September12, 
            2001: 
            Staying Power
            More nonsense on the purpose of a liberal arts education  
            
              The further away from Princeton I get, the more apparent it becomes 
              that my academic experience came down to six or seven classes. Without 
              those courses my four years at Princeton, at least from an academic 
              standpoint, would have been a complete waste of time and money; 
              with them I believe that I received an enviable undergraduate education. 
              But I also wonder how I managed to so utterly miss the boat in my 
              other 30-odd classes. What happened to all the time I spent listening 
              to lectures about the U. S. Senate, basic psychology, or econometrics? 
              In fact, I don't think I can even name half the courses I took.
              I'm curious to know if other graduates share my opinion or if my 
              academic experience was merely a product of my major and my interests. 
              It seems possible, for example, that an engineer might view his 
              or her education as having been a neatly cumulative exercise in 
              acquiring the necessary information and skills to become, say, a 
              productive software engineer (that theory would appeal nicely to 
              a mind more mathematical than mine). And I suppose that you could 
              argue that a social science education is -- at least in a 
              rough sense -- also cumulative. You apply the analytic skills 
              you learned in previous classes to deepen your experience in the 
              current one. But that seems to me a tediously theoretical argument. 
              A class that truly deepened your analytic skills ought to remain 
              in your consciousness more than three years after graduation.
              The majority of my lost classes fit into the following three categories: 
              
            
 Cocktail Party Classes
            
              These are the classes that I utterly forget I took until I'm playing 
              Trivial Pursuit and my brain spits out the answer to an impossibly 
              arcane question and I'm bewildered for a moment before I say, "Ah, 
              thank you, Art 314: Religious Symbolism in the High Middle Ages." 
              
              For me, the archetypal cocktail party class was Psychology 101. 
              Like most students in Psych 101, I was ducking the university's 
              laboratory science requirement. For my first lab class I had taken 
              a wonderful seminar on infectious diseases, the crucial details 
              of which pop into my head every time I sit at a sushi bar. But then, 
              with my brain overflowing with visions of ignominiously failing 
              a second laboratory course, I took the coward's way out. 
              The next few months proved to be as perfect an exercise in wasting 
              my tuition dollars as I could have designed. As far as I could tell, 
              the sole purpose of Psych 101 was to provide cost-free fodder for 
              members of the department to experiment upon. I came out of that 
              class dumber than I went in (and some psychology graduate student 
              has the tests to prove it.)
              I should distinguish between true cocktail party classes and those 
              classes that I took far outside my major that simply fed my curiosity. 
              The advantage of a liberal arts education is the chance to study 
              Religious Symbolism in the High Middle Ages -- if that's something 
              that interests you. So if Psych 101 had taught me something that 
              stuck in my brain for more than 15 minutes after the final exam, 
              it would have been worthwhile. Instead, I emerged wondering why 
              Princeton bothers to have a laboratory science requirement if students 
              can duck it by agreeing to flush $3,500 -- or one eighth of 
              their annual tuition -- down the tubes.
            
 The Language Requirement
            
              I arrived in my Spanish 101 class freshmen year and discovered that 
              I was the only person -- as far as I could tell -- who 
              didn't already speak Spanish. After all, the easiest way 
              to inflate your GPA is to take a class where you will be tested 
              on things you already know. The fact that the university deemed 
              me "proficient" after three terms can only be explained 
              by the compassion of my instructors -- although I suppose 
              it's more than possible that they passed me under the theory 
              that everyone would benefit if I spent as little time as possible 
              in the Spanish department. 
              While I certainly agree that every Princeton graduate ought to be 
              familiar with a foreign language, everything about my experience 
              in the basic language classes seemed out of whack. It was very clear 
              that I -- and most of my classmates -- were never going 
              to take Spanish literature classes. The focus should have been on 
              1) getting us interested in Spanish language and culture and 2) 
              teaching us enough about the language that we can successfully navigate 
              Madrid or southern California. I know that I should have been able 
              to motivate myself more effectively, but someone also should have 
              taken some time to explain why knowing some Spanish is probably 
              going to make you a better citizen in 21st century America. And 
              how hard can learning basic Spanish really be? President Bush seems 
              to be practically conversational. 
            
 Departmental Repeats
            
              I can only speak for the Politics Department and Woodrow Wilson 
              School, but I took about 10 classes within my major that were exactly 
              the same. We read insanely dull books on political theory. We read 
              moderately interesting case studies. We attended (or didn't 
              attend) lectures that tied the books to the case studies. We argued 
              about things we didn't really understand in our precepts. 
              We took a midterm and final exam and wrote a 20-page paper. Wash, 
              rinse, repeat.
              The few classes I remember from my department stand out because 
              the professor was clever enough to break that monotonous cycle in 
              some way -- usually by introducing a bit of reality into our 
              predictably cerebral and theoretical discussions. A friend of mine, 
              for example, took a seminar on public policy and crime in America. 
              It could have been utterly forgettable, except the professor sent 
              the entire class on a trip to see a state penitentiary. I'm 
              willing to bet that everyone in that class found it easier to get 
              through the insanely dull books on political theory and moderately 
              interesting case studies.