Thursday August 28, 2008
Columnists
Cardiff, Disability and me · Issue 868
Humanities students = slackers? Ted Shiress takes on the naysayers
I apologise; after two of my most diverse and risqué columns I feel like a barren desert where inspiration is water. My god! Was that not a beautiful simile? I should be an English student. Oh, hang on… I think I am! Yes, that’s right; I’m sure those lecture things I go to once or twice a week are based on Language and Communication. You know? That subject which medics, engineers and science scholars feel the need to routinely rip into, saying that it doesn’t merit a full degree; blah, blah, blah. It’s a fine and valid joke between pals, but gets rather tedious when included in the paper. I read the co-editor of this wonderful section’s letter about Piers Thompson’s rant on graduation and how he thinks us Humanities students are unworthy.
I have heard this argument many a time, and I feel I should throw in my penny’s worth. People often forget that we are not naïve; we know our degrees are (comparatively) piss easy and we take our hats off to you. Well done, you do a much harder degree; have a pint. Oh, what’s that? You can’t? You’re studying? Now, I hope I don’t get my knackers used as knockers for saying this, but my best friend Mel, who studies a hardcore science degree and does my weekly shopping on Friday, came to me last Friday as stressed as anything and definitely not her normal patient kind self. Quite frankly, it scared me how stressed she was! Now, some of us may have had enough of that 9-5 lifestyle at A-level (I know I did!) and may want a change, plus we may have other struggles in our lives we need to deal with (like a physical disability!); are we that wrong to pursue a lighter degree? Especially when we are actually interested in English (no, honestly – we are!).
To be frank, I am glad my workload is not unbearably heavy. I still find essays to keep me occupied, and these do take me longer than most students. Coming to university as a student with no experience of being in a fully ‘able-bodied’ environment, I knew I had to adjust. It took me about a year and a half to feel fully comfortable where I am, with friendships and certain activities which I do in my free time. I just would not have managed a much heavier workload. That would have meant more time sitting alone at the back of lecture theatres because I cannot climb the stairs and less time to go out and make friends because there is no chance in the isolated block you live in. Both factors would not be an issue if it were not for my mobility problems.
I like my workload. I’m not arguing that it is tough and I am giving you credit, it’s just I do not think that your workload would suit me; so what’s the problem?
Latest Edition
More information
Recent Comments
- Vanessa (Prostitution.)
- The loser (Student Tax Awareness Week)
- cc256 (Pink Cigarettes)
- Mark (A lower class?)
- Amy Davies (A lower class?)
- Jamie (Students Set Their Rate)
- George Kitous (Students Set Their Rate)
- Chris Mistlin (Students Set Their Rate)
- Alex Scanlan (Students Set Their Rate)
- chris (A lower class?)
I think you make the course as hard to you need too. A lot depends on personal circumstances, especially ones intelligence and natural ability. A very old friend of mine is doing his PhD in Physics, he’s the type of chap who can understand Hawking. He’s that intelligent. He can knock out a 20,000 MA dissertation in a few days and get a first for it. I’m similar in my field, it took me a week to write my MA thesis after I had spent a week researching on and I got a first without breaking a sweat as I was working five days a week. No problem. Put me in front of an article dealing with astrophysics and I’ll turning into a jibbering buffoon, likewise put my friend in front of an article dealing with the differing interpretations to the American Revolutionary Wars and he’ll probably spend all day trying to figure out an equation that will solve it. On the other end of the scale I know people in my course who worked their arse off just to get a 2:2, as I suspect many people in the sciences do, and these people are either in the wrong course or just plain stupid.
The truth is that if you’re a at least of reasonable intelligence and you’ve chosen your course wisely then you should find it easy enough to get 2:1’s without even trying and Firsts with only minimal effort. If you can’t then you’re probably in the wrong course or university just isn’t the place for you.
Not this again…
I’d argue that anyone who gets a First making “only minimal effort” is of more than “reasonable intelligence”, and that anyone with only “reasonable intelligence” who gets a First probably put in more than “minimal effort”.
I don’t really won’t to go down this road again because we simply won’t agree. I think our disagreement is centred around a differing definition of ‘reasonable intelligence’. I am of the opinion that if one has to work beyond a minimal effort to obtain at least a 2:1 then one could not really be considered reasonably intelligent but only mediocre at best.
Instead of writing a long drawn out essay, I will just summarise my points (and I’m talking from a humanities perspective, as that is what I’ve experienced):
1) 2:1 (60%) essay = B/A grade essay at A-level (in my opinion)
2) If you can’t consistently write essays to a 2:1 standard without a struggle then you really need to question your appropriateness for being at university.
3) A 2:2 doesn’t cut it anymore when there are so many people with degrees, so what is the point in spending so much money on sending people to uni just so that they can get pissed?
4) Getting 60% is easy, you just regurgitate arguments already in the field and add your own opinion to it. Getting 65%+ requires a bit more effort because it involves a bit of analysis, but still not difficult. Getting 70% is slightly more difficult because it requires an element of originality. However, considering that the university tells you exactly how to get a 70% mark it should still be in the realms of anyone’s capabilities. Getting over 70% is more difficult and that is where any effort should be made.
5) You should consistently be getting 65%+ for your work to merit being at university.
6) In conclusion, if you can’t overview historiography and add your own opinion without breaking a sweat and thus achieve a 2:1 then you really shouldn’t be studying at university.
OMG, comments again! I’m not just doing this for the attention….... honest!!
