Gen eds: What are they accomplishing, really?

My students and I spent the last week and half watching the film Accepted and discussing various issues surrounding higher education in the US. I do this every semester as part of their second essay project, and every semester students lament being forced to take "pointless" general education courses. I present them with a brief history of the university and brief them on what it means to be an "educated" person. We discuss what value various general education courses have to their lives, their future careers, their role as citizens in a democracy, and to being just generally an "educated" person. It's difficult for them to buy into it.

Students don't understand the purpose and value of gen eds. They see no reason to be informed about history. Many say "I don't need to write for the career I'm going into, so I shouldn't have to take this course." Art majors see no value for knowing math. (What?!) Nursing students see no value in taking psychology. (Are you kidding me?) Business majors see no point to studying literature, music, art.

I am not surprised by this. I am concerned. I'm concerned, especially, because it's not their fault that they think this way. This is the way our educational system has trained them to think. Subjects are taught as if they are independent areas of study completely isolated from one another. I'd like to say this ridiculous division of disciplines is limited to the public education system but it is the way most educational institutions function, at every level.

I am thankful that my daughter's school is highly inter-disciplinary. If the students are learning about ancient Roman history, they learn that content in every class. Social studies addresses the objective historical background, literature addresses the same content through the subjective, experiential history recorded in poetry and novels, and art asks them to recreate what they're learning in creative, visual ways. When she learned about the digestive system in science, she was also writing a short story for language arts that illustrated the digestive process from the perspective of the food that was eaten. My daughter will never question why she needs to take a wide variety of courses unrelated to her major, because she will know without doubt that all knowledge is an important, integral part of learning any one thing in depth.

I do my best to help my students see this. In fact, I used this very example in class today. Some of them get it. Most do not. I'll see what happens as they begin interviewing faculty, deans, administrators, advisors. A few more eyes will likely be opened. I worry, though, about those who continue to view their education in terms of a buyer/seller exchange. I worry about what happens when they find themselves in the work force, unemployed or working a low-paying job they didn't need a degree for. All because they didn't learn the skills their desired professions wanted from that college degree: written and oral communication & critical and creative thinking.

Students are required to take gen eds. But when they approach the course with the attitude of "getting it over with," they store enough information in their short term memory to get them by. When the course is over, it and its content are forgotten. Are gen eds achieving their intended purpose? When employers expect college education as preparation for the work force, when students only go to college to be trained for a job, should the purpose of higher ed change to meet the demands of our changing world?

I'm afraid that college simply for the sake of learning is a thing of the past for the vast majority of the US population.