"A poet’s work is to name the unnamable, to point at frauds, to take sides, start arguments, shape the world, and stop it going to sleep."
The educational value of teaching students to become proficient in the intricacies of reading, speaking, and writing in English cannot be overstated. Bertolt Brecht, arguing that “literacy empowers in a Marxist sense,” directs the following imperative to those of the lower classes: “Learn the ABC, it’s not enough, but learn it. Don’t let it get you down! …You who are starving; grab hold of the book” (qtd in Fleming and Stevens 65). The discipline of English is invaluable to people of all classes in North American society as we know it. No other language in the world is spoken and understood as widely. In my personal experience, however, I’ve often been told a different story—one that depicts studying English as a fascinating but ultimately useless endeavour. In what follows I want to weave my personal experiences into a critical exploration of some of the root causes of this prevalent stereotype, particularly at the level of curriculum design and its foundational social values. Not only is the myth that English degrees are not attractive to employers misleading, but I would argue that training in English (and its close cousins in the Arts) can equip individuals with a thriving sense of social awareness and activism.
In Grade 12 I found myself see-sawing back and forth about potential degree and career options. I had done well enough and taken a broad enough range of Arts, Science, and Math credits in my final two years that almost every door was open to me at the undergraduate level. During the process of consulting people prior to making my final decision, I had a guidance counselor several teachers, many of my peers, and even one of my parents advise me in their own way against pursuing English and Philosophy at the post-secondary level. The central thread running through their collective advice was the idea that a degree in English and Philosophy would never land me a stable, high-paying job.
How realistic were their concerns? In 2012, Georgetown University released a comprehensive survey designed to determine more precisely which post-secondary degrees currently have the highest and lowest unemployment rates. Growing up, I was convinced for years that I was going to be an Architect. I loved designing potential floorplans for huge, creative houses. People were generally very supportive of this aspiration, and over the years I gathered that as an Architect I would be very well off, both financially and in terms of getting a job. I eventually abandoned this pursuit due to its intensive math prerequisites, but it seems that, in terms of Georgetown U’s survey, I may be better off after all with my degree in English and Philosophy. Given “the collapse of the construction and home building industry in the recession” (2), Architecture grads currently have the highest unemployment rate in the United States (13.9%). When it became clear that I was set on pursuing English, various people urged me to at least consider replacing my Philosophy minor with something more attractive to employers, such as Information Systems. Recent graduates with a degree in Information Systems, however, currently have the second highest unemployment rate in the country (11.7%), right behind Architecture! English and Philosophy (lumped in with “Humanities and Liberal Arts”) came in fourth, with an unemployment rate of 9.4%. Statistics are very often misleading, of course, but the Georgetown U survey at the very least serves as a useful reminder that tunnel-vision, money-first approaches to choosing one’s career are risky at the best of times and downright misguided at the worst of times.
The potential careers for someone trained in English and Philosophy are varied and exhaustive: Writer (Grant, Technical, Creative), Editor, Journalist, Publisher, Teacher, Lawyer, Librarian, Public Policy/Relations, Research Analyst are just a few of the more prominent options. The New York Times published an article in 2010 on job-hunting as a recent graduate that stresses the importance of skills such as writing, editing, confidence with speaking, and the ability to make points with reference to concrete examples—all skills learned and practiced extensively by those who pursue degrees in English and Philosophy. The article cites career counselor Dr. Katharine Brooks, who states by way of example that although “there aren’t a lot of jobs for philosophers…people use logic to formulate and weight ideas and to reach conclusions, which can make training in philosophy very effective in the business world” (Korkki). The same principles apply to English. Authorities on employment all across the board agree that it is absolutely crucial to have a top-notch resume, coverletter, and interviewing skills. But although a degree in English and Philosophy teaches students how to make themselves appear polished and shiny, the most important benefits it provides are arguably more behind the scenes, teaching them how to think, analyze, argue, and clearly express themselves.
