<p>
</p>
<p>Even if true, so what?</p>
<p>
I profusely disagree. There is ample evidence on this thread to disprove your contention. You just have to know where to look. ;)</p>
<p>Apparently a slightly out of date stat :)</p>
<p>[Mercury</a> Rising: World’s Highest Standard of Living? Not Any More](<a href=“http://phoenixwoman.blogspot.com/2006/01/worlds-highest-standard-of-living-not.html]Mercury”>Mercury Rising: World's Highest Standard of Living? Not Any More)
[High</a> Living Standard Countries, High Standard of Living Countries](<a href=“http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-quality-of-life-map.html]High”>Countries with Best Quality of Life)</p>
<p>Also:
[Per</a> Capita Income Around the World](<a href=“http://www.success-and-culture.net/articles/percapitaincome.shtml]Per”>http://www.success-and-culture.net/articles/percapitaincome.shtml)
Which is now:
[List</a> of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita]List”>List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>So, I suppose my claim was a bit of an overreach. But the principal still holds - we still cost more to employ. China and India rank 82nd and 118th respectively. They have people who are better at math and science than us. But we still destroy them in terms of QoL, SoL, PC GDP, and on and on.</p>
<p>If we want less people to attend college, lower prices, and so on, as some have suggested - we could drastically cut American wages, making us more efficient in the manufacturing sector. I don’t see why we should be modeling countries that are in infinitely worse shape that our own.</p>
<p>DSC, I work in technology for a large financial company. We have dozens of open positions for software engineers in Massachusetts. We have a hard time finding qualified applicants. Almost all engineers we hire to work in the US come from India, China and other countries. Their wages are well above average for the US. We see very few US college graduates applying to these high paying jobs if at all.</p>
<p>Speaking about standard of living, per capita income is only one of the metrics that can be used. Here is an interesting article that mentions other indexes used to evaluate standards of living in the world and what they mean:
[Standard</a> of living in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_living_in_the_United_States]Standard”>Standard of living in the United States - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>“The average Engineer’s IQ is far higher than the Average IQ of an Art Historian’s.”</p>
<p>Gee, maybe that’s why some of us find your argument hard to take–maybe we can’t understand it!
tsdad, the reason you need to know calculus is the same reason you need to know Latin and cursive writing–even though you will never use it in your life, ever, it somehow helps you to think good.</p>
<p>mamochka, we’ve had this discussion on CC before: the apparent lack of Americans in the tech sector. Many of us believe it is NOT because Americans aren’t prepared well enough (as you seem to imply judging by your earlier posts) but rather because those who MANAGE technicians make more money. Unfortunately – or fortunately, depending on your view point – MBAs in this country who move up into high executive positions can earn a fortune exponentially larger than the techs who work for them. Ditto lawyers. I personally believe that is the case: in my own family we have two high-level engineers and two MBAs (one of whom was, gasp, a liberal arts major - art history to be precise.) Guess who makes and has consistently made more money? And is ready to retire sooner?</p>
<p>‘it somehow helps you to think good.’</p>
<p>lol.</p>
<p>yea, to think good. that’s why this former english major made major money in college writing papers for those brilliant engineers :)</p>
<p>RE Grade inflation/harshness of grading-
How common is this- anyone else have a son/daughter at a university that does this?</p>
<p>Dean’s List Requirements (at my kids’ U):</p>
<p>Accounting 3.5
Building Construction 3.7
Business Administration 3.5
Education 3.75
Engineering 3.2
Journalism 3.5
Liberal Arts/Science 3.75
Nursing 3.6</p>
<p>Do all colleges have disparities between majors? Same goes for Cum Laude, Magna Cum and Summa Cum Laude.</p>
<p>Nope, dp. But at D’s 1700 student LAC Summa is 3.95 and Magna is 3.85. I’ve checked some recent years and it seems there are maybe a handful of the first and maybe less than 10 of the latter. I think I remember one year it was 4 and 7. I calculated that a student could make 5 A-'s in their whole career and still get the top honor graduate position. Brutal when you consider that her school has zippo grade inflation.</p>
