Liberal arts renaissance

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
1

While I know this isn’t exactly a UChicago thread I found this a very interesting letter from CU President Bruce Benson, I’m sure @marlowe1 would appreciate it.

March 2019

Dear

I recently asked for a report to be developed about the future of higher education in general and the University of Colorado in particular. Even though I will retire from CU in July, it’s important for university leadership, including my successor, to scan the horizon to see where our enterprise is going in the next decade or two or three.
Some findings are what you would expect – how electronic delivery and online education will continue to change higher education. The demographic trends that will impact our student body. The move toward specialized certificates and professional master’s degrees. One finding was particularly interesting: We will need more liberal arts graduates.
The pendulum that swung in recent years toward degrees in STEM fields is starting to swing back. Let me be clear – STEM degrees remain critical to society and our university, and we will continue our focus on them.
But as automation continues to reach into many aspects of life, so does artificial intelligence (AI). AI and machine learning (ML) will increasingly do work humans do, particularly in computer programming and financial services. AI and ML will get more sophisticated.
It will be essential to assess data and suggested decisions from multiple sources with competing goals. You might call this “critical thinking.” It will also be important to evaluate competing viewpoints (even if generated by AI or ML), communicate evaluations and make decisions based on these evaluations using business, technical, aesthetic and ethical considerations. You might call the aggregate of that “creative problem solving.” Graduates with the human skills a liberal arts education fosters – communication, problem solving, leadership – should have a leg up.
The number of STEM majors and graduates has increased dramatically in recent years at CU and elsewhere, and rightfully so. Yet we cannot lose that fundamental purpose of a university – to prepare a well-rounded person who will be an asset to society.
When I considered attending CU Boulder for my undergraduate geology degree, I looked at another university with a highly specialized curriculum. The focus would have been on geology and not much else. It was (and is) a fine institution, but I needed a more well-rounded course of study, so I chose CU Boulder.
I’m glad I did. While most of my professional life was spent in geology, a grounding in the liberal arts allowed me to think beyond my field and branch out to various business and political ventures. It helped me have a successful career and life.
The knock these days on liberal arts degrees is that they do not lead to lucrative careers. Certainly an engineering major will usually earn more than an English major. But that doesn’t mean an English major won’t have a successful career and life.
A few years back we surveyed the leadership of Colorado’s top 25 public companies. Of those, half earned undergraduate degrees in liberal arts fields. Three-quarters earned advanced degrees. All were extremely successful in leading their companies. It highlights the statistic that 40 percent of liberal arts graduates go on to graduate or professional schools, where they specialize.
A liberal arts degree can be a ticket to economic mobility. While most of those graduates will likely earn less than STEM graduates, that doesn’t mean they won’t be successful and productive. People who go into fields such as teaching, social work or the arts go in with eyes wide open about the economic prospects. A salary is not the sole measure of success. Their contributions to their communities and society are immeasurable.
It’s important for liberal arts graduates to translate their skills into needs in the job market. But one of the hallmarks of the liberal arts is being able to adapt. I’m happy to see a resurgence of the liberal arts. It’s interesting that the future of our university is so steeped in its past and a classical, well-rounded liberal arts education. Thankfully, teaching people how to learn, how to think and how to scan the horizon will always be in style.

For feedback, contact officeofthepresident@cu.edu
Sincerely,

Bruce D. Benson
President

2

Good to learn of a resurgence. It’s still the case that if choosing a liberal arts education, you should attend the best university you can get into and can afford, or shoot for honors whenever possible. That ensures overall quality. Liberal arts can be a two-edged sword by attracting both the driven and those following the path of least resistance to a degree. No one should be fooled that “liberal arts” equals “critical thinking” at a good number of universities; it’s quite possible to obtain that BA without a smidgen of intellectual growth.

3

well, good to hear.

We certainly dont want UChicago to get to a point where it has to deal with “Stanford-type” problems now do we?

Read this blog to understand what I mean by “Stanford-type” problems brought on by “too much” emphasis on STEM, and too light emphasis on Liberal Arts. I think I would like UChicago to preserve its Liberal Arts character until the end of time…

This blog (https://cathincollege.com/2016/03/28/w-for-wisdom-how-stanford-is-killing-the-very-intellectual-vitality-that-got-us-all-in/)

The kid in the blog would have been a perfect fit at UChicago.