This emphasis in English and Philosophy on critical thinking is very Brechtian; critical literacy enables individuals to become more deeply informed about the realities of the world around them. Michael Apple worries that our current education system functions “to reproduce and sustain an unjust, inequitable, and inhumane maldistribution of power” (qtd in Walker and Soltis 72). He argues that “it helps those in power to maintain their power and trains those without power to accept their underclass station in life…in part, by teaching a selective version of knowledge” (72). English and Philosophy train students to perceive such gaps in logic and reasoning. They teach students the power of asking critical questions in order to bring out the complexities in things that seem straightforward. As any good philosopher or literary critic knows, advertising slogans like “Built Ford Tough” do not actually convey any real evidence to convince consumers to buy Ford trucks. Instead, philosopher-writers like Naomi Klein have pointed out that corporations aim to market an image, an idea, or an essence in place of substance. As farfetched as this might sound in theory, the staggering amount of dollars spent every year on advertising proves that these skills are far from useless. From advertising products, it is only one step further to advertising people, whether pop stars or politicians. The same non-logic applies. In contemporary North American society, individuals are bombarded at every step with “selective version[s] of knowledge”—ideas that lack substance and support. The ability to push back at this tidal wave of coercion is exactly what Brecht saw as the power of literacy.
The stereotype that English, Philosophy, and the other Arts are useless wasn’t always as prevalent as it is now. It reflects a more widespread devaluing of the Arts in Canada in general. More and more Music and Fine Art programs are being cut at Secondary Schools across the country, and when a budget crunch hits, these subjects are too often seen as ancillary to the “essentials” of the curriculum—a designation that only consistently refers to Math, Science, and (thankfully) English. Philosophy is even more impoverished than Music and Fine Art in Canadian high schools, only appearing in isolated situations, such as the Theory of Knowledge elective available to International Baccalaureate (IB) students. Although English is still currently considered essential, it is disturbing that Philosophy barely registers at all on the radar of curriculum planners. This distinction at a curricular level by administrators and educators sends a clear message that the “essential” priority of English classes should be to teach literacy (basic reading, writing, and speaking) instead of critical thinking, logic, and arguing/debating skills. In this way, it seems that Stephen Harper’s economic system may very well have a steady stream of workers who have “accept[ed] their underclass station in life” to step into jobs requiring these skills (72). The nationwide funding priorities for Education, then, seem to be moving the system more and more in the direction Apple describes. And if, as I suspect, I am not alone in my experience of being largely discouraged and pressured away from pursuing a vocation in the Arts, then this stereotype of uselessness is indeed more serious than many have been led to believe.
- Salman Rushdie, The Satanic Verses
The educational value of teaching students to become proficient in the intricacies of reading, speaking, and writing in English cannot be overstated. Bertolt Brecht, arguing that “literacy empowers in a Marxist sense,” directs the following imperative to those of the lower classes: “Learn the ABC, it’s not enough, but learn it. Don’t let it get you down! …You who are starving; grab hold of the book” (qtd in Fleming and Stevens 65). The discipline of English is invaluable to people of all classes in North American society as we know it. No other language in the world is spoken and understood as widely. In my personal experience, however, I’ve often been told a different story—one that depicts studying English as a fascinating but ultimately useless endeavour. In what follows I want to weave my personal experiences into a critical exploration of some of the root causes of this prevalent stereotype, particularly at the level of curriculum design and its foundational social values. Not only is the myth that English degrees are not attractive to employers misleading, but I would argue that training in English (and its close cousins in the Arts) can equip individuals with a thriving sense of social awareness and activism.
In Grade 12 I found myself see-sawing back and forth about potential degree and career options. I had done well enough and taken a broad enough range of Arts, Science, and Math credits in my final two years that almost every door was open to me at the undergraduate level. During the process of consulting people prior to making my final decision, I had a guidance counselor several teachers, many of my peers, and even one of my parents advise me in their own way against pursuing English and Philosophy at the post-secondary level. The central thread running through their collective advice was the idea that a degree in English and Philosophy would never land me a stable, high-paying job.
How realistic were their concerns? In 2012, Georgetown University released a comprehensive survey designed to determine more precisely which post-secondary degrees currently have the highest and lowest unemployment rates. Growing up, I was convinced for years that I was going to be an Architect. I loved designing potential floorplans for huge, creative houses. People were generally very supportive of this aspiration, and over the years I gathered that as an Architect I would be very well off, both financially and in terms of getting a job. I eventually abandoned this pursuit due to its intensive math prerequisites, but it seems that, in terms of Georgetown U’s survey, I may be better off after all with my degree in English and Philosophy. Given “the collapse of the construction and home building industry in the recession” (2), Architecture grads currently have the highest unemployment rate in the United States (13.9%). When it became clear that I was set on pursuing English, various people urged me to at least consider replacing my Philosophy minor with something more attractive to employers, such as Information Systems. Recent graduates with a degree in Information Systems, however, currently have the second highest unemployment rate in the country (11.7%), right behind Architecture! English and Philosophy (lumped in with “Humanities and Liberal Arts”) came in fourth, with an unemployment rate of 9.4%. Statistics are very often misleading, of course, but the Georgetown U survey at the very least serves as a useful reminder that tunnel-vision, money-first approaches to choosing one’s career are risky at the best of times and downright misguided at the worst of times.
