"Should Undergraduates Specialize?" Response

I chose to reflect on this reading because I felt that the opinions of Patrick Allitt were ones with which I agreed firmly. The statement "I think more American colleges should offer the chance to specialize right from the outset to those students who want it" is very agreeable because some people know exactly what they want to do and know what they are passionate about. Like Allitt says, the American system is unlike the British because the student has to pay for those costs of education since they are benefiting from the education. If we are paying thousands of dollars, we should be able to choose if we want to specialize right away rather than having general education classes, considering we have to deal with the costs.

On the other hand, students also should have that choice to take general classes if they are undecided on a major, which is where I stand. Personally, I have no idea what I plan to major in, so taking a variety of classes has helped eliminate some possible ideas I've had for majors as well as sparked interests. All in all, I agree that there should be that choice of having early specialization.

One other point I wanted to touch on was the topic of college applications. In America, you cannot simply rely on academics and the grades you got in high school to be accepted into top colleges. Allitt makes the point that his daughter was encouraged early on to join many extracurriculars, anything that will make her stand out above just academics. While I do agree that people should be accepted on more than just grades, the extent is almost ridiculous. A lot of the clubs at my high school ended up with students who really did not care what the club was about and did not participate to their fullest potential. They would just join to be able to put it on their college applications and make themselves "look good". Just an interesting thought I guess.

"Should Undergraduates Specialize?" Response

The points that Allitt portrays in this essay were very intriguing to me. The way he presents the pros and cons of the schooling systems in Britain and America brought up certain points that I had never thought of before. Something that many people should reflect on is his argument that education isn't "one size fits all." There are ups and downs to both specialized and liberal arts education; consequently, neither of these systems are perfect. Allitt's essay provoked in me the idea that education will probably never fitsociety's exact needs or interests. Some students are ready for a vocational school right out of high school, and some need that broad spectrum that a liberal arts school provides so they can find what it is they want to pursue.

"Should Undergraduates Specialize?" response

Patrick Allitt makes it clear that college education in England is very different from an American education now. Anyone could have guessed that. I understand his point that students should specialize because it makes them much more aware of their field and they get a more in depth understanding of it; but, just has he made clear before, education has changed. A college education used to be rare, now it is a commodity. Basically every high school graduate goes to some type of college these days. There is not really a need to specialize in an undergraduate degree. The current undergrad degree is the equivalent to the old high school degree. Now, students will get a masters to be ahead of the curve and to get a good job. A masters degree is the place where students should specialize in the field of their choice. Then, they will be old enough to decide what they want to do with their life and will have had enough prior education to have a well rounded knowledge of different topics as well.