Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
The value of an arts/humanities/social science education
All the Open House exhibitions at the various universities in Singapore would have ended by today. I bet most of the ‘A’ level graduates must be wondering what course of study to choose. And I wonder, how many of them would actually want to pursue a course in the arts/humanities/social sciences?
As a social science student myself, I would say that I have no regrets choosing this course of study over courses like science and engineering (I was a science student in JC). My previous sentence wasn’t meant to downplay the value of the other disciplines. If one is interested in the sciences and engineering, by all means, please go ahead.
For those who are undecided, consider a course in the arts and social sciences. Courses like philosophy, sociology, literature and political science may sound intimidating, but they really help one to grow critical thinking skills. Plus, given that the mode of assessment is usually writing and more writing, the writing skill of any student in the arts and social sciences will improve.
I would think that for most jobs (other those that require specialist training), the most important attributes required are the ability to think critically and write ably. Information specific to an industry can be picked up fairly quickly while on the job. It will probably take at most a couple of months to learn the industry or job specific knowledge. Critical thinking and writing can’t be learnt in a few months. It takes a couple of years of writing academic papers and debating with lecturers, tutors and fellow classmates in order to acquire those skills.
Actually, the most important thing about acquiring critical thinking and writing skills is that these skills will never be outdated. These skills will survive all kinds of fads, be it IT or biomedical sciences. So, don’t write off the value of an arts/humanities/social sciences education.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 11/03/2007 at 10:41 pm, and is filed under Ramblings. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 3 years ago
Hear hear!
Too bad people still have that outdated perception that the Arts & Social Sciences are for those who are not that “good” in their academic performance; that it is a “soft” option, whatever that means…
about 3 years ago
Economics is still very popular among the social sciences I believe. I chose to do Economics in the NUS even though like Aaron, I did Science in JC (Aaron: which batch are you from? 00? I was from 96, S6). Now that I have started working, I think finance in Biz Ad is probably more specialized and useful to the real world of finance. But of course one should ideally choose a course according to his/her interest. I remember a friend in Uni who spent four years doing Chem Engine but had always wanted to work in the financial sector. Her job now has nothing to do with Chem Engine which to me is a bit of a pity.
To develop critical thinking skills, I would recommend freshmen to check out the USP (University Scholars Program) in the NUS.
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/
about 3 years ago
I was somewhat amused not to see a mention that one should just study what one is interested in. I speak as a humanities/science double major: With the possible exception of disciplines like economics, it is more financially prudent to go for a sci/eng major than a humanities/SS major. Not that you will be jobless as a H/SS major, but statistically speaking you will have less options on the job market.
I think the whole approach of choosing a major wholly based on financial profit is an unhealthy symptom of the ends-based materialistic thinking that pervades Singaporean culture. It’s the same reason why there are so many students who pick CCAs based on the number of CCA points they can get, instead of what they are interested in, which is absurd when you realise that these very same students are the ones who are hailed as ‘well-rounded’ for excelling in both academics and CCA. It is incredible how no one realises that the humanities and social sciences have intrinsic value in themselves as disciplines of intellectual inquiry. Critical thinking is not important just because it will help you to earn money. It is important because thinking is an essential part of being human (what happened to the ‘rational animal’?), because there is something intrinsically valuable in being able to independently evaluate the endless flow of information that one is bombarded with everyday.
I also suspect that the government has an interest in not nurturing too many people who can think critically. We don’t want our meek apathetic university students to morph into their liberal arts-educated, critical American counterparts, after all.
about 3 years ago
I think staying at home – sleeping reading selectively and sipping hot coffee in a disciplined fashion for 4 years might give you more knowledge and will teach one more.
about 3 years ago
Yun,
I was from 99 and from S6 too.