I’ve worked hard to increase my marks from the 50s in my first year to roughly 65% now, and fully intend to continue working hard to improve my marks throughout the rest of my time at University. Surely, apart from nurturing existing geniuses, a main function of the university system is to educate people and encourage them with their studies.
I find the fact that you feel people who are not consistently achieving 65% in every piece of work, frankly, quite insulting.
Not only do you have to remember huge amounts of complicated information for many subjects, but adjusting to the desired way of presenting it can be quite a challenge for people who may not be Stephen Hawkings or Richard Dawkins, but nevertheless are intelligent people.
I should add that I’m not a humanities student, so I’m commenting from a biosciences perspective. :)
Rachel, for me, my points were from a humanities perspective like I said, so I was discussing the merits of people who sign up for those courses, and not the sciences.
I think you missed your punch line in your second paragraph, but I get your point. However, since whatever subject you choose is likely to be the one you enjoy most and in which your knowledge base is set and the fact that the university gives you a step-by-step guide to how to achieve a 60% mark, surely shouldn’t you be attaining it on a regular basis?
I moved from an Arts undergraduate degree to a Sciences Masters degree and achieved an overall Merit grade (i.e. 65%+) with limited effort. This was after coming to a subject that I knew hardly anything about in any worthy detail. Now, I don’t profess to be of any great intelligence because I know that I am distinctly average for my chosen subject area (I am now a PhD History student), but if I can do that with a relatively alien subject then surely the majority of other university students should be able to achieve a 60%+ mark at a lower degree level in their chosen subject area?
I know that some subjects are more complex than others, however, that shouldn’t be a viable excuse. Firstly, the student has selected that course and been accepted onto it, suggesting that they are capable and that the subject area is where their knowledge base is. Secondly, the university provides guidelines on how to achieve the different levels of marks. Thirdly, you are generally given a significant amount of time to research and write an assignment, meaning that if you need to you can write drafts and ask for initial feedback on them. And finally, because you have the time you can liaise with your lecturers to find out what they look for in an essay and how best to achieve it.
Anyway, like I said at the beginning, my original points were aimed at humanities students, so I’m sorry if you’ve been insulted by anything that I’ve said.
Having a 2:2 doesnt cut it??
I have a 2:2 in a not very sought after degree, but my work experience has got me a job where I went up against people with 2:1s and 1sts.
Its not all about getting good marks necessarily, you need valid experience, as without that they won’t look at you twice!
The comments myself and Jon made were about intelligence, not career success, the two do not coincide as often as they probably should.
Yeah, look at Bush…
george w. bush has a BA from Yale and MBA from Harvard.
Whether that combination is an indication of intelligence is a matter of opinion.
I would imagine, however, that a BA from Yale and a MBA from Harvard looks better on ones CV than a BA from Cardiff.
Try talking to an English Lit student before you start spouting off about how easy it is, Language and Communications boy!
Well, you can talk to me anytime, fit babe!
What?? just quoting your name!!
Thank goodness it isn’t some painfully cringe article about sex or drugs this week.
I hear enough about other people taking drugs and having sex, and to be honest I don’t care, I find it disturbing and sickening to think about ‘erupting’.
Humanities degrees are for the more creative of us, science for the more sciencey. Everyone is different so is good at different things.
George Bush is actually very very intelligent. Despite the odd gaffe (which are sometimes unintentional, and sometimes intentional) he has won two presidential elections. More than any of us have!
Sorry, but you are all wrong.
There has been massive grade inflation in the uni and college and school system over the last 10, 20, or more, years. Also there has been massive dumbing down. Also foreign students essentially buy their way in to uni.
A first used to be very rare, as did A grades. Not any more. A 16 year old at school 20 years ago doing O levels would do the equivalent of first year uni work now – that can be proven with regards to maths papers. Less than 1% of the 15% who did A levels then used to get an A – now it’s 15% of 60%. We are dumbing down to american thicko levels – not quite there yet, but… Degrees are O level level – and lots of lecturers know this but are too scared to say anything as they’d lose their jobs and/or ruin their careers. If everyone won a gold at the olympics it would be absurd – so why must everyone get a prize through the education system?
The consequence? No-one trusts qualifications any more – and employers set their own tests – and people need a masters and contacts via their parents and wealth to get certain jobs, eg in the media.
The uni system and the school system should be an elite system – then we would have more social mobility again. The comprehensive mass education system – an american idea – crushes the bright who are not well-connected. It is anti-education, paradoxically.
As a footnote, i would say i have met plenty of dullards and dimwits with 2:1s and 1sts, especially these days. And plenty of original thinkers with 3rds – in fact, original thinkers are not very likely to be the kind of ‘do what you’re told and follow the teacher’ sheep who get the highest marks or A grades. They become solicitors or corporate clones…
The UK education system and its grades should be taken with a very large pinch of salt indeed.
“Sorry, but you are all wrong.”
An interesting start given that everyone is disagreeing with each other…
“An interesting start given that everyone is disagreeing with each other…”
And the fact that in his first two paragraphs he either agrees, or adds support to what I’ve been saying…
OK – you are all right then!
Hey, when 70% of students get a 1st or 2:1 and 15% get three As at A level, everyone;s just so brainy these days I can’t keep up…
Jon, you’re right, it seems I deleted the end of a sentence before submitting it.
Maybe that’s why I’m not achieving grades as high as yourself. Well done on being a talented all-rounder, and I appreciate the response, however I stand by my previous comments.