Reply to this post in 100 words or more.
Funny, I have a kid pursuing each of these fields. I think they are equally important.
I disagree with the proposal for variable tuition based on major. I understand there is a need for more people to choose STEM fields but until there is no longer a need for social workers or psychologists, I can’t support such a proposal. My research project is on mental health; there is a strong need for more service providers, not less.
The article points out that “it would straddle students with debt they might not be able to repay†(Travis, 2012, Oct. 4). It seems to be just another case of not taking care of those who take of us. The recommendation doesn’t seem to take into account that these fields produce our teachers and social workers. Neither pays very well but are incredibly valuable positions that are needed in our communities.
I can understand the State’s perspective in wanting to increase the numbers in the STEM field. We do need people that can hopefully create new technologies to solve problems (climate change, hunger, water scarcity) and keep us competitive. But from a human perspective, it is not good for individuals. People need to be able to follow their passions. I hate to throw around incendiary words but sounds like communism to me.
One troublesome assumption this proposal makes about the purpose and value of education is that all that matters is the workforce. Even if I were to never work again, my education has made me a better person and citizen. That alone is invaluable to society, especially to a democratic society. Another false assumption is that the humanities are not needed or valuable to society.
Travis, S. (2012, Oct. 4). State proposal: Vary cost of college tuition by degree sought. Sun Sentinel. Retrieved from http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-10-24/news/f…
WhatsApp us