Let's Kill the College Major
Jeff Selingo
Bestselling author | Strategic advisor on future of learning and work | College admissions and early career expert | Contributor, The Atlantic | Angel investor | Editor, Next newsletter | Co-host, FutureU podcast
A proposal for a new university in Canada recently caught my eye for a host of reasons, not the least of which is that its students wouldn’t have majors. Instead, the students would be able to “distinguish themselves through practical and demonstrable skills in four areas of focus—technology, entrepreneurship/management, health professions, and creative industries.”
For most college students, the idea of a major is outdated in a 21st Century economy in a constant state of flux. College majors are for the most part an organizing function for the faculty of an institution who want to have departments for their academic disciplines.
Sure, students need a structured curriculum to follow in order to get the classes they need to take a licensing exam or apply to medical school, but most majors don’t have such specific requirements. Do you need to be an undergraduate business major to take the GMAT and apply to business school? No.
As high-school students tour campuses this summer or their older counterparts get ready to start college this fall, instead of asking them their major, we should ask them one simple question: What problems do you want to solve?
Most 18-year-olds have no idea what they want to be when they grow up (many adults don’t, either, of course). But you can get many would-be college students to talk quite passionately about what they want to fix in the world. From such conversations, you can imagine a whole set of courses at almost any college that would engage such students but don’t fit neatly into a major's bucket: find renewable sources of energy; bring water to the the drought-striken West; improve the delivery of news around the world.
As high-school students tour campuses this summer or their older counterparts get ready to start college this fall, instead of asking them their major, we should ask them one simple question: What problems do you want to solve?
Stanford University recently called such a pathway, “purpose learning.” As part of a yearlong design exercise to rethink undergraduate education, students suggested doing away with the major and replacing it with a “mission.”
Under such a scenario, the “I’m a biology major,” was replaced with “I’m learning human biology to eliminate world hunger,” or “I’m learning Computer Science and Political Science to rebuild how citizens engage with their governments.”
The goal of the exercise was to “help students select a meaningful course of study while in school, and then scaffold a clear arc for the first 10 - 15 years of their professional lives.”
For many students, a major is just a box to check on an application anyway. By the end of their first year, 1 in 4 freshmen change their minds about their field of study anyway. Another half of first-year students say they plan to change majors.
Students have plenty of options to choose from, of course. As a marketing strategy, colleges in recent years have come up with crazy new majors to entice students to enroll, from sports management to web design. Since 2000, there has been a 20% increase in the number of majors at American colleges and universities, according to an analysis of the U.S. Education Department data. A third of those new programs were in just two fields: health professions and military technologies/ applied sciences. The 1990s saw similar growth in the number of majors. Indeed, nearly 4 in 10 majors on today’s government list didn’t exist in 1990.
It's time to kill the major or at the very least reduce the emphasis on it during the college application process and the first year of school.
Jeffrey Selingo is author of the forthcoming e-book, MOOC U: Who Is Getting the Most Out of Online Education and Why, due out September 2 from Simon & Schuster. You can pre-order it now for $2.99 at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and iTunes.
His first book, College (Un)Bound: The Future of Higher Education and What It Means for Students, was published last year and was a New York Times best selling education book. He is a contributing editor at The Chronicle of Higher Education and a professor of practice at Arizona State University.
Follow him here by clicking the FOLLOW button above, on Twitter@jselingo, and sign up for free newsletters about the future of higher education atjeffselingo.com.
Photo: Ohio State University/Columbus Dispatch
The work that we do with career education and professional development through the Career Services Center is consistent with the notion of "purpose learning." Helping students figure out who they are, what they bring to the table, and how they can contribute is what we call their occupational target; their goal. Having students spend time and energy determining that rather than trying to pick the "perfect' major would be time well spent. I like it!
Customer Care Professional At Delta Airlines/Social Impact & Climate Change Enthusiast/Community Planner/Globetrotter
10 年Wonder when the day will come for required gen ed courses will dissolve at college, but students will have pure freedom in taking what they wish yet still master crucial skills like critical thinking/analysis, people relations (how to act with superiors, coworkers, subordinates and clients in various situations) teamwork, ethics, and basic computational and math skills along with any good tech skills for later?
Quality Analyst III at Valorem Reply
10 年We need to focus on vocational learning too.
Staff Systems Engineer
10 年I don't know if I entirely agree with this article. I do understand certain aspects of the argument, but to me, this is essentially throwing out the baby with the bath water. There are a lot of people out there that don't end up working in a field related to their major, but that doesn't mean that the major itself is worthless. Also, this article assumes that a student will not change his/her mind regarding what their passion is during their time in school. A lot of companies train their incoming employees, and if the organization is worth anything, it will look to place an individual in a situation where they are passionate and will succeed. So, if the individual displays a passion and a talent in a certain area, it should achieve the same end. I'm just not sure that the entire education system needs to be blown up in order to attain short term ends.
Dedicated To Sustainable Energy At The Personal Level
10 年And basic college education wouldn't have to be a 4 year ordeal!