Introduction
Researchers often argue about the validity of college education and its relation to individuals’ performance in the work place. Some researchers argue that higher education is a prerequisite for individuals to secure nice jobs. Conflicting information exists on the significance of the course, people major in, and their eventual success in the labor market (Kuther and Robert 8). While some argue that majoring in some disciplines such as medicine or teaching was important, others are of the opinion that what mattered most was the mastery attained during college education. The paper evaluates the essay written by Barnett and Bedau on current issues, which hold that, it did not matter what somebody majored in during college education (Barnet and Hugo 517).
Evaluation
The argument presented by the authors is valid. This is because majoring in a certain course in the college, did not necessarily imply that an individual will only be tied to working or rather performing roles only associated with the learnt course. For instance, the author woke up one morning to perform two tasks, which did not have anything in common in terms of majoring, since one entailed the writing of a column, while the other involved the grading of exam papers (Barnet and Hugo 517). On the other hand, the two tasks clearly demonstrated something of great importance associated with higher education. This implied that, what mattered most was the value of higher education to enable an individual to apply mastery in accomplishing a variety of duties in different fields (Barnet and Hugo 517).
Furthermore, the authors postulate that college education was necessary for individuals to acquire jobs that would place them in the middle class. This was because the labor market had considered college degree to be the minimum qualification for a good job (Barnet and Hugo 517). This clearly depicts that having a college degree was more significant in securing a job rather than the course one specialized. The authors saw the increment in college costs to have created social problems, since higher education was supposed to be affordable to everyone across the board (Barnet and Hugo 517).
Moreover, many people are now investigating what students get out of college in return for their money. People are increasingly questioning both institutions and students’ commitment to academic excellence. This was vital in appreciating that the mastery acquired by students was the most significant element of college education (Barnet and Hugo 517). For instance, people who major in pre-MED and biology would assume jobs as doctors and scientists respectively, but on the other hand, it would be difficult to establish the kind of jobs applicable to individuals who majored in Indonesian history or Renaissance art (Barnet and Hugo 517).
It does not necessarily mean that such people who majored in the arts or history could not assume important roles and perform them diligently. This meant that students developed a set of skills in the college that would help them in serving properly in the postindustrial labor market (Barnet and Hugo 517).
The authors argue that, despite the course, one majored in, it was necessary for individuals to acquire skills that would assist them in assimilating and organizing large pools of complex information. The individuals would analyze such information in order to come up with outcomes that created value to others, while expressing such ideas in a clear and purposeful language. Therefore, what mattered most was individuals’ to pursue trainings in crafts of mastering complexity, which was applicable in varied fields rather than embarking on what courses they majored in. Thereby, the acquired college skills should enable one to perform tasks ranging from zoo management to advertising (Kuther and Robert 8).
Furthermore, college education is a craft just the same way as the making of cabinets. This denotes that higher education should instill skills to students to help them in delivering sustained and reasonable arguments. For instance, despite the author having majored in teaching at the college, he uses the learnt skills in assembling columns, which act as a source of living due to the use of such figurative cabinets (Kuther and Robert 8).
The argument that, what students majored in did not matter is further supported by the author of the essay by indicating the several positions he assumed to earn his living. The argument is valid since the author once occupied the positions of policy analyst, a reporter, a businessperson, a writer and a teacher. Further, the author argues that, what happened in higher education was mainly to learn the way to drive the postindustrial nails straight (Barnet and Hugo 517). Again, the argument is valid from the viewpoint that in the current businesses and even in the political arena, most politicians did not specifically major in courses related to political science. In addition, several CEO’s and other business executives are graduates of different areas other than business related courses (Kuther and Robert 8).
Conclusion
In summary, it is quite valid from the analyzed evaluation, that it does not matter what scholars specialize in, or rather major in college education, but what matters most is acquiring important skills that would assist them in depicting mastery while assuming roles in different fields.
Works Cited
Barnet, Sylvan, and Hugo A. Bedau. Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2013. Print.
Kuther, Tara L, and Robert D. Morgan. Careers in Psychology: Opportunities in a Changing World., 2013. Print.