I think that even things like finance information can be learnt by taking ACCA or CFA. In fact, a friend of mine concurrently did a degree in Political Science and ACCA. I think it would be a much more attractive proposition to a prospective employer. Critical thinking/writing isn’t something that people outside of universities would teach.
about 3 years ago
Ponder Stibbons,
Ultimately, Singaporeans are still a pretty pragmatic lot. It’s best if one is willing to ignore societal normal and do what they like. However, there’s still somewhat of a bias towards the sciences in Singapore, and I just wanted to comment on that as a counter balance.
about 3 years ago
Ben,
Problem is that nobody will give you recognition for that. People would still want to see a piece of paper that says “So and so has been conferred XXX class of degree from YYY institutiom”.
about 3 years ago
the value of an arts/social science degree lies not in the degree but in the journey one takes towards obtaining it.
it’s not the skills and the concepts that are taught in school, but the experience of interacting and engaging with other human beings on many levels.
i think it’s just sad that society always values specialist degrees. puts unnecessary pressure on kids. many shape their dreams as according to these pressures.
about 3 years ago
Actually, I think staying @ Starbucks and reading selectively over a cup of hot creamy coffee is pretty good too. Not that I’d do tt continuously for 4 years because it kind of burns a hole in the pocket, but if you read selectively enough, that’s your journey to your degree. And that blasted piece of paper.
Anyway IMHO, the paper opens the door. The stuff you learn along the way to tt piece of paper – be it over coffee or at home or elsewhere – is what gets you through tt door. =)
about 3 years ago
Dun be so naughty. The Paper cannot open the door. Where got Paper Key one? I think even quality per se cannot always get you through the door. Sometimes, its who you know. Its the same everywhere.
about 3 years ago
Ben: If got paper key, must have paper door mah. Got paper house means got paper door means paper key can open. =P
Actually, there is a lot of bias I think. A medicine degree from NUS is deemed much more respectable than a sociology degree from NUS. But what about a degree in literature from Harvard? The university brand name plays a huge role too.
But that being said, I honestly believe tt society places too much emphasis on kind of degree and university as well. That’s why a lot of people who want to do a degree in what they are interested in usually go for scholarships if those degrees are in the general fields of arts – because they consider the prospects of job security as well. Oh well.
about 3 years ago
Knowledgeable AND Thinking people needed.
Why not combine Physical Science/Engg and Social Sciences in 4 years at NUS?
In the US college system, Singapore A level students skip one year and are able to double major in both fields in 4 years.
————————————
==============================
Actually, the most important thing about acquiring critical thinking and writing skills is that these skills will never be outdated. These skills will survive all kinds of fads, be it IT or biomedical sciences. So, don’t write off the value of an arts/humanities/social sciences education.
about 3 years ago
Mr Yeo,
There wasn’t such an option for me back then. It looks like there’s such an option for double majors now.
http://www.nus.edu.sg/registrar/newprogs.htm
Looks like NUS has been slow to catch up. However, it appears that there isn’t an option for double honours, so that might put off some of the more academically inclined students.
about 3 years ago
Double honours in 4 years can be done in US.
Son of a friend went to US after good O levels.
Chemical Engg and Economics in 4 years.
GPA 3.87.
Must nag NUS to change for the benefit of future students.
about 3 years ago
No surprise to me that top Singaporean students prefer to go overseas because Singapore universities do not offer enough flexibility for these really high flying students. It used to be the case that students who do two majors (it was called shared major) are not allowed to do honours. Only single majors were allowed to do honours.
It’s interesting that NUS being ranked so highly internationally still lags behind in terms of flexibility in academic programmes.
about 3 years ago
NUS ranked highly internationally? That must be from those infamous surveys that count %age of international students as part of their measure of a university’s quality, no? Which of course plays right into NUS’s hands with their generous subsidising of foreigners.
For that matter, the UK system (which NUS is largely modelled after) has almost no flexibility in academic programmes. So I don’t think flexibility has much to do with ranking.
about 3 years ago
And yeah, the honours thing is screwy. If a student is talented enough to be able to cope with double honours they shouldn’t be paternalistically prevented from doing so. At the very least there should be an appeal option where the dean and relevant faculty members consider each student’s application for double honours based on their academic record and recommendations. Why set an artificial ceiling and suppress the talented?
about 3 years ago
I will ask NUS.
