Why doesn't a true general studies or liberal studies degree exist?

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by AlK11, Aug 14, 2019.

Loading...
  1. AlK11

    AlK11 Active Member

    If the definition of general studies is "General studies programs result in a degree comprised of multiple disciplines, such as arts, sciences and humanities, which may appeal to students who want a broad education" or something similar, then why doesn't a completely student driven degree exist? For example, why can't I just take 30 credits of whatever I wanted, write a 3 credit thesis, and then have a masters in general studies? Why don't schools offer a "create your own degree" option?
     
  2. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    OK, I've got a 2 part answer
    1) No one wants to buy that. If there was a market for it then it would exist.
    2) A Masters degree in General Studies seems like an oxymoron.
    "A master's degree[note 1] (from Latin magister) is an academic degree awarded by universities or colleges upon completion of a course of study demonstrating mastery or a high-order overview of a specific field of study or area of professional practice."
    A Masters degree is, by definition, the study of something specific, not just a random collection of credits.
     
  3. heirophant

    heirophant Well-Known Member

    I did that at community college (City College of San Francisco) back when it was free and over the span of years I took the introductory class in just about every imaginable subject in night-school. (It was better than hanging out at bars.) It actually had more employment utility than either of my degrees (a BA and an MA) since it taught me the basic language and concepts of most subjects so that I could sound reasonably educated in conversation on anything. That impressed bosses.

    But I don't pretend that doing it was the equivalent of an undergraduate, let alone a graduate degree in anything. It was something else, with its own validity I think.

    Individualized student-designed majors exist.

    http://bulletin.sfsu.edu/colleges/all-university/interdisciplinary-studies-graduate/

    http://www.sjsu.edu/cgs/current-students/interdisciplinary-studies/index.html

    The thing is, universities will require them to have depth and focus. They can't just consist of a superficial exposure to a bunch of largely unrelated material. They can't just consist of x number of credits in anything. How would one write a thesis/dissertation on everything... and nothing in particular?

    An example I sometimes use is Neoplatonism and Religious Art. That's a focused subject with application to things like religious icons. But addressing it might require dipping into Philosophy, Theology, Art History and perhaps even Medieval and Late Antique history, Islamic topics, Psychology of Religion and more. So it would be a tightly focused subject that draws from a wide variety of disciplines.

    I think that many universities allow their students to invent interdisciplinary major subjects like that.

    Another one might be the History and Philosophy of Science. Some universities devote a department to this, but elsewhere it might involve work from Philosophy, suitable training in some relevant Science, the general History of the period in question, and even Religious Studies or Theology when appropriate. Plus an interdisciplinary thesis/dissertation committee drawn from multiple departments all of whom have an interest in your topic.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  4. bceagles

    bceagles Member

  5. cookderosa

    cookderosa Resident Chef

    I don't understand the rationale behind being a master of generalization. Bachelor's degrees, of course, are plentiful in general studies and liberal arts, but to go beyond learning someone else's work, a master should be an active participant in their industry (a doctor a contributor) so what would you be a master of, exactly?
     
  6. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    There are a few people who have been given the title “The last man who knew everything.” Enrico Fermi, Thomas Young and Karl Jaspers come to mind.
     
  7. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    I think this really hits to the heart of it.

    You can get an interdisciplinary Masters. You can synthesize two very different fields with relative ease.

    History and Religion, Psychology and Business, Art and Language or any combination of the things I just mentioned. A guy I used to teach at the community college with had an MBA and an MA in History and specialized his research on "the History of Commerce." He had a really interesting course on sea trade in the classical era that was dual-listed in History and Business.

    Having say, 18 credits in Art and 18 credits in Religion is very different than having 36 credits in 12 different fields. One means you are a master of an interdisciplinary study, maybe one that no one else has undertaken, the other is someone who puttered around from grad program to grad program.

    Perhaps a sensible compromise would be to create a "Jack of All Arts and Sciences" degree? Seeing as the holder would be Master of None?
     
  8. GregWatts

    GregWatts Active Member

    Masters in liberal studies / humanities are around; I agree that general studies doesn't make sense.
     
  9. cookderosa

    cookderosa Resident Chef

    Humanities is a field, so I think that won't apply. An MA in Humanities would be more similar to an MA in Social Sciences. Broad, but still a subset of liberal arts. Probably "as broad as" you can get without being too diluted.
     
  10. AlK11

    AlK11 Active Member

  11. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    And it all can be yours for the low, low price of $60K
     
  12. AlK11

    AlK11 Active Member

    That's only $82 per day if it takes you two years to complete it. Not too bad.
     
  13. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    To me it seems a lot of money but clearly there are people making that choice or the program wouldn't exist.
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    At the bachelor's level, the US evolved a system based in part on a liberal arts education, in part on a specific major of study.

    In some other countries, you go to university to study a particular subject--exclusively. There is plenty of debate over which is superior.

    At the master's level, I agree with Kizmet that the degree is designed to "master" one's field of study. This cannot be if it is just a jumble of courses assembled with no rhyme nor reason.

    The notion of interdisciplinarity has come up. I have a bit of experience in that area with my Union degree. The concept isn't just a melding of two or three major areas of study. It's about using theories, methods, etymologies, even ontologies from different disciplines to examine a particular subject or issue. For example, in my Leicester work, I used a sociological theory--Strong Structuration--to not only help explain the phenomenon under study (stemming from the practice and underlying theories of human resource development), but also to build a unique theory about it. That theoretical model, in turn, can be used to examine other professions and how they're practiced at the executive level. Fun, huh?
     

Share This Page