What Made you Smile/What Ticked you off Today?

[Jmustang1968]

It is about as relevant as any other art/cultural elective to getting a job. Not much different than a film or media course.

And if that is the answer I received, I would pull my son from the course.

"Because" is not an answer, rather an excuse.

I didn't answer because. I also recall being an adult in college and I picked my own courses...

[mjmjr25]

"because is an excuse" sounds like some cheesy one liner from a motivational speaker.

"Why do I have to drink milk instead of soda, dad?"
"Because Milk is healthier for you."

"Why can't I stay up until 11pm on a school night."
"Because your body needs sleep - you are crabby and inattentive when you don't get enough sleep."

Those are answers - not excuses.

[prfsnl_gmr]

The vast majority of vocational skills are acquired on the job; so from a vocational standpoint, the true purpose of obtaining an undergraduate degree is to signal to an employer that you have the basic educational background, intelligence, and work ethic to be a successful employee.

By and large, the only true vocational skill that is fostered by undergraduate universities is critical thinking, and if you are looking to acquire anything else, then you are probably better off going to trade school. DSH's course is at least as good - if not better - at fostering critical thinking than any other undergraduate course. Accordingly, from a vocational standpoint, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Also, the knowledge that students acquire from an interesting course like this should make them a hit at cocktail parties, which - in the long run - is probably more important for their professional development than anything else.

[Ack]

Love you Dish, and you know it. I also think it's awesome you have the opportunity to teach a course that touches on a subject that is close to your heart.

That said, if I was paying for my kid to attend a major University and saw this course on his schedule I would have to have a one on one with you and bluntly ask "What is your goal for the students in your course, why should they choose your course over other electives, and how is your course relevant to my son getting a job in a related field?".

I'm sure you'll answer those questions in your syllabus, but when I took "Bowling" as my athletic elective my parents were pissed. If I told them "I'm taking a course on video game history and video game business" they would have been livid.

"Well, mother and father, if I want to continue pursuing a career designing/creating/programming/producing/studying/writing about a field such as video games/interactive art/entertainment software, then I need an expansive background which will include history and theory to make sure I am reasonably well rounded and capable of understanding it from a variety of facets."

Hey, I was an English major who at the time was interested in writing, so I took courses on script structure for film, television, and radio, poetry writing, fiction writing, technical writing, journalism, so on and so forth. And considering I have done video games journalism and now work for a major entertainment provider where my capabilities for analysis and communication (particularly in visual and interactive media) are prized, I'd say a course like that would have made perfect business sense for me.

[Jmustang1968]

The vast majority of vocational skills are acquired on the job; so from a vocational standpoint, the true purpose of obtaining an undergraduate degree is to signal to an employer that you have the basic educational background, intelligence, and work ethic to be a successful employee.

By and large, the only true vocational skill that is fostered by undergraduate universities is critical thinking, and if you are looking to acquire anything else, then you are probably better off going to trade school. DSH's course is at least as good - if not better - at fostering critical thinking than any other undergraduate course. Accordingly, from a vocational standpoint, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Also, the knowledge that students acquire from an interesting course like this should make them a hit at cocktail parties, which - in the long run - is probably more important for their professional development than anything else.

Not necessariily for engineering. Many courses for most of the majors have direct impact or preparedness for the industry. But one liberal arts elective is as good as any other for me.

[prfsnl_gmr]

The vast majority of vocational skills are acquired on the job; so from a vocational standpoint, the true purpose of obtaining an undergraduate degree is to signal to an employer that you have the basic educational background, intelligence, and work ethic to be a successful employee.

By and large, the only true vocational skill that is fostered by undergraduate universities is critical thinking, and if you are looking to acquire anything else, then you are probably better off going to trade school. DSH's course is at least as good - if not better - at fostering critical thinking than any other undergraduate course. Accordingly, from a vocational standpoint, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Also, the knowledge that students acquire from an interesting course like this should make them a hit at cocktail parties, which - in the long run - is probably more important for their professional development than anything else.

Not necessariily for engineering. Many courses for most of the majors have direct impact or preparedness for the industry. But one liberal arts elective is as good as any other for me.

Fair enough. I was friends with a lot of engineering majors in undergrad; so, I think this is true if you pursue a career - or higher education - in engineering.

[Jmustang1968]

The vast majority of vocational skills are acquired on the job; so from a vocational standpoint, the true purpose of obtaining an undergraduate degree is to signal to an employer that you have the basic educational background, intelligence, and work ethic to be a successful employee.

By and large, the only true vocational skill that is fostered by undergraduate universities is critical thinking, and if you are looking to acquire anything else, then you are probably better off going to trade school. DSH's course is at least as good - if not better - at fostering critical thinking than any other undergraduate course. Accordingly, from a vocational standpoint, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Also, the knowledge that students acquire from an interesting course like this should make them a hit at cocktail parties, which - in the long run - is probably more important for their professional development than anything else.

Not necessariily for engineering. Many courses for most of the majors have direct impact or preparedness for the industry. But one liberal arts elective is as good as any other for me.

Fair enough. I was friends with a lot of engineering majors in undergrad; so, I think this is true if you pursue a career - or higher education - in engineering.

Who pursues a higher education in engineering? Lol, I am only half joking. Some go and get their masters in business to become project engineers or managers. But higher education in engineering is generally worthless with a few exceptions:
- becoming a professor
- university research
- foreign students extending a visa

[Luke]

"because is an excuse" sounds like some cheesy one liner from a motivational speaker.

This made me burst into laughter as all I could think about was reading all the responses in Chris Farley's voice.

[Hobie-wan]

HEY HEY NOW... it was good with ranch dressing, ALRIGHT?

If you have a Krogers, you might try that chicken bacon ranch pizza in the store branded ones. I didn't care for it, but it might be up your alley.

[dsheinem]

I think my course has practical job-related applications for some of the reasons others have suggested. It is also designed to teach writing and research skills (FYS stands for first year seminar).

That said, why must education (at any level) simply be about landing a job? Is there no value in paying for education for the sake of broader intellectual development?