Teaching creativity

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Of course, there was a lot of discussion about science and math courses.
But I advocated for the requirement for arts and music based on the idea that once
entered medical / dental school, there was little or no time left for students to explore the fine arts.

I disagree. By the time med students, or engineers, get into college, they usually have a good idea on what they want to do and the classes they take are on their dollar. Instead of art or music classes they could get out a semester early, and avoid a semester worth of loans, or take more classes that will (hopefully) make them better at their profession. Even if they are forced to take those classes, which my classmates and I were, we took them pass/fail and did just enough to pass. I have an interest in a lot of the liberal arts classes but I'm going to choose studying structural design over John Locke any day of the week. I would recommend liberal arts classes that do have medical or engineering relevance though (drawing, powerpoint stuff, public speaking, etc).


In elementary school, I would agree with art classes if the budget allows but there should also be an emphasis on problem solving in the curriculum. If we are just going for creativity, problem solving takes just as much as art. But, I think there is more reasons to teach art at a young age than just creativity so I wouldn't cut it out all together.

[Lamplighter]

The trouble is that students are not medical or engineering students when they get to college... they are (only) high school graduates.
Some have ideas about what they may want to do, but those ideas are often immature and/or unrealistic
and/or coming perhaps from pressure or tradition of their parents, etc. etc...

Our family took the positions that undergraduate college was a place and time
to explore the world outside of the family, and not just a job-training program,
even if they wanted to eventually go into medicine or other graduate training.
The same can be said for colleges known for engineering or agriculture or business management or whatever.

A student can justify job training almost anywhere along the pathway to adulthood,
but it turns out to be very difficult after using the college years for job training to then try to go back to college
to pick up courses missed in history or literature or philosophy or art or music or whatever.

I believe that after a some years of actual employment in any field, people start looking for other areas of self-fulfillment, and
if they have not ever explored the fine arts or creative pathways
they are at a loss compared with those who have explored and tested their breadth of own interests.
It's those other interests that often can lead to what I perceive as contentment.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

The trouble is that students are not medical or engineering students when they get to college... they are (only) high school graduates.
Some have ideas about what they may want to do, but those ideas are often immature and/or unrealistic
and/or coming perhaps from pressure or tradition of their parents, etc. etc...

Ideally, I don't disagree with you but I have my stance because I didn't really learn anything in my classes outside of engineering. I can also say with a pretty large amount of confidence that others in my field will say the same. The only class where I felt I learned anything was a history class and that is because I was interested in the topic and the TA was excellent.

What it comes down to is that people are going to learn in what they are interested in. If an engineer or medical student is interested in art or music, by all means let them take it because they will most likely get something out of it, but if an engineer or medical student is not interested in art in music, forcing them to take a class won't accomplish anything. As I said earlier, I have no problem with allowing students to take classes outside they are field for exploration or interest reasons or forcing students to take classes that will build a skill set (public speaking or writing for example) but I don't see much actually getting accomplished from forcing students to take classes outside their field for exploratory reasons.

And some students do come into college knowing exactly what they will do. Some take a few years to find it.

It's those other interests that often can lead to what I perceive as contentment.

I disagree. People are different. Some people find enjoyment in fine arts, some people find enjoyment in math. And keep in mind by math I mean actual problem solving, not long division.

I contend the differences are based on history and art and religion and design, beyond just the knowledge of structural engineering.

This is getting a bit off topic, but engineering is much more than just math. Everything must be taken into consideration when an engineering company gives out a proposal for a bid on whatever needs to be designed. If the bridge is out in the middle of nowhere, the cheapest bridge is probably sufficient. If the bridge is in the middle of the city, architecture, aesthetics, and historical factors should always be taken into consideration. If you don't another company will get the job.

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

If the bridge is in the middle of the city, architecture, aesthetics, and historical factors should always be taken into consideration. If you don't another company will get the job.

And the terrifying thing is that often the visually/aesthetically illiterate are making judgment calls about whether these projects are approved.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Our infrastructure is falling apart, in many cases, because people more worried about aesthetics and environmental impact, drag projects out for years and drive the costs so high, the projects never get done. Often the engineers don't even propose repairs, knowing the shit they'll be up against. They let things deteriorate until the inevitable necessity generates public/political pressure to cut out the bullshit and get it done.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Our infrastructure is falling apart, in many cases, because people more worried about aesthetics and environmental impact, drag projects out for years and drive the costs so high, the projects never get done. Often the engineers don't even propose repairs, knowing the shit they'll be up against. They let things deteriorate until the inevitable necessity generates public/political pressure to cut out the bullshit and get it done.

Part of the problem is that opening a new civic feature wins votes, but closing a bridge for six weeks to do maintenance ticks people off.

Do we say spineless politicians? or stupid voters?