The potential careers for someone trained in English and Philosophy are varied and exhaustive: Writer (Grant, Technical, Creative), Editor, Journalist, Publisher, Teacher, Lawyer, Librarian, Public Policy/Relations, Research Analyst are just a few of the more prominent options. The New York Times published an article in 2010 on job-hunting as a recent graduate that stresses the importance of skills such as writing, editing, confidence with speaking, and the ability to make points with reference to concrete examples—all skills learned and practiced extensively by those who pursue degrees in English and Philosophy. The article cites career counselor Dr. Katharine Brooks, who states by way of example that although “there aren’t a lot of jobs for philosophers…people use logic to formulate and weight ideas and to reach conclusions, which can make training in philosophy very effective in the business world” (Korkki). The same principles apply to English. Authorities on employment all across the board agree that it is absolutely crucial to have a top-notch resume, coverletter, and interviewing skills. But although a degree in English and Philosophy teaches students how to make themselves appear polished and shiny, the most important benefits it provides are arguably more behind the scenes, teaching them how to think, analyze, argue, and clearly express themselves.
This emphasis in English and Philosophy on critical thinking is very Brechtian; critical literacy enables individuals to become more deeply informed about the realities of the world around them. Michael Apple worries that our current education system functions “to reproduce and sustain an unjust, inequitable, and inhumane maldistribution of power” (qtd in Walker and Soltis 72). He argues that “it helps those in power to maintain their power and trains those without power to accept their underclass station in life…in part, by teaching a selective version of knowledge” (72). English and Philosophy train students to perceive such gaps in logic and reasoning. They teach students the power of asking critical questions in order to bring out the complexities in things that seem straightforward. As any good philosopher or literary critic knows, advertising slogans like “Built Ford Tough” do not actually convey any real evidence to convince consumers to buy Ford trucks. Instead, philosopher-writers like Naomi Klein have pointed out that corporations aim to market an image, an idea, or an essence in place of substance. As farfetched as this might sound in theory, the staggering amount of dollars spent every year on advertising proves that these skills are far from useless. From advertising products, it is only one step further to advertising people, whether pop stars or politicians. The same non-logic applies. In contemporary North American society, individuals are bombarded at every step with “selective version[s] of knowledge”—ideas that lack substance and support. The ability to push back at this tidal wave of coercion is exactly what Brecht saw as the power of literacy.
The stereotype that English, Philosophy, and the other Arts are useless wasn’t always as prevalent as it is now. It reflects a more widespread devaluing of the Arts in Canada in general. More and more Music and Fine Art programs are being cut at Secondary Schools across the country, and when a budget crunch hits, these subjects are too often seen as ancillary to the “essentials” of the curriculum—a designation that only consistently refers to Math, Science, and (thankfully) English. Philosophy is even more impoverished than Music and Fine Art in Canadian high schools, only appearing in isolated situations, such as the Theory of Knowledge elective available to International Baccalaureate (IB) students. Although English is still currently considered essential, it is disturbing that Philosophy barely registers at all on the radar of curriculum planners. This distinction at a curricular level by administrators and educators sends a clear message that the “essential” priority of English classes should be to teach literacy (basic reading, writing, and speaking) instead of critical thinking, logic, and arguing/debating skills. In this way, it seems that Stephen Harper’s economic system may very well have a steady stream of workers who have “accept[ed] their underclass station in life” to step into jobs requiring these skills (72). The nationwide funding priorities for Education, then, seem to be moving the system more and more in the direction Apple describes. And if, as I suspect, I am not alone in my experience of being largely discouraged and pressured away from pursuing a vocation in the Arts, then this stereotype of uselessness is indeed more serious than many have been led to believe.
Comments
Post a Comment