Defending Liberal Arts Essay

William Butler Yeats is accredited with once saying Education is non the plectron of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. It seems this idiom no overnight rings true todays preferred education encompasses the emetic of technical jargon in the hopes of finding a job. People promptly deem Liberal Arts spirit level worthless its in like manner expensive and impractical in todays job market. The sciences and biography colleges be where the jobs lie. In the battle over higher(prenominal) education, through his unorthodox article The New Liberal Arts, Sanford J. Ungar stands as a lone social reformer against an onslaught of misperceptions.I for one agree with and applaud his effort, although he could physical exercise some additional support in presenting some of his counter arguments. Unger eldest battles the misperception of the value in a cock-a-hoop humanistic discipline degree for jump-generation, lower income college students these degrees atomic number 18 for the eli te group upper-class. As Ungars imagined antagonists put it, A gratuitous arts degree is a luxury that most families can no yearner afford. Career education is what we with emerge delay must focus on (191). Ungar contends that although skyrocketing tuition makes it increasingly difficult to pay for a college education it is now a more prudent investment than ever before (191). go along his crusade against naysayers by suggesting that the career education bandwagon (191) is not a reinvigorated investment, asserting that It is far wiser for students to prepare for changeand the multiple careers they are promising to prevailthan to search for a single job track that expertness one day become a dead end. (191) Ungar shows the pitf totallys of having a narrowly focused education. Moreover, Ungar seems utterly disgusted with the notion that an education in the across-the-board arts is one for the upper class, the rich and the privileged those who are not of this stratification are better suited implementing the ideas of the elite, not coming up with ideas of their own (192).He brands these accusations as condescending (192) and prejudice (193) and rejects the idea that the blue-collar only duty is to implement the ideas of the upper-class. I believe that Ungar is correct on these assertions however, Ungars argument would be better served if he acquiesced to the fact that a college education, much less one in the liberal arts, is not even off for everyone. Higher education is not a one size fits all discipline. There has to be some to fill the factories, work the land, pave the roadstead and power the service industry.Unger is accurate in saying that the liberal arts should be available to everyone and everyone could benefit from this type of virtuous education thus far not everyone is suited for such an education. The misperception that the liberal arts are for the elite is one that has been heard before but not nearly as much as the old employers do not want to postulate people with useless degrees line which Unger obliterates with his next argument. Ungar continues his defense of a liberal arts education by refuting the claim that employers no longer withdraw someone with a useless degree, such as French.Showing how not only a specific degree such as a foreign language is one that is wanted by employers but the utility program of other liberal arts degrees, emphasizing A 2009 survey for the knowledge of American Colleges and Universities actually found that more than three-quarters of our nations employers urge on that college-bound students pursue a liberal education. (192) Ungar deals with this common misconception methodically by first stating what people believe and then contesting that belief with facts diversified with his own opinions.Although he is correct and he brandishes documented facts to back up his assertions Ungar may have missed the mark by not including actual job numbers. By displaying irrefutable proof th at those who have a liberal arts degree are more likely to get a job in any field and by showing those jobs are more moneymaking for degree holders than those who are not, Ungar could put the nail in the coffin naysayers.For his next dose of perception breaking, Ungar skirmishes with the following idea Liberal arts degrees are antiquated, the Sciences and Career colleges are where the smart money is, and the STEM fields are much better suited for todays economic reality. Ungar contests this misperception by showing that a degree in liberal arts alike includes the sciences. He illustrates that a conventional liberal arts degree includes the sciences the historic basis of a liberal education is in the classical artes liberales, comprising the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric) and the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music) (193). galore(postnominal) of Ungars points are valid his handling of this misperception is deft and detailed. However, I olfaction that U ngar is stretching with his response to this argument. Although a liberal arts degree does notch some glimpses into the STEM disciplines, it is not comparable to a degree in those specialties.A student wishing to become a chemist would not be well served pursuing a degree in History. In showing that these misperceptions are just that, Sanford Ungar single-handedly makes the case for a classical liberal arts education. He does a wonderful job tackling the misperceptions beingness thrown around today about a college degree in the liberal arts. He takes from each one one of these common misconceptions and thoroughly disproves each claim skillfully and without hesitation. By doing so he reopens the door to higher education. Perhaps if he and others like him continue to confront the onslaught of misinformation doled out upon the masses we can return to a world where a traditional liberal arts education is once again commended and no longer forsworn. Works CitedUngar, Sanford. The New Liberal Arts. They Say I Say The Moves That subject in Academic Writing with readings. Eds. Gerald Graff, Kathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst. New York W.W. Norton and Company Ltd, 2012.190-196. Print.