Christine (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} chris_nysb) wrote,@ 2008-10-17 22:43:00 |
|
k most of you are j2 and should know this already if you're even the least bit interested, but it's amazing how many people have this misconception:
"liberal art colleges shouldn't have compulsory modules because by definition, liberal arts means that you have the liberty to study what you like to study! that's what a liberal arts college is about!!"
no. just.. no.
even wikipedia knows this:
catholic(!!) encyclopedia:
and lastly this site, which is best read (though the portion about the faculty isn't really relevant):
to be honest i haven't really read up properly on any college besides sjc, but it strikes me that when i first heard of liberal art colleges, i wasn't attracted. many of the colleges advertised themselves as a less restricted version of normal university, where you get to learn from broader fields and you can pursue your interests, but the catch - it seems to be as focused on ability and grades as any other college. it still seemed largely like singapore's meritocratic system, which of course is good for countries and economies but not always so for the individual. and i was looking for a place which loved learning and educated one to be more of a person, not built up one's talents i suppose for the eventual purpose of entering society.
only sjc has the focus i want. but the point i was trying to make was more that: liberal art colleges now seem to be advertising themselves as a place where you can learn anything you want, any how you want? that was never their intent, and it's very painful to see them increasingly skewing themselves towards normality. almost as painful as seeing people who proclaim their interest in liberal art education adopt this point of view.
and if you're thinking of going to a liberal arts college for pragmatic reasons (e.g. financial aid, or because you'll learn skills like critical thinking), you.. really shouldn't. the whole point of a liberal arts education is as stated below:
(1) The quality of a liberal education that makes it so effective is that the subject matter studied is not “use-eh-full.”
It is the very “uselessness” of what liberal arts students study that opens the door to their appreciating knowing for the sake of knowing, that drives home the point that learning is of value in and of itself whether or not it leads directly to a marketable skill. It is possible to realize these things while studying banking or engineering, but it is much more difficult because the student is constantly distracted from the utility of acquiring knowledge by the utility of the knowledge being acquired. The genius of the American system of liberal education is that it eliminates this distraction. Its uselessness separates knowing from need to know, learning from need to learn, desire to understand from need to understand.
it needs money and i'm not certain if i can make it. but at the very least i know what i'm doing and why i'm doing. please make an informed choice! esp j1s i know you guys still have a year to consider but seriously, don't speak of pragmatic reasons or having complete freedom of choice when you're thinking of a liberal arts education. pragmatic reasons are important but there is difference between acknowledging that and making it your purpose.
correct me if your model of liberal arts education is totally different, because really - i'm only aiming for sj; of course there's a bias.
(xiu said that ki taught us to love learning. we weren't like this in nanyang, that much i know.)
"liberal art colleges shouldn't have compulsory modules because by definition, liberal arts means that you have the liberty to study what you like to study! that's what a liberal arts college is about!!"
no. just.. no.
even wikipedia knows this:
The term 'liberal arts' is a college or curriculum aimed at imparting general knowledge and developing intellectual capacities, in contrast to a professional, vocational, or technical curriculum. In classical antiquity, the term designated the education proper to a freeman (Latin: liber, "free") as opposed to a slave. Martianus Capella (5th century AD) defines the seven Liberal Arts as grammar, dialectic, rhetoric and geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, music.
catholic(!!) encyclopedia:
They are called liberal (Latin liber, free), because they serve the purpose of training the free man, in contrast with the artes illiberales, which are pursued for economic purposes; their aim is to prepare the student not for gaining a livelihood, but for the pursuit of science in the strict sense of the term, i.e. the combination of philosophy and theology known as scholasticism.
and lastly this site, which is best read (though the portion about the faculty isn't really relevant):
In the early 19th century, subject matter that made up the liberal arts curriculum was fixed: the ancient classics, rhetoric, logic, Greek and Latin. It was what a gentleman, a liberally educated person, had to know. Today, while the curriculum is flexible, taking advantage of the special skills and interests of the faculty, it still defines liberal education at each liberal arts college. It is the responsibility of the faculty — not the students, not the administration — to create a curriculum and the goal in doing so must be to make the best possible use of the faculty to insure that the college’s graduates are securely launched on a lifetime of liberal education.
to be honest i haven't really read up properly on any college besides sjc, but it strikes me that when i first heard of liberal art colleges, i wasn't attracted. many of the colleges advertised themselves as a less restricted version of normal university, where you get to learn from broader fields and you can pursue your interests, but the catch - it seems to be as focused on ability and grades as any other college. it still seemed largely like singapore's meritocratic system, which of course is good for countries and economies but not always so for the individual. and i was looking for a place which loved learning and educated one to be more of a person, not built up one's talents i suppose for the eventual purpose of entering society.
only sjc has the focus i want. but the point i was trying to make was more that: liberal art colleges now seem to be advertising themselves as a place where you can learn anything you want, any how you want? that was never their intent, and it's very painful to see them increasingly skewing themselves towards normality. almost as painful as seeing people who proclaim their interest in liberal art education adopt this point of view.
and if you're thinking of going to a liberal arts college for pragmatic reasons (e.g. financial aid, or because you'll learn skills like critical thinking), you.. really shouldn't. the whole point of a liberal arts education is as stated below:
(1) The quality of a liberal education that makes it so effective is that the subject matter studied is not “use-eh-full.”
It is the very “uselessness” of what liberal arts students study that opens the door to their appreciating knowing for the sake of knowing, that drives home the point that learning is of value in and of itself whether or not it leads directly to a marketable skill. It is possible to realize these things while studying banking or engineering, but it is much more difficult because the student is constantly distracted from the utility of acquiring knowledge by the utility of the knowledge being acquired. The genius of the American system of liberal education is that it eliminates this distraction. Its uselessness separates knowing from need to know, learning from need to learn, desire to understand from need to understand.
it needs money and i'm not certain if i can make it. but at the very least i know what i'm doing and why i'm doing. please make an informed choice! esp j1s i know you guys still have a year to consider but seriously, don't speak of pragmatic reasons or having complete freedom of choice when you're thinking of a liberal arts education. pragmatic reasons are important but there is difference between acknowledging that and making it your purpose.
correct me if your model of liberal arts education is totally different, because really - i'm only aiming for sj; of course there's a bias.
(xiu said that ki taught us to love learning. we weren't like this in nanyang, that much i know.)
