Trump attacks protections for immigrants from ‘s***hole’ countries

[Dill]

(01-12-2018, 12:03 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That’s misleading.   It’s also easier to get degrees abroad.   I can’t speak for the third worlders but most don’t have to take 2 years of nonsense classes before they start their program.    More people here would have degrees as well if you took away the gen ed’s.

What are non sense classes?  Where do you get your information about "third worlders" and college degrees?


Are you arguing here that higher education should be converted to vocational training?

[StLucieBengal]

(01-15-2018, 06:58 PM)Dill Wrote: What are non sense classes?  Where do you get your information about "third worlders" and college degrees?


Are you arguing here that higher education should be converted to vocational training?

General education requirements are a waste.

If someone wants to be an engineer those 3 art history classes aren’t important.

[Dill]

(01-12-2018, 03:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The comment is in poor taste as are attempts to make it a racist comment.

Like all those libtards claiming Trump's P*****grabbing comment was "misogynist."

Poor taste everywhere.

[Belsnickel]

(01-15-2018, 07:01 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: General education requirements are a waste.

If someone wants to be an engineer those 3 art history classes aren’t important.

Well, since it isn't likely any engineering major would be required to take one, let alone three, art history courses, all is well.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-15-2018, 07:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, since it isn't likely any engineering major would be required to take one, let alone three, art history courses, all is well.

Roommate and I both had to take them he was an engineering major. I was secondary ed.

[Dill]

(01-15-2018, 07:01 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: General education requirements are a waste.

If someone wants to be an engineer those 3 art history classes aren’t important.

So you are conflating vocational training with higher education.

No US university requires an engineering student to take three art history courses--though an engineer might learn much from such.

If you sign up to get six months training for a certificate in heating and air conditioning repair, then I agree gen ed requirements would be inappropriate.  But the higher literacy requirements and analytical skills of most college majors require a different kind of prep, not always directly related to a major.

Gen ed everywhere includes a balance of math, social/natural sciences, humanities and writing/communication courses. Some require at least some exposure to a foreign language.  The science/humanities requirements are often mostly electives, which can vary widely from courses in European history to world religions to Asian film--all courses which provide students with a more global perspective conducive to citizenship and a basis for higher order thinking. And why should students enter junior senior level courses in any subject with limited vocabularies, limited understanding of markets, politics and history, and no experience writing research papers, much less conducting research?

This all becomes "waste," yes, if you just think of college degrees as a type of vocational certificate.

[Dill]

(01-15-2018, 07:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Roommate and I both had to take them he was an engineering major.  I was secondary ed.

You studied to be a teacher, potentially in a position to advise and otherwise influence young students life choices, and you concluded gen ed requirements were a waste?

What subjects were you proposing to teach?

[Belsnickel]

(01-15-2018, 07:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Roommate and I both had to take them he was an engineering major. I was secondary ed.

Yeah, I don't believe for one second that a program of study at any university is going to force potentially 9 credits of a program to be used like that. But that's the story you want to tell to fit your narrative, so have at.

[GMDino]

(01-15-2018, 06:55 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Wrong again.   This thread is about ending Temporary protective status.   They are here as temporary guests.   And that is ending.

They aren't "illegal"...carry on.  The look into how you "reason" is FASCINATING!

[StLucieBengal]

(01-15-2018, 07:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, I don't believe for one second that a program of study at any university is going to force potentially 9 credits of a program to be used like that. But that's the story you want to tell to fit your narrative, so have at.

UC and we were under quarters.

[Belsnickel]

(01-15-2018, 08:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: UC and we were under quarters.

Doesn't change my assertion.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-15-2018, 07:35 PM)Dill Wrote: You studied to be a teacher, potentially in a position to advise and otherwise influence young students life choices, and you concluded gen ed requirements were a waste?

What subjects were you proposing to teach?

I didn’t need art history. Irrelevant.

Physical Education was the program I was under at the time.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-15-2018, 08:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Doesn't change my assertion.

Well you never mind being wrong so why break the streak lol

[Belsnickel]

(01-15-2018, 08:35 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Well you never mind being wrong so why break the streak lol

I just like evidence to support claims, especially those that are extraordinary. This is why I didn't say you were lying, just that I don't believe you. Your claim is one that would not be normal and so unless I am presented with evidence to support it, I remain skeptical.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-15-2018, 08:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I just like evidence to support claims, especially those that are extraordinary. This is why I didn't say you were lying, just that I don't believe you. Your claim is one that would not be normal and so unless I am presented with evidence to support it, I remain skeptical.

Uhhh look at any general ed requirements. This was the case at UC in the mid 90’s

[Belsnickel]

(01-16-2018, 12:54 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Uhhh look at any general ed requirements. This was the case at UC in the mid 90’s

I've looked at many general education requirements. I work in higher education administration, after all. My wife handles accreditation information, which includes these specific requirements, for our university and we have spent time comparing other schools to where we work for reports. I have never seen a school with a requirement such as the one you have stated, which is why I consider your claim to be extraordinary and require evidence to support it before I believe it.

[GMDino]

(01-16-2018, 12:54 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Uhhh look at any general ed requirements.   This was the case at UC in the mid 90’s

https://www.uc.edu/gened/process.html

Seems more like they wanted to broaden student's minds and gave them multiple options and some just chose what they thought would be the easiest.

[Belsnickel]

(01-16-2018, 12:38 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.uc.edu/gened/process.html

Seems more like they wanted to broaden student's minds and gave them multiple options and some just chose what they thought would be the easiest.

UC has updated their general education requirements into the Breadth of Knowledge program relatively recently, if I understand correctly. That being said, it is common practice everywhere for general education requirements to be that there are required to be a certain number of classes taken from certain knowledge areas. A student may be required to take one fine arts class overall, but even that is not as common as taking something related to the arts, which could be fine or performing.

[Belsnickel]

The most frustrating this about this fiasco, to me anyway, is that it came during a meeting in which Congressional leadership was presenting a bi-partisan solution to all of this. This is a fact lost in all of this, that Democrats and Republicans compromised on a piece of legislation, and Trump blew it up during this meeting. This legislation could have avoided a government shutdown, so when it happens, it hangs 100% around the neck of Trump.

[GMDino]

(01-16-2018, 03:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The most frustrating this about this fiasco, to me anyway, is that it came during a meeting in which Congressional leadership was presenting a bi-partisan solution to all of this. This is a fact lost in all of this, that Democrats and Republicans compromised on a piece of legislation, and Trump blew it up during this meeting. This legislation could have avoided a government shutdown, so when it happens, it hangs 100% around the neck of Trump.

100% true.

But the rubes won't believe it because the dailywire/Fox/Breitbart didn't way it.