Are liberal arts more valuable than STEM learning?

A liberal arts education that focuses on a broad range of topics, and is not vocationally-centric, is a bigger asset to today’s students than other trending tracks like STEM learning. That’s according to author Fareed Zakaria in his new book “In Defense of a Liberal Education.” Zakaria argues that the central focus of a liberal arts education is writing, and that “writing makes you think.”
In an interview with Forbes, Zakaria had this to say about his stance:
What a liberal education at its best does…is to allow people to range widely, to read widely, to explore their passions…I think that kind of breadth and the ability to feed your curiosity and indulge is incredibly important. It’s what, now in the corporate world, one would call synergy, or out of the box thinking, or the intersection of disciplines. This has always been a central part of what a liberal education has meant.
By having a liberal arts foundation, workers can then build on in other areas. Zakaria says that scientific thinking certainly has a place in American education but that there should be a “logical clarity and coherence to it.”
With all of the talk of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math learning as the wave of the future, Zakaria’s view and book are a refreshing reminder that writing and logic are still valuable. It goes back to the age-old concept that we must teach our students HOW to learn, and not just WHAT to learn. That’s the real way to ensure innovative and skilled future workers.
What do you think? Are liberal arts as important, less important or more important that STEM tactics?
I am a strong believer that more STEM emphasis needs to me made at the elementary level. It has been my experience that more than half of every day is devoted to “liberal arts.” Reading and writing about feelings, family experiences, and social norms is what you find when you will find as you walk down an elementary school hallway. The remaining time is devoted to mathematics and finally “specials” where a student is finally aloud to be a kid in an art class or gym.
Social norms are important to young students as they learn what it is to be a citizen and part of a social group. It is my opinion however that as most, not all, young elementary teachers are young females who didn’t enjoy science and mathematics in school and engineering, well lets just say it didn’t happen. If it did they would be engineers, scientists, or mathematicians making six digit incomes and not teachers.
There is a change taking place at a glacial pace but it seems that some recognize the “hole” in public education that steers students into academic degrees and not vocational opportunities. I don’t advocate for one over the other, I just suggest that sometimes when we write an exposition in the classroom, that teachers encourage students to write about STEM topics in addition to the the traditional historical and cultural social topics found in every elementary in the country. STEM should not be an addition to the curriculum but an inclusion into core literacy, social studies, mathematics and science topics.
Thank You
[…] Liberal arts graduates are still incredibly valuable in the contemporary workplace, according to a new book. […]
[…] A liberal arts education that focuses on a broad range of topics, and is not vocationally-centric, is a bigger asset to today’s students than other trending tracks like STEM learning. That’s according to author Fareed Zakaria in his new book “In Defense of a Liberal Education.” Zakaria argues that the central focus of a liberal… […]