Students do not always receive a well-rounded education.
Students do not always receive a well-rounded education.
Many come, take the courses in their major plus whatever other course we require, and leave. The University has a lot more to offer than this, and students should leave with at least a passing familiarity with a broad spectrum of knowledge. One needn't take an entire semester course to gain some familiarity with Homer--reading the Iliad takes only a few hours. There are many introductions to the sciences suitable for the math-impaired.
I propose that the University require a non-credit course each year in which the student selects a professor who tries to find out what deficiencies the student has in his breadth of learning, and assigns readings to remedy this. I presume that the student is intelligent enough to learn from the reading and from asking/being asked a few questions about the subject. I further propose that academic staff be included in the list of mentors for this purpose.
Benefits: The student is exposed to a wider range of learning than would otherwise be the case, and presumably learns something. The course is relatively painless. One may hope for new enthusiasms and synergies. Students and professors may get to know each other better, leading to a more collegial atmosphere in what is often an impersonal environment.
Problems: Lazy students may seek out lazy professors who just sign off at the end of the semester. Lazy professors may specify the same readings to every student without bothering to get to know them. It would be easier for un-ethical professors to punish students who disagree with their politics. The plan costs a little more time for each professor involved. (If only 1000 professors participate, this is about a 5% increase in time.) However, using academic staff helps noticably.
Some fields of study are hidden, for no good reason.
A well-rounded education should include some passing knowledge of law and medicine. We need not fear that a single course will tempt students into thinking themselves doctors--a single chemistry course doesn't lead them to think themselves scientists. An introduction to why the laws work the way they do lets a citizen see not just how to behave but how things may realistically be changed.
I propose that a semester course in the principals of law and another in some aspect of medicine (not health) be required of all students.
Benefits: The students will be able to understand what is happening to them when they have need (as they will) of the services of either professional. To know the limits of power should give some wisdom to their later legal, political, and medical choices.
Problems: This is a large teaching load to add, and therefore a large expense; the more so in that these are very expensive professions. (This looks like adding 25 150-student courses in each of the two areas.) There will probably not be a one-size-fits-all course in either field.
Athletics are both over- and under- emphasized.
Intercollegiate sports, in particular football and basketball and hockey, get amazing attention. At some universities the attention and the money involved corrupts both the athletic department and those other departments luckless enough to have big-name sports students in their classes. At the same time the ordinary student has the opportunity but little encouragement to participate in competitive or other athletic sports. The University of Chicago showed that it is possible to abandon football. One may argue that this is extreme; that the name recognition is priceless, and so on; and I'll not go that far.
I propose that some incentives be developed to encourage inter-dorm or inter-department games--preferably games not likely to cause injury. With a broad enough spectrum of activities and incentives (trophies, pizza, ...) one might induce more students (and staff?) to become more active.
Benefits: Healthier students will be better students, and better graduates. Presumably the same principle applies to staff. A graduate might remember not just cheering for players he never met, but throwing the ball himself--which might be an even more pleasant memory the alumni association could remind him of when trying to tap him for donations.
Problems: It isn't free to administer such a program no matter how many volunteers you find. It might not be popular, or might vary in popularity year to year. Getting busy staff to take 20 minutes off for the sake of their health isn't as easy as one might like, given their workloads.
Neither the University of Wisconsin nor its Physics Department necessarily endorse any of the views expressed above. James Bellinger, 30-September-1997