suburbanreuben – Member
It amazes me that amongst the arty farty professions an admission of innumeracy is seen as a badge of honour.

No formal maths or English qualifications beyond low cse grades but that’s not a badge of honour as its simply not worth mentioning or irrelevant to getting an arts degree and then having a career and earning a very good wage, something me and the other half have done with a couple of degrees in graphic design, photography and an MA in printmaking.

Not everybody with an arts degree is going to go on to have a career in their chosen subject but does every science type student end up with a job relevant to what they study?

The value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the learning of many facts, but the training of the mind to think of something that cannot be learned from textbooks. (Albert Einstein)

word of mouth only…

The graphic design community will be mildly annoyed by this obvious snub.

…but the CSSD grads will be exhilarated.

A levels in Art, Maths , and Physics. Just ” celebrated” 25 years working in the television industry. Not sure which of my A levels contributed the most though.

Brian Eno mentions how the Arts made him who he is on the 6music John Peel Lecture here

She was speaking at a conference to encourage people to study Maths and Physics, so makes sense to point out that career choices and employability are generally greater for sciences. Or also true that employers regard sciences as the “hard” subjects. Whether that’s strictly true or not is mute as what’s important is what the person hiring you thinks.

The overall issue is the fact that in the West the humanities and the sciences are opposed to one another (the idea that you have to choose between the two at 16).
Alas, the ‘best minds’ I knew at uni, whether they had phds in chemistry or history, all ended up as lawyers anyway.

The overall issue is the fact that in the West the humanities and the sciences are opposed to one another (the idea that you have to choose between the two at 16).

In Britain, maybe. In the US it’s possible to delay that “decision” until the late stages of your bachelor’s degree course.

not really evidence,but I’ve often heard radio and TV presenters making a joke about being rubbish at maths, or not understanding physics. If they said “I’ve never seen a play by Shakespeare” they’d be laughed out of the studio.

Not evidence, but on University Challenge, Paxo generally looks astonished when someone can answer the simplest of science questions, whereas sneers when they don’t recognise the opening bars from some obscure piece of classical music.

The overall issue is the fact that in the West the humanities and the sciences are opposed to one another (the idea that you have to choose between the two at 16).

Not sure I’d agree with that one. As far as secondary school education is concerned my Highers are evenly split between Maths, Physics, Chemistry for “science” and English, History, Music on the “arts/humanities” side.

Thing is it is far easier for a science person to have an interest in art, music, literature etc, than it is the other way round. How many historians have a keen interest in Quantum physics or genetics? Whereas for example I know some top scientists who play music in orchestras to a decent level (Grade 8). So generally IME (good) science folk tend to to be more rounded.

Thing is it is far easier for a science person to have an interest in art, music, literature etc, than it is the other way round.

It’s really not. No one is expecting everyone to be fully versed in the minutia of Quantum physics, but being able to understand basic geometry (e.g. Pythagoras) and trigonometry shouldn’t be too much to ask.

Interesting debate

I am involved with an event that promotes the STEM subjects – Curated by the lovely Maggie Philbin no less 🙂

There are genuinely lots of early teens who think that striving to be in the X factor is a good career path. Honestly.

Over the course of the day the participants (500 X 11-13 year olds approx) get to meet a bunch of scientists and engineers and actually discover what this maths/physics/chemistry stuff is used FOR.

Seeing the lights go on when these kids realise what is possible and what enablers the STEM subjects are is utterly fascinating. I still think we have an issue with the STEM subjects being presented in a dry way – all tweed sports jackets with elbow patches and nasal hair. The arts? well they’re just always trendy aren’t they?

TM

Basic geometry is so easy it’s taught about the age of 12. How many arts students can explain something as essential as calculus?

A lot of teachers are awful for encouraging STEM subjects. Probably because most of them don’t seem to have a clue about the world outside of their school. When I did open days at Uni all the daftest questions came from teachers, not the kids who were far more open minded.

How many arts students can explain something as essential as calculus?

Not sure that calculus is actually essential for most people let alone art students.

An oldie, but a goodie.

Manchester University in the late 70s produced the following:
Ben Elton (drama)
Lisa Meyer (drama)Young Ones
Nick Hamm (English), Hollywood director, Nick got a p poor degree but went on to be the youngest director at the RSC
Steve Hewlett (sciences), R4 Media Show, Guardian
Rik Mayall (drama)
Ade Edmondson (drama)
Dave Aaronovich (history) media figure
Rikki Tarascas, (drama) theatre and film director, Manchester Poly

They didn’t seem to do too badly. Sure these stand out but it shows in can be done.

dragon – Member

How many arts students can explain something as essential as calculus?

It takes 1 arts student to point out that calculus isn’t essential.

How many arts students can explain something as essential as calculus?

I was an arts student (philosophy) and I can explain calculus, so at least one. I’ve never felt the need to use it since leaving school though.

Not sure that calculus is actually essential for most people let alone art students.

Neither is the history of the Russian revolution, although I’m quite glad I studied it at school.

Because it’s difficult (impossible?) to quantify, we tend to miss the fact that a blend of both usually gives a better employee.

Troubleshooting complex systems can be equal parts engineering, art and witchcraft. I had a real fight in the dim and distant past to take Maths, Physics and English Lit at A level… it was expected I’d do Chemistry but I had no interest and reasoned English just couldn’t be a bad choice. Glad I stuck with it too.

Arts degrees are useless?

I’ll be sure to tell my sister in law that before she gets flown out to Dublin for a few hours work and flown home again. At her employers expense. Of course she has an RAD teaching qualification as well but that wouldn’t have happened without the degree.

Exception perhaps but enough to prove “the rule” is a load of nonsense. Any degree is what you make of it, if you’re mediocre in your field expect to do mediocre things. If you’re exceptional on the other hand…

Oh and FWIW, as an engineer, Newton and Liebnitz can go fornicate themselves till the end of time. I don’t suppose any of you purists still use slide rules either? Calculators? damn and blasted infernal machines, what’s wrong with long division???

I run a ‘successful’ arts organisation. I use maths everyday, working out budgets, projecting income and approximating materials.
We also regularly work with scientists (It has been almost 10 years now) in the field of biology and bio ethics. I’ve grown quite used to diving into some quite technical papers in order to interpret them for an audience. I enjoy science as it challenges me, and broadens what we do as a company.
I don’t think it is useful in the long term to divide education into ‘subjects’ -it puts us into silos far too early. Subjects are a convenient way to teach, but few of us work in an entirely scientific field, or in a rarified arts one. I wouldn’t want to.