USC students should follow their passions
Last Saturday, CNN published an article titled “Why would-be engineers end up as English majors,” which claimed the low number of undergraduates studying science, technology, engineering and math affects the United States’ ability to compete in the global market.
CNN cited a 2010 study by UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute that found 36 percent of white, 21 percent of black and 22 percent of Latino students completed a bachelor’s degree in science, technology, engineering or math within five years of beginning college. According to the article, to further the United States’ role as a leader in technology, educators must make it a priority to develop American scientists and engineers at a young age.
Sylvia Hurtado, director of the Higher Education Research Institute, believes the trend of students leaving science and math fields is a serious problem.
Luis Villanueva | Summer Trojan
“Many students want to be in science, but very talented people are choosing other fields,” she told CNN. “That shouldn’t be the case.”
Students, even those talented in science, should be free to choose other majors. Students could simply have a greater interest in one area than another. Instead of promoting an education in only science, technology, engineering or math, students’ role models should develop a students’ curiosity in science and non-science fields.
Rather than attempting to increase the number of doctors, biologists and engineers, educators should be encouraging students to pursue their passions.
Without a doubt, USC students have the talent to enter numerous and disparate disciplines. The university encourages students to study in unrelated fields through its Renaissance Scholars Program that honors students who graduate with either a major and minor or two majors in “widely separated fields of study.” As the USC undergraduate admission website states, “It is this breadth of study that produces well-rounded graduates who often rise to the top of their fields.”
If an engineering major finds himself also passionate about English literature, then, if he cannot major in both, he should at least minor in one, although this might not be easy for some because of the demanding workload.
Hurtado claims poor scientific literacy and science and math programs that aim to lower the amount of students are to blame for the low numbers of graduates in science, technology, engineering and math. This suggests students are either not smart enough to complete a bachelor’s degree in one of those fields or they can’t deal with the competition and choose an easier major.
That shouldn’t be the assumption. The rigorous workload associated with an engineering degree might serve as a wake-up call for the students who chose engineering because of job opportunities available after graduation, rather than a passion for the major. English majors tend not to study humanities because of the plentiful jobs they’ll encounter with their bachelor’s degree, but because of the delight they find in reading and writing.
In another CNN article, Michael S. Roth, president of Wesleyan University, said “America should not retreat to a narrow, technical education in hopes that it will makes us tougher in global competition.”
Undergraduates should not feel obligated to study in a science- or math-related field. It will only lead to disgruntled students who will experience an unpleasant four years of college. The decision of which major to choose should be based on the student’s passions, not just talents.
Giovanni Osorio is a senior majoring in English and international relations, and he is editor-in-chief of the Summer Trojan.
Smart people pursue STEM-related academic paths. Most people will rationalize and talk about “some people are smart in different ways”…yeah, OK. Some people do the “my univerisity’s admit rate is a single digit” *cough* (Stanford losers), or “SC is in the ghetto; their football team cheats, and the London Times still recognizes…” *cough* (ucla losers with joke-for-a-major BAs).
It is platitudinous for me to reiterate, but society repudiates this because most American youths are too scared to compete in STEM academic paths: HARD MAJORs a la engineering, premed, computer science = a lot more promise than BA degrees, especially in this bleak economy.
btw Ms. De la Vergne, please “creatively” develop a cure for cancer; engineer a fuel that’ll enable internal combustion powered cars to travel 300 miles from a fume of fuel; develop a military weapon that can wipe out 9 million people 9,000 miles away with the left click of a mouse….
Ah, yes – the old hippie “just follow your passions” line. This belief may have made sense back in the 60’s when college cost a couple hundred dollars a semester and good middle class jobs were readily available even for those without a degree. But America has changed quite a bit since then.
Newsflash: Most liberal arts majors (communications, philosophy, sociology, gender studies, etc) are useless. They might be difficult. They might involve hard work. Unfortunately, they have very little practical application in 21st century society. You might find Philosophy to be a fascinating subject, but “Philosopher” stopped being an actual job title several hundred years ago. The purpose of college is to prepare you for a career in something. Despite all the childish new-agey platitudes you may hear from your professors, not all majors are created equal. The world needs more engineers and scientists. It does not need more liberal arts scholars. STEM majors possess real, practical skills and will tangibly contribute to society in ways that people with an expert knowledge of “American Studies” will not.
I agree with you. I’d take it step further: Assuming that only STEM majors are equipped to work in the technology business is narrow thinking. The technology industry needs more than tech expertise to drive it. What about creativity? Articulating qualitative requirements? Being an inventive, creative tester? How about creating training materials for new technology, or working well in teams made up of people from many cultures–as is common in the global economy today? Do they teach that in science, tech, engineering and math? Nope. Students learn that sort of thing studying history, culture, literature, sociology, anthropology and foreign languages.
Yes. Passion is the Key. There are not enough STEM role models in the US Elementary-Middle-Secondary Schools. This “shapes” & “develops” Passion for STEM.
However I take issue w/ Ms. de la Vergne. About the lack of Creativity and the ability to do collaborative work. Has she ever looked at the Engineering Curricula? What about USC’s Core Requirements? Both attempt to “foster” a STEM graduate who is not a “Total Tech-Nerd.” Of course Interdisciplinary schooling needs “tweaking”, but keep in mind the following saying. “Jack of all Trades. Master of None.”