________________________
It used to be the case that students who do two majors (it was called shared major) are not allowed to do honours. Only single majors were allowed to do honours.
about 3 years ago
Good post. However, I don’t think there needs to be a zero-sum game in choosing between the humanities, social sciences, science, mathematics and arts and literature.
In a liberal arts college, one has to take classes from each of these disciplines. Often, taking a creative writing class informs on the way I understand historical events. Doing triple integrals in Calculus allows me to think of spatial notions in political science in a more systematic way.
A science student in such a college would have taken many social science, literature and humanities classes that would have inform greatly on the volitional aspects of science; on the usage, implementation and philosophy behind the discipline he is doing.
I guess education is also to make us humane, cultured and learned people; not simply as efficient digits in the economy =) I applaud the government’s latest initiative in thinking of setting up a liberal arts college in Singapore.
Also, I think Singapore, beside being an IT and biomedical hub, has also very good base on the humanities and social sciences. The East Asian Institute, ISEAS, IPS as well as our universities are great bastion of research in these areas. My only concern is whether such wealth of resources filter down to the ordinary undergraduates; whether undergraduates can access these opportunities to pursue their interests in these topics, EVEN if they may not be academics in the future. This is because I find doing research is the best way to learn and get interested in a topic.
about 3 years ago
Hi Wayne,
Indeed it need not be a zero sum game. I enjoyed the few life sciences classes I took purely out of interest (although it was tough for someone with no background in biology). I’m not sure how many Singaporeans see the value in a liberal arts education though.
To complement the liberal arts college that the government is thinking of setting up, the local universities should offer greater flexibility in allowing for students to tailor their own degrees. It seems that NUS has finally caught on somewhat, although I think that more can be done. I don’t see why a student who wants to do marketing, philosophy and bio-engineering should be denied a chance for such an education. Perhaps we should be moving towards “customised” degrees.
about 3 years ago
Why not?
________________________________
I don’t see why a student who wants to do marketing, philosophy and bio-engineering should be denied a chance for such an education. Perhaps we should be moving towards “customised†degrees.
about 3 years ago
Mr Yeo,
My sentiments exactly. Why not? However, it seems to me that not everyone has the guts to say “Why not?” to radical ideas. I’ve enough experience in NUS to know. If you call for the establishment of “customised” degree (along with calls from MoE), perhaps it will provide a bigger impetus to change than a small-time blogger like me. In fact, allowing students to customise their degrees to follow their interest could very well be the path towards developing the creativity that Singaporean students have been criticised for lacking.
about 3 years ago
While I agree with you on the need for NUS to moved towards customised degree, I wonder if the underpinnings of NUS could limit its ability to change?
In a sense, I see NUS (and to some extent NTU) as performing a role that the state wants; provide enough professionals such as doctors, lawyers and engineers for the economy while allowing a certain segment of individual to pursue other interests. In a sense, there is no overt discouragement from pursuing the latter; because we have been politically socialized to think that the former is the “nature” road for Singaporeans to take. Thus, there does not seem to be deliberate attempts to prevent students from taking social sciences and the arts for example.
Why I am encouraged by the recent government’s initiative is that it realizes that a globalized economy is so complicated that both real and corporate governance requires creative thinking and competence that is not simply linear and lateral. In other words, you need people who are able to do many things and consider multi factors at one go in a short period of time. Thus, I am thinking that that state may allow SMU and the new liberal arts college to go in that direction.
My caveat is that, in a way I am agreeing with Mr. Yeo, that they may not be “immediate” results from these experiments of SMU and the liberal arts college. Throwing Singaporeans and international kids in a liberal arts environment does not guarantee a renown politician, poet, thinker, economist, geologist, scientist. It might create confusion (Why should I study geology when I am interested in studio Art), tensions (Why am I doing group work with a PRC student) and struggles (Why is my professor asking me to link Heidegger with cognitive science?)
But it can also pay off. One can become more humble from confusion, more tolerant from tensions and a better thinker from struggling with ideas.
