@horgen: Although I understand the concept of "critical thinking" I believe the reason funds get pulled for these courses is because it doesnt always present tangible value once the person is qualified. For example....getting a top notch degree in mathematics paints a picture of someone who can achieve great results in a specific field.
Critical thinking "the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement".
I would argue that although a top notch degree in critical thinking proves you can think critically about whatever it is you write you dissertation about...its doesnt mean your a commodity.
I would expect an architect to be an architect first and foremost. I wouldnt however employ a critical thinker to build my house.
im not trying to devalue critical thinking as a subject however I understand why states would pull funding for it in order to reinvest that money into courses and subjects that yield more tangible results.
The state of texas has produced X amount of fully qualified engineers trained at degree level sounds better on paper than
The state of texas has produced X amount of fully qualified critical thinkers trained at degree level.
Log in to comment