Studies at University.

Volitions Advocate on 21/9/2010 at 04:07

This has been on my mind a little bit since last week when studies started up again, and the discussion going on in the C++ homework thread added to my feelings.

Rather than explaining everything I'll just paste the letter I sent to the Chair of the program I'm in for you to read and share your thoughts.

here goes:

Quote:

Dear Rolf:

I'm really glad that the 2nd year of studies has finally started. All summer I was really itching to get back into the work and I can really tell that we're starting to get into the thick of it.

I'm happy that you have such an open door policy with concerns that all of us students have and I'm emailing you because I've got a concern I wanted to share with you and some of the faculty, Although I'm not sure if you can even really call it a concern because there isn't really anything I'm asking you to do or change. So thank you for humoring me and listening to my thoughts.

Since coming back this fall for studies I have had a handful of conversations with fellow students about the nature of our degree. These weren't planned conversations or debates but they came up while discussing some of the things we are learning in our classes this semester.

Everybody is excited about the new Studio, and I am no different. But I've been hearing a lot of comments such as "why would you take an audio engineering program if you're not going to be an audio engineer?" and the like. Today in class helping some classmates with a MaxMSP patch I was met with a bit of frustration and questions like "how does this help me write music or be a better musician?"

I realize that the physics and the math and the computer programming is difficult and I sympathize with the students who don't have much interest or background in those areas. But I think this program is so much more than simply making us into the next batch of audio engineers for recording music that just happen to have a university level understanding of Music theory. The music conservatory part of our degree is important and will be useful to us in the future both in terms of using our expertise and gaining employment, but I'm sure it was not intended to be the ONLY edge we have on people who can go to Vancouver to get a 2 year audio engineering diploma.

The reason I am bringing this is up is because I really enjoy the math and the physics and the computer programming, and as excited as I am about getting the chance to learn about the equipment in W700 and using it to record school related projects as well as some of my own projects, I know that my best work in the program will probably be done elsewhere.

I've been working on some software prototypes which I've gotten some help from Ian and Thilo, and I think I am most definately a student who has joined the Digital Audio Arts program to be something other than an Audio Engineer. And I think the classes available reflect that direction. And even if somebody here wants to go full bore into the Audio Engineering side of things where they are producing music and recording bands, ensembles and artists, they still need to take other important aspects involved, even if it isn't something they will use practically in their field, Just like Math students have to take Computer Programming which is Computer Science, and Logic which is Philosophy, Or Political science students who have to take Sociology. We are a university after all and these are the things which make us the best of the best when we graduate, to prove that we put forth the effort rather than just doing the minimum for what we feel we need to know.

I'm assuming for the most part you would agree with me, I just wanted to share my feelings because I feel a little bit isolated in that I may be the only person in the program that is absolutely interested in the math formulas, and the physics, and the computer science involved, and I'd really hate to lose out on opportunities for being the minority in the program. I would assume you wouldn't cancel classes that I would be interested in taking, but I know that a lot of students want an easier and more "relevant" course load to their interests, and I suppose I'm just writing to ask you to stand firm in what the program should represent, and not allow complaints of difficulty or supposed irrelevance to derail the program from its intended purpose.

To be told by a classmate that if I want to "take a physics class then go take a physics class, because this is supposed to be a music class" greatly discourages me if most of my peers feel this way and have even a small amount of sway over the faculty that continues to plan and organize this program for the future.

Obviously I can take what my classmates say about this with a grain of salt, I just wanted to voice my concern about it because if enough voices get together about a subject, they can usually make a change, and I'd hate for a change in that direction to affect my education adversely.

Even though I don't plan on being the next Quincy Jones or Peter Gabriel, I'm still taking the studio and audio production classes.

Thanks for listening, I hope I wasn't too bland or Presumptuous.

It's something I feel pretty strongly about. Especially if the whiners keep at it, and after I graduate they neuter the program and suddenly it carries less weight. Even though I graduated before they made it easier, employers will see the degree as second rate. I've spoken to people who have had this happen to them and It worries me a little bit.

Your thoughts....

Muzman on 21/9/2010 at 04:34

It's something I've bitched about in my muddled way elsewhere. In short: so called vocational education is a rot that will destroy the entire education project. It's somewhat ironic that the trend has been to make tertiary education a vital voucher to have for employers, only for this populism to result in gutting programs in the name of relevance.

That's the general way of things though. It would vary according to the field I guess. Employers generally don't seem to give a damn about the specifics of a degree, only that you did it and what software you know how to use or whatever. Do you think employers would examine the coursework in the audio tech area like that and say "Hey these guys get music too. Must be a good school."? Seems less and less the case in most other areas, but I don't really know.