The challenge is as SMU moves towards a perception of “mainstream” in the next few years like that of NTU in the 1990s, whether such latent energies within “new” organizations can be sustained. Will the new liberal arts college attract the best and the experimental from the established universities or will it be a struggling outfit like that of Lingnan University in Hong Kong?
P.S. Lingnan is the only liberal arts college in Greater China based in Hong Kong.
about 3 years ago
Aaron,
I do remember one of my peers in the Special Program of Science, NUS 4 years back, who managed to graduate with a double major in chemistry and psychology. He had a lot of trouble in dealing with the bureaucracy, despite the faculties are trying their best to help. Things are much more inflexible in the past as compare to today. Actually, if you really want it, you can fight for it.
My sense is always that you should never let school interfere with your education. It really does not matter what subject you study. If you are really interested in another subject, say economics or philosophy while you are studying science, you should just go and sit in for the lectures and vice versa.
In any case, the world’s number one theoretical physicist, Edward Witten, who also won a Fields Medal in Mathematics, did his basic degree in history and journalism (and was a campaign manager for the US presidential elections in 1972) before he studied postgraduate physics in Harvard. One interesting thing that came out of his arts degree, is that his research papers are written almost like newspaper articles, with complex mathematics and physical insights within.
about 3 years ago
Bernard,
I didn’t know that Edward Witten majored in history in college. I have heard rave reviews about his works from my friends who are physics majors. Thanks for that nugget. Also to point out, the new president of Harvard is a historian =p
I agree with your underlying message about attitude overcoming bureaucratic obstacles. Often, It’s about the attitude in creating your own opportunities.
In any case, the following link might be of interest to all. It is a blog by an associate professor of history. In this post, the professor lists famous professionals who majored in history:
http://doctorhistory.blogspot.com/2004/07/famous-history-majors.html
about 3 years ago
Come on, Ed Witten is the exception. Most people would struggle to gain admission to and succeed in physics grad school without a degree in physics or math. If you want to be a physicist, it really does matter. Simply sitting in lectures is nowhere as effective as doing problems and getting expert feedback on one’s progress, an option available only if one is a registered student. In fact, it’s probably less effective than reading textbooks on one’s own. Wayne’s list of famous history majors has only one scientist.
The fact is if one is interested in further study in an interdisciplinary subject (say philosophy of mathematics), being able to double major in math and philosophy would be a huge help. It shouldn’t be something that one has to fight for.
History is one of the most popular majors in the US, so it’s unsurprising that many history majors become famous.
about 3 years ago
Better for meeting the uncertain future that Singapore have our young educated in a professional discipline be it science, engineering or medicine and broaden with a good spicing of humanities and arts at the BS level.
They can then specialize/focus at the graduate studies level.
Vice versa, educate a humanities/arts under grad with genetics of diseases.
We are all walking biological systems. Should not be ignorant of our own developmental biology as we have to confront and live with diseases at any point in our life cycle.
_______________________
In a sense, I see NUS (and to some extent NTU) as performing a role that the state wants; provide enough professionals such as doctors, lawyers and engineers for the economy while allowing a certain segment of individual to pursue other interests. In a sense, there is no overt discouragement from pursuing the latter; because we have been politically socialized to think that the former is the “nature†road for Singaporeans to take. Thus, there does not seem to be deliberate attempts to prevent students from taking social sciences and the arts for example.
about 3 years ago
I do agree that multidisciplinary education is the way to go.
I’m currently doing Political Science, and minoring in English Studies and Cultural Studies. However, I am also doing contract work in film stills photography and advertising. Friends have always mistaken me for a media student or digital artist. I’ve dipped my fingers into theatre as well, and I must say that all these has allowed me to see things in a different perspective and apply oft-overlooked combinations of skills to solving certain challenges.The effects of ingesting Ionesco and Pinter have actually wormed their way into a few of my PS papers, how quaint eh..
Anything that enhances or broadens one’s mindset and skillset should always be embraced.
It never hurts to have something that adds to your value and pushes you a few inches ahead.
Right, maybe I’m plugging for my fellow liberal arts students when I say that while science may empower us with the product, the humanities will empower ourselves with the ethics to debate if it should be used.