From: kovarik@utkux1.utk.edu (SaintMeechTheChaste)
Newsgroups: alt.angst
Subject: Re: Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:25:05 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center

In article <14184@borg.cs.unc.edu> kimy@monteverdi.cs.unc.edu (Yong-Mi Kim) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.200051.20852@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> tcarsten@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Teresa C D Carstensen) writes:
>>[Stuff about the possibility of it being unethical to seduce students into
>>various programs by promises of jobs deleted]

The way I see it, if universities are run from a strictly profit-making
point of view, then this sort of seduction is no different from any other
sort of advertizing that is designed to convince someone to buy a product.
If a university obtains government grants which are proportional to the
number of registered students, is it also unethical to admit as many students
as possible to maximize their grant, and keep the curriculum easy so that
the students remain registered for the minimum length of time so that the
university gets to keep the grant, and then after this minimum period is
passed, make the curriculum hard to force bad students to drop out or fail?

>
>A friend and I were discussing something similar.  We agreed that
>many academic departments in universities were being unethical in
>letting so many people major in those fields.  Departments in
>question: political science, sociology, psychology, English, history
>(add your own peeve if you wish).  How many of these people will have
>decent-paying jobs after they graduate with their bachelor's degrees?
>How many of these will go to graduate school because they could not
>find jobs, and after receiving the Ph.D. in English, again not be
>able to find a job because of the glut of Ph.D.'s in English?
>

Hey, Ph.D.'s in physics can't find jobs these days either.

Should universities be more strict with their admission criteria?
Should they only admit the students who can most benefit, and spend
more money per student in providing an education, or should they
accept anyone who can pay tuition regardless of their ability, and then
cater to a low common denominator?

>At my undergraduate institution I noticed how certain departments
>were quite "cruel" about getting rid of students they did not think
>would be successful in that area; among them were math, CS, and
>engineering.  The professors let you know at the introductory course
>level whether they think you should continue in that major.  Having
>known people who limped along in some of these majors, graduatee with 2.0
>GPA's, and were not able to find jobs, I wonder if indeed this practice
>of early discouragement is "cruel."

My observation has been that if a lot of students show themselves incapable
of pursuing a particular course of study, then the course of study is diluted 
so that they do not fail, and continue paying tuition.  This is certainly
the case at the University of Tenneesee Dept. of Physics, where the courses
in the graduate program are taught at a level comparable to 3rd or 4rth year
courses at the University of Toronto which is where I got my B.Sc.  Of course, 
when these students go out and try to find a job, they are horribly shocked 
by what they discover.  No job!   This sort of thing may not be the case at 
all institutions, but I suspect is quite common at "lesser" universities.

					Mitch