Chade on 21/9/2010 at 05:35

On a theoretical level, it's good to be able to connect ideas from different disciplines, even if only subconsciously. Is it really true to say that music has nothing in common with maths? That doesn't feel right to me.

On a practical level, you never know what the future holds. I certainly wouldn't have predicted almost ten years ago that my aborted physics degree would help me land my latest programming job.

kabatta on 21/9/2010 at 06:02

The idea of cutting classes to turn it into a vocation system is absurd. It's like putting a philosophy class in a history college in order to develop critical thinking, but getting rid of archeology. (history is different than philosophy in terms of thinking) I feel that school is greatly mocked by the new modern projects. Heck, we don't even do normal classes anymore at my college. Nobody actually works. Those whiny little children who consider themselves adults should learn a thing or two about life and work.

Brian The Dog on 21/9/2010 at 06:31

It's due to differemt ideas about what university is for. Do you want a piece of paper that says "I am clever" or do you want to actually understand what's going on? While I'm not anti vocational degrees, I would prefer the more abstract ones as they focus less on the software (which changes every 5 years or so) and more on the maths or concepts, as they never change.

Here in the UK, successive governments have put the Department of Universities not as a sub-department of the Department of Education, but the Department of Industry, which shows how their thinking goes :(

catbarf on 21/9/2010 at 19:58

Well, I'm a freshman at Rochester Institute of Technology studying Game Design & Development, and what sold me on the program was its approach towards game design as a form of entertainment rather than technology. So the major features a lot of programming-type work, but also physics, art, and creative design- basically everything that goes into games, not just a rebranded Computer Science degree.

Making a major 'well-rounded' just for the sake of having more things to put on a features list is misguided, but there are professions that I believe greatly benefit from a wider perspective.

SubJeff on 21/9/2010 at 21:15

Even vocational degrees should teach skills that aren't just focused on the vocation. As regards the OP, yes I totally agree with you. Learning subjects like physics, maths and chemistry gives you the ability to problem solve, to use logic. Anyone whining about having to do them hasn't got it. In my experience I hear people moaning about having to do Chemistry A Levels to get into Medicine at uni here in the UK. As I understand it even some of the graduate entry Medical degrees want you to have this (not all mind, and I know that for sure). People moan/avoid those courses and those people just don't get it.

demagogue on 21/9/2010 at 22:26

I didn't like how my law school classes mainly ignored all the surrounding issues in law like sociology, political theory, political and business economics, cognitive science, interpretive theory, moral theory, etc ... So you never really get a feel for what anything you're learning has to do with the real world, and we just have to read about it on the side or speculate on our own. Come to think of it, I'm not sure we really learn *anything* about what law actually is or does. (Well one professor would go into those things; he also had a reputation for being one of the best professors in the school.)

I remember being in Contracts once and asking about the cognitive or linguistic basis of "agreement", like what interpretations could be read-into a contract text based on the shared understanding of the parties when they signed the thing, things like that ... because to my ears, having done my undergrad in the philosophy of cogsci & language, that kind of stuff sounds a lot like something that brains do according to certain rules we know a lot about -- e.g., lots of studies on pragmatic implicature say that certain unstated conditions are assumed in certain phrases based on the context and the way implicature works in language. But the professor looked at me like I was from Mars and answered something like, "We can't read minds. We can only see people's behavior. So it's all just a legal fiction." Then I thought oh, I guess that means we ought to be hauling all those fMRI machines to the literature or mythology department then, since they're producing all this fiction. I felt like the classes were 40 years behind every other department that's caught up with the fact that all these things are interdisciplinary and work off each other. Happily there's a little cottage academic industry in behavioral law and economics, so I can content myself with reading all those books and articles on my own and smugly nodding to myself every time a professor says "We don't know why the law says X, but that's just the way it is", because I know why the law says X.

But anyway... of course law firms don't care. They're interviewing for the first batch of interns hardly a few months into their first year based only on their first semester grades, when they know jack shit about what's going on. I really got the feeling in a lot of classes that I was the only one in the room that actually cared about what the subject was actually about, rather than just thinking of the class as one more means to an end (get a good grade). Fortunately that played in my favor as I got fantastic grades (grades are always on a competitive curve). Hard not to appreciate the irony of that. Unfortunately, again, once you get out the industry doesn't really care as long as you know the basics. But I can say, at least from my own experience, you do practice law better when you know that kind of side stuff. It just makes you know how to explain things so they make sense (because it makes better sense in your own head), which is what really matters. I don't know if any of this applies to other fields, but maybe some of it translates.

AR Master on 21/9/2010 at 23:22

i go to university to study a broad and grade on her curves :cool:

Queue on 21/9/2010 at 23:45

"Rolf"?

Where are you studying, Muppet-U?