General education and its effectiveness are still topical questions in our society. Most of the students find it a waste of time (Slacks). However, many authors claim that by being opposed to general education we might miss out great opportunities.
A useful tip is that people often change their occupations, at least once. Therefore, in such cases being versatile and an all-rounder is an advantage (Austin). Austin also claims that general education broadens out mind and gives critical approach making us a more difficult target for all kinds of scams. Even businessmen define general education as a key factor for success.
In Stanford, a great attention to general education is paid. The concept of liberal education is a preservation of general education requirements with a bit more flexibility (“General Education Requirements Still Lacking Citizenship Training”).
What is surprising, many students are hostile and resentful against the requirement of general education. Sometimes, it is not altogether their fault, but the inability of teachers to show the importance and relevance of general education for their future (“The Value of a Liberal Education”).
I find it harmful and populistic that some universities give in to the displeasure of the students and reduce their general education requirements (Austin). It does only harm to students, who are often too immature to realize its significance. However, students being of age are usually responsible for their own decisions. If they do not want to take some subjects and their parents fail to influence, how is university supposed to persuade them?
Unless students fully understand that general education is the basis for their intellectual, psychological, and character formation, general education classes will be considered useless; they will be neglected and done anyhow. So, if you study anyhow, why study at all?