<p>No, many colleges do not have different standards for different majors. However, at Harvard, in order to get departmental honors, you must be recommended for honors by your department, no matter how high your GPA. So the chemistry professors choose the meritorious chemists; English professors choose the meritorious English majors. </p>
<p>Also, for Phi Beta Kappa election, candidates are divided into humanities, social science, and natural science majors, and the chapter members within each category choose honorees from that category. So you don’t have physics and economics majors going head to head for seats in the chapter.</p>
<p>Katliamom, unfortunately all liberal arts graduates cannot become highly paid MBAs and lawyers. Picturing American workforce as consisting of American MBAs managing technicians from India and China looks a bit arrogant and unrealistic to me. Especially, when it is combined with ridiculing occasional grammar mistakes that your engineering opponents have made. You certainly understand that for some of them English is not their first language. If you cannot supress the urge to laugh at their grammar gaffs, I encourage you to think about how fluent you would be arguing the same topic in a foreign language (PhDs in French, this exercise does not apply to you -:)</p>
<p>There is a lot of arrogance in the postings of the engineers too when they claim exceptional mental abilities.</p>
<p>“I encourage you to think about how fluent you would be arguing the same topic in a foreign language”</p>
<p>Believe me, if I were typing in French from my computer at a French university, I wouldn’t be arguing that I don’t need a liberal arts education in French to maximize my language skills.</p>
<p>Anyway, the idea of supporting your theories with evidence is universal. That’s what I take issue with, not the occasional misplaced plural verb.</p>
<p>katliamom, many of the engineering majors I have kept track of are placed on the management track and most technical departments/divisions are managed by scientists/engineers who are able to more effectively understand the work under their management. </p>
<p>And given the relative small number of engineering graduates, they are greatly over represented in the upper eschelons of corporate management. Of the largest 100 S&P500 corporations, 22% are graduate engineers followec by Business Admin(21%), Econ(9%), LibArts(8%) and Accounting(3%). Similarly for all S&P500 firms-Engineering(20%), BusAdmin(15%), Econ(11%), LibArts(9%) and Accounting(7%).</p>
<p>Actually, I am not an engineering major, but a business major. I arrived in America 3 years ago, and am doing significantly well in your MIS program, thanks to better training in my country. Foreigners don’t come here for a better education, we come here because the American education system lacks in many fields and we take advantage of it. It is not a foreigner’s fault that they do better in school than American students.</p>
<p>Many universities do have lower standards for honors in engineering programs, because they are simply much more difficult to do well in. The theories are quite comprehensive and many of their applications are difficult to understand. Anyone can study English or Art History, but many simply will not hack it in Engineering simple because they do not have the intellectual capability to do well. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nobody claimed a liberal arts education is not necessary to understand and improve linguistic skill. The argument is that we are putting too much emphasis on liberal arts and not enough on math and science, where a substantial lack of qualified students exist. Students do want to get into these fields but they are not well prepared and do the liberal arts route instead. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Refusing to look at the evidence does not constitute a lack of evidence. There is plenty of evidence. When people such as yourself feel that Americans are above all that technical jobs should move overseas and you should manage them, is quite a bit ignorant.</p>
<p>I don’t remember the argument where anyone stated that liberal arts should be eliminated. You seem hell-bent on defending it. Whether you choose to admit it or not, it takes more intellectual capability to earn an engineering degree than a degree in English.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Engineering degrees are amongst the rarest degrees granted by American institutions, yet they 22% of managers in fortune 500 companies are engineering majors? It seems to me that is evidence in itself that engineering schools offers better preparation for management and professional schools. </p>
