meh, isn't this kind of maintenance normal/expected? As upsetting as it may be to lose a program, I feel like an entire major serving only 4 students couldn't be well developed or fully staffed anyway.
It seems that the administrators are trying to turn UT into a trade school. The university focuses so much on business, engineering, law and computer science that liberal arts and other true academic areas sometimes get the back hand.
UT is the largest of America's top 50 universities. As such, it should offer more majors of study than our peer universities. This is one of the main reasons why students choose to come here instead of smaller schools like Rice - more opportunities.
If UT decides that cutting academic programs is the only option given the budget cuts, then they should cut useless programs. Social work and education certainly come to mind. These produce little value to the university or society (no offense). I would not cut intellectual majors like Greek and Scandinavian studies.
"What's the justification to offer a major that students aren't taking?" Commissioner Raymund Paredes said in a separate interview after the forum. "We're in a budget crisis in Texas, and we cannot afford to sustain dozens, in some cases hundreds, of programs around the state that aren't producing graduates."
The programs need students. Otherwise, what is point of having a program?
I would not cut intellectual majors like Greek and Scandinavian studies.
The difference between Greek and Classics at UT Austin is not significant. Push come to shove, eliminating Greek and Latin and keeping a major in classical languages is not a significant change. Many universities, even very good ones, don't offer separate Greek and Latin majors.
Eliminating all classics undergrad majors or (even worse) the PhD program would be far more worrisome.
Edited to respond to the post below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedalie
Students who want to study Slavic Studies and major in Greek can go to universities with bigger, more well-developed programs in those areas.
FYI, UT has the biggest classics program in the country and is a strong contender for a top 10 if not top 5 spot in any ranking. It's by far one of the university's strongest programs.
Last edited by warblersrule; 10-28-2011 at 01:36 AM.
I agree with frever and texaspg...in a way it's a tragedy to see these departments disappear, but what's the point of continuing to fund them if participation is in the single digits? Students who want to study Slavic Studies and major in Greek can go to universities with bigger, more well-developed programs in those areas. Andrewt, surely you cannot be serious about cutting social work and education. I don't want to start a fight here but I just have to call you out - how could you say that social work and education contribute nothing to society? While I agree that the liberal arts have gotten the short shrift at UT as of late (and I say this as a member of a program that has suffered severe, damaging cuts over the last year), practical financial concerns need to come before concerns about "societal value."
Last edited by buriedalie; 10-28-2011 at 01:45 AM.
If UT decides that cutting academic programs is the only option given the budget cuts, then they should cut useless programs. Social work and education certainly come to mind. These produce little value to the university or society (no offense). I would not cut intellectual majors like Greek and Scandinavian studies.
If UT were a private Liberal Arts school then I could understand your argument but UT is a state school. UT was created by the state, for the state. While history and the arts are critical parts of our society, the Texas state government should have little interest in diverting public funds to convert philistines into highbrows. Our government is here to promote the general welfare of its people and that, in the face of finitude, is most efficiently accomplished by teaching "trades." I would liken the Classics to state parks and the "trades" to roads and cities. Parks have their place in society, as do cities and roads but ultimately, and unfortunately, no matter how much we fight it, one must eventually yield to the other. And with the international economy as it is, I do not find it tenable to preserve "intellectual" majors over, if I may call them, useful majors.
I agree that the Classics should be taught wherever possible but in a stressed economic environment, I do not see it offering more utility than education or even social work. The laws of supply and demand should prevail and the voice of demand has strongly spoken.
The only time I was able to find "culture" in the Education Article of the Texas Constitution is as it appears within the word agriculture. The most direct statement of purpose declares that the universities are to be created "for the promotion of literature, and the arts and sciences." I never said that Texas' universities should not promote culture and I'm definitely not advocating the wholesale abandonment of it. My analogy comparing parks and cities to the classics and trades, respectively, should have highlighted the fact that though parks are public goods that the government should supply when possible, they should not have priority over primary goods such as a well-functioning infrastructure. I believe that in this current economic climate, most people would agree that we should cut park funds before we slash infrastructure funds until our problems have been sorted out. Much in the same way, I find it reasonable to prioritize Education over Classics.
As I said above, it's not a matter or whether we should or should not teach literature and the arts. The clear answer is that we should (and have to). My only argument is against Andrew787's proposal that "Greek and Scandinavian studies" should be held over "education and social work". Again repeating myself, the overriding priority of our government, and by extension the University of Texas, should be to promote the welfare of the state. With this is mind, I don't see how educating our citizens in the esoteric Scandinavian studies can claim greater utility than the "trades" such as engineering, the sciences and business. Intellectual studies should be left to private Liberal Arts universities whose teachings are not so directly subsidized by tax-payers' money.
With social work and education, the "trades" that are taught are not really necessarily required to enter the given field. What I'm trying to say is that education and social work don't necessarily belong in the same category as other majors that teach valuable "trades" like business, engineering, law, architecture, computer science, etc. I'm NOT saying that social work and education are not important in society; that would be direly incorrect.
This might explain my point better:
To become a computer scientist, one will need a degree in computer science. To become a lawyer, one will need to attend law school. To become an architect, one needs a degree in architecture. To become a historian, one needs a degree in history.
On the other hand, a degree in social work is NOT necessarily required to become a social worker. A degree in education is NOT necessarily required to become an elementary or middle school teacher. In fact, at the high school level, a degree in the subject matter that is being taught is usually what's required.
^The UTeach program makes an excellent substitute for a degree.
*edit* as in for an education degree. you can major in science, math, comp sci and earn a certificate so you can teach straight out of college. Love it!
