<p>I have a friend who graduated from SJC, and the rigor and deep thought involved in that education is clear in everything he does. His first novel won award after award last year, and was nominated for the National Book Award (nearly unheard of for a first book). He’d be a terrible actuary, no question.</p>
<p>By undergraduate origins of Ph.D.'s, SJC not only ranks #1 per capita in Humanities and Linguistics, #2 in English/Literature, and #7 in Foreign Languages, but also #10 in Math and Statistics (right behind Princeton and Rice). </p>
<p>I have not seen evidence they prepare students well for careers or advanced degrees in the biological and physical sciences, so if that’s your thing but you’re otherwise attracted to the place, I agree with IB that Reed might be a better choice. Nevertheless I’m glad SJC is there; I do wish there were more demand for what they offer.</p>
<p>Very interesting thread. I was a math major at a large state university. I don’t currently use any of the higher math or statistics I learned, but it taught me how to have patience and problem solve. I agree with a previous poster that said a liberal arts and science education teaches you to think. That being said, if I knew then what I know now I would have jumped at the chance to attend a small LAC and learn how to learn. I am very glad my DS has decided to focus on LACs in his college search. To each his own…</p>
<p>I knew a math major in college who used to make fun of Engl. majors until his senior year, when the first job he applied for, required good writing skills. He did not get the job.
I speak three languages, and do translations once in a while. I have to say reading works in their original languages it’s the only way to go if you are serious about the classics.
I am also glad there are schools like SJC around.</p>
<p>
As a Classics major, I completely agree. Certain things are completely lost in translation or don’t carry over well. </p>
<p>At the same time, suggesting that SJC provides that sort of education is somewhat dubious. Latin is not part of the regular curriculum, and their Greek language instruction only covers the equivalent of about 1 1/2 years of standard language instruction, and all of those works (selections of Plato and New Testament semester 2, Sophocles/Aristophanes semester 3, Homer semester 4) would regularly be covered in those 2-4 courses. </p>
<p>Of course, I can hardly complain about anyone learning Greek. Goodness knows not enough people do, so kudos to them. I’m merely perturbed when people look into SJC thinking it will provide them a solid understanding of classical languages.</p>
<p>I do wish people would differentiate between a Great Books education and a liberal arts education. There is a large difference. Study physics at SJC, you read Spinoza and Galileo. Study physics at a LAC, you learn string theory and quantum theory.</p>
<p>I agree that society should provide mechanisms to support “pure” scholarship in “academic” disciplines. </p>
<p>IMO that support should include a requirement that the scholar occasionally share their insights with students that are not devoted to their discipline. Yes, the dread “survey course” has its place for professors as well as students!</p>
<p>
That is also the idea behind lecture series.</p>
<p>IB, do you have some sort of personal issue with StJC? </p>
<p>your criticisms are good points, but …(and I may be misinformed about this!!), but I don’t believe that most students approaching StJ are expecting either a modern science curriculum or indepth classical language training…they go for the “big picture”, for the rigorous writing and reading and speaking skills…those students don’t <em>WANT</em> to study a pure discipline right now and therefore are not expecting the school to provide that…and I think many would admit they will need to catch up on the “specifics” of a discipline later</p>
<p>there’s no doubt StJC students miss out on certain things, but there are certainly unique benefits too, but you’re criticizing StJ for not being something that it does not pretend to be…if students go there expecting to learn about string theory or become fluent in Latin, then that is their own fault for not researching the school at all…perhaps give students a little more credit for knowing what will work for them</p>
<p>(disclosure: am considering attending StJ)</p>
<p>
See post #4. My animosity towards the school (to use too strong a word) comes mainly from dealing with graduates of the school, who all too frequently consider their educations superior to those of students at other, different colleges. My personal view is that it is quite possible to craft a SJC-style education on top of a traditional major at a good many colleges (for sample curricula, see ISI’s Choosing the Right College), so one needn’t feel quite so superior.</p>
<p>
I agree. For such students, SJC is an excellent fit (indeed, one of the very few). While I still have minor quibbles with the curriculum (primarily the heavy emphasis on Western cultures), I agree that it provides an excellent education for such students. ring<em>of</em>fire pointed out in a recent thread that the average LSAT at SJC is 158, which is 80th percentile and reasonably good.</p>
