The non "Coca" COLA

COLA: College of Liberal Arts or College of Lazy-asses (Who weren’t smart enough to get into business.) **Not that I’m bitter about the unbelievable high standards for transferring into the B-school.**

Within reading two paragraphs of “The Origins of Universities” my entire idea of college was negated. The image that was conjured in my head was that of a haughty British university where wigs were still worn and men were its only inhabitants. “The whole body of teachers and scholars engaged, at a particular place, in giving and receiving instruction in the higher branches of learning, with definite organization and acknowledged powers and privileges…and forming an institution for the promotion of education in the higher or more important branches of learning” (340). First of all, I was never asked for my opinion or my original thoughts in a lower division course. I was neither engaged nor acknowledged—I was a UT-EID and a seat number. Secondly, who is to say which branches of learning are the highest and most important? For a lawyer, english and history would be deemed more important than an astronomy class, but the astronomer will argue that astronomy is the “end-all-be-all” of college courses. Skipping down a few paragraphs, the article bolsters my idea of British (or in this case European) stuffiness—“the oldest institutions of higher learning that have always satisfied the modern definition of a university were in Europe” (340).

What am I doing in liberal arts? Honestly—writing is the only subject in which I excel, and English is taught in the ever so daunting and overpopulated “COLA.” (Side-note: abbreviating the schools initials to the name of a sweet and bubbly drink does not represent the college well. There is nothing sweet about having to take random sciences like “the Biology of AIDS” to fulfill a credit requirement.) Until this reading, I hadn’t a clue to what a liberal education really is, and was, in fact, quite annoyed that I have to take 18 hours of a natural science or 16 hours of a foreign language. According to Newman, an education that is considered liberal is one where, “A habit of mind is formed which lasts through life, of which the attributes are, freedom, equitableness, calmness, moderation, and wisdom…” (309). What a resume starter… “Well, Mr. CEO, you should hire me because not only am I filled with wisdom, but I am calm, free, and quite equitable.”

In my opinion, Newman hits the nail on the head with his idea that the key role of a university is the cultivation of intellect. If intellect is the capacity for thinking and acquiring knowledge, then my suggestion is to trash the grade system and teach every class like an upper division English class—a class based on discussion. To me, tests are satanic. Nothing is gained when a 19-year-old takes adderol and drinks a few Red Bulls to pull an all-nighter just to memorize 50 multiple-choice questions that he/she will forget as soon as the caffeine buzz wears off. Knowledge should be pursued for its own sake, just like Flawn said, “…knowledge is not merely a means to something beyond it, or the preliminary of certain arts into which it naturally resolves, but an end sufficient to rest in and to pursue for its own sake” (306).

I guess my ranting leads to the fact that who I am is a college student who excels in English courses but bomb the others. According to my transcript, I am an average student with mostly B’s and a few C’s in my science classes. The A’s only stand next to courses starting with an “E” I am here to improve my critical thinking, but feel suppressed by the universities grading system. I agree with Newman—learn for learning’s sake, and focus on constantly cultivating intellect.