<p>A fraction of students graduate in engineering compared with liberal arts graduates, yet they hold over twice as many of the countries highest positions. Hmmm, ya’ll must be right, liberal arts grads are far more capable of executing high ranking positions.</p>
<p>“There is plenty of evidence.”</p>
<p>That may be, but see, it’s your responsibility to offer it, not just to claim that it is there. On the topics that I’ve brought up, you’ve cited, so far, to Northeastmom’s opinion and to some letters to the opinion editor of the NYTimes. I’m waiting for factual support.</p>
<p>You said upthread:</p>
<p>“Engineering requires articulation and writing skill as well, it’s not just all mathematics and physics. Most engineering students excel profusely and humanities classes are amongst their best grades.”</p>
<p>If that’s the case, and you’d excel in a philosophy course, then I really shouldn’t have to point out yet again that this:</p>
<p>“Whether you choose to admit it or not, it takes more intellectual capability to earn an engineering degree than a degree in English.”</p>
<p>is yet another example of pulling a factual assertion out of your butt and expecting other people to accept it as true. The problem isn’t my refusal to accept the truth. The problem is your refusal to PROVE what you believe to be the truth.</p>
<p>“ya’ll must be right, liberal arts grads are far more capable of executing high ranking positions.”</p>
<p>And this is called a straw man argument, where you pretend that your opponent made an extreme claim that he did not in fact make, and then you knock the straw man down.</p>
<p>Many engineers entered my class at Harvard Law and more than held their own. But you’re not showing us that you’d be one of them.</p>
<p>The sheer difficult of engineering programs would suggest that the students in those programs are, on average, (not every single case, but on average) of higher intelligence than others. </p>
<p>Something about the general consensus being engineering programs are out of reach for most student’s intellectually leads me to believe elements135 has a point. I AM NOT SAYING EVERY ENGINEER IS BRIGHTER THAN EVERY ENGLISH MAJOR. However, it is indeed far more difficult to obtain a degree in engineering, and for that more intellectual capability is necessary than to obtain a degree in say English. If this were not the case, the retention rate of English majors would not be as low as the retention rate of engineering majors.</p>
<p>You fail to realize, Uri and elements,
that the reason the retention rate is so low among engineering majors, and the reason the requirements are lower for engineering majors in attaining honors, is because</p>
<p>(drumroll)</p>
<p>they’re just plain dumber than the rest.</p>
<p><<on the=“” evidence,=“” engineering=“” students=“” do=“” just=“” as=“” well=“” in=“” their=“” humanities=“” courses=“” majors,=“” yet=“” majority=“” of=“” humanity=“” majors=“” would=“” not=“” be=“” able=“” to=“” excel=“” an=“” program,=“” and=“” it’s=“” due=“” lack=“” interest.=“” many=“” engineers=“” interest=“” classic=“” cultures,=“” most=“” significantly=“” these=“” classes=“” well.=“”>></on></p>
<p>This is BS, pure and simple. Curmudgeon is quite right. I remember the MIT students dropping like flies in Wellesley English classes when they found out how much work they were going to have to do and how low a grade they were going to get. </p>
<p>“Engineering” types take an introductory course where the teacher is grading gently, and think they are kicking ass. In fact, they have no idea what it takes to really perform in the discipline. The fact is that performing on a high level in a real literature class is beyond the capability of most of them (as it is beyond the capability of most of the poli sci, art history, and psych majors, no matter how smart they are). They simply do not have the talent. It’s not that they are stupid, it’s that their talents and interests lie elsewhere.</p>
<p>I was an English major. When I eventually chose to take a few programming courses–Assembler, I might add, which is pretty hard core–I got As.</p>
<p>My kid is getting As (and has gotten a 5 on the AP exam) in AP Biology, AP Chemistry, AP Physics, and AP Calculus BC. I’m pretty sure that he would beat both you and Uriah Heep on an IQ test. I’m quite sure that he would succeed in engineering and science programs if he chose to participate. Guess what? Right now, he prefers to study philosophy, where a high percentage of the “engineering” types would have difficulty clinging to his coattails.</p>
<p>There are exceptions. My son’s AP Chem teacher is not only an excellent teacher, his hobby is philosophy. He’s probably smarter than a whole lot of your “engineering” students also.</p>