<p>fair enough then…I certainly don’t feel that it is necessarily a “superior” education, just a different one, and one that may be a “superior” way for ME to develop academically…your attitude is understandable if you’ve had several bad experiences with alumni, so my apologies then</p>
<p>I also have concerns about the emphasis on western culture, but it’s always a trade off right? you have to go with the best situation you can get. Interestingly enough, Columbia was my first choice, but I’ve been out of school for a while -therefore the “General Studies” school was my only option, I was still happy to go but the financial aid they offered me was ridiculously inadequate, so I had to turn them down …and in the other corner, Reed is a “full-need” met school but this year denied admission to many students because they were too poor (there was a NYtimes article about it). So I’m optimistic that St J may be another option for me…admission not tied to ability to pay like at Reed, and yet will probably (hopefully!) give me more money than Columbia GS</p>
<p>actually since I’ve put all that out there…</p>
<p>if anyone has suggestions for similar schools (strong core curriculum requirements + rigorous level of instruction, preferably small size)…I have outstanding stats and unique experiences…but I’m a slightly older, very poor international student…those three adjectives don’t seem to be looked kindly upon by most elite LACs</p>
<p>
This might help:</p>
<p>[The</a> Great Ideas: Great Books Colleges](<a href=“http://www.thegreatideas.org/schools.html]The”>http://www.thegreatideas.org/schools.html)</p>
<p>Times sure have changed. I went to college a few decades ago. Back in those days we made fun of the kids with brief cases and business majors. We called them “college lite”. Now we have had 20 years with our nation/wallstreet run by “bean counters and mba’s” and what did it get us? (not to let the lawyers off the hook…as they drafted all those documents that created all those nasty derivatives that have blown up the world.)</p>
<p>Right on, ghostbuster. In another recent thread, I drew a distinction between “educated” and “trained”, which I think is in the same spirit as your comments. To me, the world is made better by education, but business and law degrees are not education so much as they are training. That doesn’t mean that business people and lawyers are necessarily uneducated, but it does mean that those who understand only business or law—but not literature, science, or history—are not contributing much to making the world a better place.</p>
<p>It doesn’t seem to me that it would be necessary for the lawyers working for our Justice Dept to have an in-depth knowledge of history (or science or literature) to prosecute Nazi War Criminals or fight for Civil Rights for all citizens. A law degree, some high school history (make that elementary school history), and a sense of justice would do. Wouldn’t you say they’ve made the world a better place?</p>
<p>The way I had read it was less “make the world a better place” by doing something good and being a productive member of society, and more by doing something radically different, and changing the world.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Either they need to have that knowledge or take their marching orders from someone who does. How can one really value life and liberty without understanding the harm to humanity of failing to value those things? And where does that understanding come from, if not from a knowledge of history? I believe similar analogies can be drawn with science, literature, etc.</p>
<p>How do you make a new thread on this website?? Ive looked everywhere and Im totally confused :</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>How could anyone possibly become a lawyer in the US without being exposed to the value of life and liberty during their college and/or legal education?</p>
<p>BCEagle, our son was a compsci major and graduated with a major in psych and minor in philosophy. He is now employed as a computer game designer which is a very creative position. He is not a coder but develops games from a conceptual viewpoint considering things such as story line, game theory and mechanics, age/level perspective and world building issues.</p>
<p>I view this lac vs vocational argument as largely hogwash. I was an engineering major and recieved a very well rounded education, taking a courses in composition(2), history(2), music(3), art history, urban/regional planning, sociology(2), Serbo Croatian lit, macro econ, bio, microbio, philosophy, and geology. Now retired I continue to be an avid reader, totally engaged in politics/social causes, love the theater/opera, write (bad) poetry and regulartly attend the symphony. The only real gap in my education that I regret is that I never learned a foreign language, though I am self taught in Spanish in a rudimentary sense.</p>
<p>And anyone who thinks that engineers do not think creatively or critically fails to understand the process of undertaking a major project from concept to completion.</p>