Gen-eds a waste of time, brain cells

An annoyance for many students these days – myself included – are general education… An annoyance for many students these days – myself included – are general education requirements. They’re the courses you’re required to take, regardless of the amount of personal interest you have in them. Some of these courses have a practical use, and others may, at times, seem rather pointless.

There are certainly courses that are genuinely useful; that’s precisely the purpose of a general education. However, there are times I ponder: Perhaps some of these required courses are just fluff imposed on me by academic bureaucracy.

My time is very valuable to me, more valuable than any tuition bill. It doesn’t seem to me that I have enough semesters to burn in the process of finalizing my education. Wasting my resources on a course that I feel is ultimately irrelevant overwhelms me with a sense of loss – of both time and money.

I find it interesting that the University covertly encourages its students to take five years instead of four to complete their degrees. It’s a system that encourages two years of academic slumber and then a rushed three years of overloaded semesters.

It would be easier for students to complete their degrees in four years if early coursework weren’t as diluted as it is now. With all the mistakes we make along the way with bad course selection and retaking courses, it can easily become difficult to fit 120 or 130 credit hours into eight semesters.

Spending my time preoccupied with general education credits defies the reason I am here in the first place. If I take a break from thinking about that which is truly important, it puts me doubly at a loss later on: wasted time elapsed over the years and additional wasted time recovering from inactivity in my field.

It’s not the breadth of these courses that I disfavor. Quite the contrary – I think the exposure is a good thing. What irks me is their lack of depth. Many required courses end up being introductory courses by default. Those familiar with intro courses know that they’re worthless without follow-up and continued study, making them mere distractions on their own.

As students – as humans – we can only hope to be masters of specialty. History has few renaissance men, if any. No one can do it all and be it all. Therefore, it is essential that we find focus in our lives and in our educations.

At its core, I am questioning the foundation of the liberal arts education. It may teach one how to learn through a repetitive learning exercise, but, at the same time, it trivializes much learned as consequence of that exercise. I think there is a way to strengthen one’s ability to learn while all the while absorbing fully relevant skills and information.

The “well-rounded” education is a myth. No one becomes well-rounded from classes they don’t care about; they become well-rounded as a product of getting older and gaining wisdom.

While it could be argued that many general and required courses are relevant because of their exercises in both reasoning and communication – and those are indeed skills of paramount importance in all of life’s endeavors – their focuses are usually on matters too trivial to fit into the big picture of an individualized education beyond that virtue.

Nevertheless, a large component of degree credits end up being effectively worthless to the student. I don’t have all the answers, though, and I may not even have the right idea. But I think it would be a wise and healthy practice for others to keep an open mind in considering the role these extra credits play in undergraduate education.

E-mail Karim at kab85@pitt.edu.