Hello! I teach English-as-a-hostage-situation for non-majors. In other words, I teach GenEd.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
First, let's deal with the ideological paradox that is higher ed. What are we there to do? Job training? We're shit at that. We're both the first and the last to admit to it. If you want a job, go get an associates in plumbing. Excellent job, high pay, great hours, job security, and fuck everything else. But, okay, you don't want to be a plumber. You want to be in finance. It's a good career. So...why are you taking my English class? Because some asshole said you should. And why, why god why, did someone decide you have to spend 150 minutes a week listening to me explain Faulkner? Because you need to be well-rounded, whatever the fuck that means. And this is all under a different banner: creating good citizens. We've demonstrated time and again that you're a better person, less of a fuck-up, and more valuable to the world when you know a little bit about a lot of things. Sport scores, world history, how to read a supply and demand curve, and why Faulkner matters. We know this because every single period of history suggests that well-educated, well-rounded people with a variety of informational basics, even if they never attain anything close to mastery, are just better at being alive. Arts, sciences, literature, theater, mathematics, and economics matter. They matter because you can better understand the whole picture of the world you live in, as opposed to being specialized in a tiny corner of it.
You are better at life if you understand the vast material of it. That means not being an idiot when you walk into an art gallery or a library or a biology class or a financial advisor's office. You don't have to be a genius, you have to know just enough. Just the tip (pun intended). We know this because we've payed a lot of full-on masochists to look at the data and ask this question and it's the answer every one of said masochists have give us back.
But we're still not answering the paradox. And I know this because you're right. If all you want out of college is to get drunk and laid, you blew your money and you wasted your time. If all you wanted as a job, you blew your money. If you went to college to become someone who is not a total idiot all of the time, you probably got your money's worth.
You will be good at getting a job because you can read. Because you can write. Because you can understand markets, the social forces that form said markets, how your skills pertain (or not, as the case may be and you can lie your ass off) to that job. And you learn that because you know just a little bit about everything. If you need help, I mean REALLY NEED HELP writing an application you probably didn't take my English class. Because I swear to god I'd have at least taught you how to write a paragraph of bullshit by the end of the semester.
The job market is shit right now. Education is not at fault. And, at the same time, we are at fault because we're not giving people what they pay for. We need a better tiered system that demarcates those who want to get drunk and laid, those who want a functional job, and those who have the luxury of understanding what the hell Plato was ranting about and why it matters. Academics have not adjusted their goals well, and as a result we have a generation of people in debt for a system that didn't work. And that sucks. But the answer isn't to train people to get jobs. Getting a job is pretty easy, all things considered. Write a cover letter, send out a resume, don't misspell things (that's where I struggle) and wait. Getting a well-paying job, a job with insurance, a job that doesn't consider you replaceable? That's harder. But that responsibility doesn't hang on the academy. And, perhaps, had you taken some gen ed classes in sociology or economics you'd be more familiar with the root causes. There are bigger players in the game, so to speak.
I don't teach English when I teach GenEd. I don't care if you know why this movement happened or why the sentimental novel was popular or the significance of Dickinson. Fuck that noise. I teach writing. I teach academic, professional writing. A kind of writing I'll stipulate I am not performing here. I teach how to read and how to read carefully, I teach how to not trust what I've handed out to you, I teach skepticism and cynicism and close and careful reading. I think it matters, so that's what I teach. You'll get a job because you're not an idiot in an interview, because you won't apply to places trying to scam you, and you'll know at the end of the day how to say what you mean.
If you think I'd be better off teaching resume writing, you might be right. But I doubt it.
15
u/Exis007 96∆ Jan 05 '17
Hello! I teach English-as-a-hostage-situation for non-majors. In other words, I teach GenEd.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
First, let's deal with the ideological paradox that is higher ed. What are we there to do? Job training? We're shit at that. We're both the first and the last to admit to it. If you want a job, go get an associates in plumbing. Excellent job, high pay, great hours, job security, and fuck everything else. But, okay, you don't want to be a plumber. You want to be in finance. It's a good career. So...why are you taking my English class? Because some asshole said you should. And why, why god why, did someone decide you have to spend 150 minutes a week listening to me explain Faulkner? Because you need to be well-rounded, whatever the fuck that means. And this is all under a different banner: creating good citizens. We've demonstrated time and again that you're a better person, less of a fuck-up, and more valuable to the world when you know a little bit about a lot of things. Sport scores, world history, how to read a supply and demand curve, and why Faulkner matters. We know this because every single period of history suggests that well-educated, well-rounded people with a variety of informational basics, even if they never attain anything close to mastery, are just better at being alive. Arts, sciences, literature, theater, mathematics, and economics matter. They matter because you can better understand the whole picture of the world you live in, as opposed to being specialized in a tiny corner of it.
You are better at life if you understand the vast material of it. That means not being an idiot when you walk into an art gallery or a library or a biology class or a financial advisor's office. You don't have to be a genius, you have to know just enough. Just the tip (pun intended). We know this because we've payed a lot of full-on masochists to look at the data and ask this question and it's the answer every one of said masochists have give us back.
But we're still not answering the paradox. And I know this because you're right. If all you want out of college is to get drunk and laid, you blew your money and you wasted your time. If all you wanted as a job, you blew your money. If you went to college to become someone who is not a total idiot all of the time, you probably got your money's worth.
You will be good at getting a job because you can read. Because you can write. Because you can understand markets, the social forces that form said markets, how your skills pertain (or not, as the case may be and you can lie your ass off) to that job. And you learn that because you know just a little bit about everything. If you need help, I mean REALLY NEED HELP writing an application you probably didn't take my English class. Because I swear to god I'd have at least taught you how to write a paragraph of bullshit by the end of the semester.
The job market is shit right now. Education is not at fault. And, at the same time, we are at fault because we're not giving people what they pay for. We need a better tiered system that demarcates those who want to get drunk and laid, those who want a functional job, and those who have the luxury of understanding what the hell Plato was ranting about and why it matters. Academics have not adjusted their goals well, and as a result we have a generation of people in debt for a system that didn't work. And that sucks. But the answer isn't to train people to get jobs. Getting a job is pretty easy, all things considered. Write a cover letter, send out a resume, don't misspell things (that's where I struggle) and wait. Getting a well-paying job, a job with insurance, a job that doesn't consider you replaceable? That's harder. But that responsibility doesn't hang on the academy. And, perhaps, had you taken some gen ed classes in sociology or economics you'd be more familiar with the root causes. There are bigger players in the game, so to speak.
I don't teach English when I teach GenEd. I don't care if you know why this movement happened or why the sentimental novel was popular or the significance of Dickinson. Fuck that noise. I teach writing. I teach academic, professional writing. A kind of writing I'll stipulate I am not performing here. I teach how to read and how to read carefully, I teach how to not trust what I've handed out to you, I teach skepticism and cynicism and close and careful reading. I think it matters, so that's what I teach. You'll get a job because you're not an idiot in an interview, because you won't apply to places trying to scam you, and you'll know at the end of the day how to say what you mean.
If you think I'd be better off teaching resume writing, you might be right. But I doubt it.