (if everyone fails all you ahve to do to be noticed is pass, if everyone passes you need to get a grade higher to stand out etc). Ultimately it is almost impossible to say X teaches you more than Y , or X is more useful than Y. if that were the case, we would all be learning survival skills because if you get stuck in the wilderness with no food or shelter being able to recite Keats' works wont do you much good but if the situation ever arises that the lock on a fire escape to get out of your well provisioned and now burning apartment is protected by a passphrase which is a line from a keats poem you're going to be pretty annoyed at learning how to start fires and trap small animals instead of hitting the books

Also, its important to note that education isnt just the material you memorise. A good education will develope the way you analyse that information and relate it to other, at first seemingly unrelated, facts and ideas.

personally i think that the aspiring journalist should have studied journalism and that Arts english would be a second choice, still relevant but not as useful for that particular career path (my personal opinion), in which case, if journalism was what he wanted to do and he didnt select journalism as his course then the fault does not lie with the material beign presented but in either his lack of foresight or his lack of motivation to bend the knowledge being presented toward his own agenda.

ps. in fairness, you werent asking about the educational value of arts courses in your original post (or if you were it was not clear), you stated categorically that it was "douche" and asked why anyone would bother studying arts. the phrase "Do you think all your 1000 word essays and books that you're supposed to read are actually benefitting you?" is particularly ill informed and shows a lack of understandign on your part. Personally I've only ever read three books that I feel did not benefit me in the slightest ( catcher in the rye - sorry, I know its a classic but I hated it and everything about it, cobweb by Neal Stephenson - rubbish and sub standard for such a usually well written and researched author , Battlefield Earth - ehhh, yeah.... ), the very process of writing and reading benefits the student let alone the material being read/written.

partyguinness

Hello everybody. I feel like trolling but I am feeling a bit shy so I think I shall practise trolling here before I start trolling on other boards:

NUI Maynooth...who cares?

how was that? trollish enough? sarky enough? are you now in awe of my towering intellect? or perhaps you have now seen the inner rebel in me waiting to emerge like a butterfly from its crysalis? if so, please PM me and let me know how beautiful and pretty you think I am. I like having my ego stroked almost as much as I like my post count.

LoLth

jane says wrote: »

I think it is now time for an application of


OP is not going anywhere with this.

actually the OP has raised a point that is based on a belief that many people (including me at one stage) hold to be true. Sure , his wording may have been just murky enough to cause misconception and to , justifiably , rub some boardsies the wrong way - seriously, you honestly wouldnt find someone calling what you studied for years and probably found quite difficult in the later years a "waste of time and effort" (paraphrased) offensive? - and I believe anyone that wishes to put forward their view deserves that chance.

the thread has not descended so far that its not savable and if it did descend, it is more likely that those causing the problem would have their posts deleted/edited and possibly their account barred from the forum. Locking the thread is not the way to settle an argument or end a discussion. Its a way of shutting up muppets or dealing with offensive/objectionable material and cutting off problems after they have degraded to a point where its not worth the effort to get it back on track.


on a side note: OP, you did the first year of an Arts course? i did too. maths and I found it a good bit easier than leaving cert honours maths but seeing as not everyone studied LC honours maths it served as a very good way to get everyone up to the same level of mathematical ability. I heard that 2nd and 3rd year maths ramped up the difficulty considerably. In a way, i was actually sorry I couldnt keep maths on as a subject... perhaps this is similar to what you experienced ? you were already above the level of 1st year whatever but fail to see that the purpose is to cater to all students and gradually raise the bar to a level suitable to tackle the 2nd year materials ?

Ostrom

Effluo wrote: »

I wondered about the actual course work I did and the guys in my house were doing.

Yes of course studying english "should" help someone going into journalism.
But i had the feeling that the modules were very bitty and might not benefit the aspiring journalist at all!

Thus bringing back to what i have been trying to get at from the start... the educational value!

Your OP did not make your motivations clear.

Either way the debate is unresolvable

Since neither of us can do more than speak from experience (a point I hope we can both agree on - without generalisation), one of the most rewarding things for me about teaching journalists this year has been the diversity of input from students of many disciplinary backgrounds.

The majority had arts degrees, (very few, surprisingly, had come from a conventional journalism degree), some had science degrees, and the debates and assignments reflected this without prestige. English graduates drew on criticisms of cultural context and applied it to studies of middle-eastern media institutions, philosophy graduates questioned the validity of the investigative framework, sociology graduates talked about comparative discourses...

Considering the working environment and limited journalistic conventions they will inevitably be forced to conform to, an arts degree in this case is essential

I am assuming you are a first year, and so as yet are unable to view an arts degree in its broader context - please dont take this personally

Effluo

efla wrote: »

Your OP did not make your motivations clear.

Either way the debate is unresolvable

Does anyone else here not understand what i'm saying in the post quoted above by efla?

I kind of feel i should take some kind of course on "getting your point across"

LoLth

Effla quoted your last post but he is talking about your original post. (hence the term "your OP"