But it looks good in the catalog

Miriam analyzes some contemporary college courses:

I don’t think you can go wrong adopting the general principle that, in college curricula, anything that includes the word “studies” involves a minimum of studying and a maximum of feeling sympathy for the downtrodden of all races, genders, and income levels.

To generalize further, people who major in Communication cannot communicate in any language less rudimentary than smoke signals, and any field of study that is designated “Science,” for example social science and political science, has no scientific basis at all.

I have to wonder how much of an income level you have to have to escape being “downtrodden,” and if it varies with race and/or gender, but otherwise, this seems fairly close to the mark: even political science, the most scientific of the bunch, comes up with many more obvious howlers than, say, botany. Then again, I’ve taken more communication classes than I care to admit.


  1. fillyjonk »

    7 November 2009 · 10:06 am

    We have “Special Studies” classes in my department but those are for when a student is doing research with a faculty member; it has nothing to do with studying specialness, thank God.

  2. Sean Gleeson »

    7 November 2009 · 11:58 am

    I teach in the Graphic Communications program, but I will be the first to admit that the stress is on the first word and not the second. And one semester I taught an “Independent Study,” but fully half of the students proved far too independent to study.

RSS feed for comments on this post