4

^ Thats too bad. Perhaps S’s proximity to the Valley encourages STEM to the exclusion of other specialties. But doesn’t “liberal arts” refer to a framework rather than a specific major? It does not mean you major in non STEM or Econ. Somebody can earn even a bachelor of science in computer science and still be required to explore a broad range of other subjects including those in the humanities and other social sciences.

What might be happening now is that the level of technical proficiency in some majors requires additional specialized coursework leaving very little time for electives. No inside track here but I strongly suspect the reason UChicago does not have an engineering program is because it simply cannot be fit into the framework of a liberal arts education. ABET requirements leave barely any time in the schedule for Gen Eds and no time for electives. But at UChicago there is time for a STEM major, including CS, to do additional study and even double major, especially now that the College allows up to five courses in a quarter without charging extra. Sure, it’s a ton of work. But you still graduate with a liberal arts exposure as opposed to a strictly technical one.

5

Just looked up the Symbolic Systems major that the blogger attempted - summary description and link to major are below.

It appears to be an interdisciplinary major consisting of 70-85 credits (out of 180 required for the BA/BS degree) of math, philosophy, psychology, comp. sci, language/linguistics, and neuroscience. Now, perhaps one can take those courses at any rigorous liberal arts college and work in the same field upon graduation - or maybe this specific major has been packaged in a way to make those interested in the field quite marketable indeed. Not sure which. At any rate, what jumped out is that this isn’t merely a tech’y C/S major but one that makes use of skill sets in all the divisions of a liberal arts college: Math, Science, Social Science, and Humanities. With an average of 43% of total college credits required, SymSys has about the same degree of “specialization” as ME, Neuro, Fundamentals, or Classical Studies at UChicago.

The blogger professed a love for language, so this major - at least on paper - seems a natural choice; however, it clearly requires the same facility with math and science as it does with social science and hum. So while it may be liberal-artsy, it’s not focused primarily on a non-STEM skill set. Perhaps she succumbed to the idea that she needed a good amount of C/S in her arsenal upon graduation. It would be foolish not to take ANY C/S at Stanford given the school’s ranking in that field, but that doesn’t quite mean you have to major in it (or something related to it).

Here’s the description:

“The undergraduate program in Symbolic Systems is an interdisciplinary program focusing on the relationship between natural and artificial systems that represent, process, and act on information. The mission of the program is to prepare majors with the vocabulary, theoretical background, and technical skills necessary to research questions about language, information, and intelligence, both human and machine. The curriculum offers a combination of traditional humanistic approaches to these questions as well as a training and familiarity with contemporary developments in the science and technology of computation. Students in the major take courses in cognitive science, computer programming, computational theory, probability, cognitive psychology, linguistics, and artificial intelligence. The program prepares student for careers in corporate and private sectors as well as for further study in graduate school.”

https://exploredegrees.stanford.edu/schoolofhumanitiesandsciences/symbolicsystems/

TL/DR: Blogger is incorrect that this particular major somehow demonstrates a shift away from the liberal arts at Stanford. Perhaps she shouldn’t have taken all her courses in C/S that one quarter.

6

^ There are schools like UChicago with wide liberal arts cores that all students, regardless of major, have a liberal arts education. The other extreme is essentially someone gives you a flowchart that you can follow end up with a degree - no detours into Philosophy necessary because there are a lot of fundamentals to learn along the way. In these settings, the only way to get a liberal arts education is to essentially design your own course, or to double major with one major in the liberal arts.

Stanford, having been historically strong in CS and Engineering from its inception, has a culture that extols virtues associated with those disciplines. Understandably so. It’s proximity to the Valley makes it stronger. It’s not a bad thing in itself, except when it becomes disrespectful (in the blog, the apparently denigrating “f” word is “fuzzy”, as opposed to hard or real or tech or science or stem). These virtues are what made Stanford what it is today, and has made it and its alumni rich and famous and influential. Personally, I appreciate this Stanford ethos. But then I am one of those people who, again personally, use, think and approach CS as a liberal art because at its core is critical thinking, logic and problem-solving emanating from team based discussions.

S is not for everybody. And I get it.

7

That young woman is singing from my hymnal, @CU123 . However, as others have said, a UChicago hum or soc major would never feel the attitude of disrespect she feels at Stanford. Probably that’s mainly due to the Core, both the way it continues to validate these perennial studies and the way its existence screens out those who feel the contempt for them she describes. Among my classmates were in fact many who came to Chicago to study a hard science and left it a humanist. Shakespeare, Plato and company can be seductive, but there’s nothing soft about them.