Do you think certain 'soft' subjects should be abolished?
Scroll to see replies
I don't think any "soft" subject should be abolished. The fact that the subjects are already there means that people have been studying them and that's all that really matters.
Education should be an opportunity for people to expand their knowledge in an areas that they are interested in, rather than just an opportunity to get to the next level ( i.e. gcse's to A levels to Uni). So whilst A level Photography might not be highly regarded by an RG uni, or GCSE Food tech by a 6th form college, the fact remains that those courses can instil skills and passion in students. Not everybody wants to have a STEM job- some want to be photographers, cooks etc.
Education should be an opportunity for people to expand their knowledge in an areas that they are interested in, rather than just an opportunity to get to the next level ( i.e. gcse's to A levels to Uni). So whilst A level Photography might not be highly regarded by an RG uni, or GCSE Food tech by a 6th form college, the fact remains that those courses can instil skills and passion in students. Not everybody wants to have a STEM job- some want to be photographers, cooks etc.
Hey I did food tech at A level and I enjoyed it. And I wouldn't call it a ****ing soft subject given the amount of work I had to do in that.
Should it be abolished? No. Believe it or not, it can be useful if food science is a career path you want to go down.
I'm really getting sick of the STEM elitism on here. Just let people do what they want to do. A levels like food tech don't stop you getting into good universities- I managed to get into a top 15 university with it. So there.
Should it be abolished? No. Believe it or not, it can be useful if food science is a career path you want to go down.
I'm really getting sick of the STEM elitism on here. Just let people do what they want to do. A levels like food tech don't stop you getting into good universities- I managed to get into a top 15 university with it. So there.
Original post by ishan95
All subjects are needed. They keep a lot of the world that aren't scientifically minded occupied.
Not really this is partly the problem. For example using the example of sociology, why do you need a degree to study society? The Enlightenment thinkers sat in their arm chairs and developed some of the greatest political theories the world has ever seen, you won't get that from a chemist or biologist.
For God's sake... Have you people not realised that a large percentage of the population have other interests besides sciences, maths etc. I am one of those people. I'm not sorry that such subjects don't appeal to you but it doesn't mean that they should be abolished just because they don't pique your interests.
They may be seen as "soft subjects" but think of it this way: if we were forced to do maths and sciences we aren't passionate about at AS level +, the results would just end up being awful... Not to mention it would bring down the national average and make us look less intelligent in the eyes of other countries.
We would have a even larger amount of students missing school because they are being forced to do subjects which they don't want to do. The entire point of Alevels and all other variations of qualifications including degrees is to encourage variation.
'Soft subjects' are the subjects that help kick start knowledge in another field rather than the likes of Geography, History and whatever else because we have freedom of choice that we didn't have at GCSE because we still had to do CORE subjects.
If we didn't have Drama at Alevel or as a degree, we probably wouldn't have a large percentage of our culture because they wouldn't have the knowledge they would have gained through education. We wouldn't even have plays, TV shows or movies because we simply wouldn't have the actors or any of the backstage crew (due to the lack of skill) Despite popular belief, acting isn't easy and it's something that actually has to be learned. Some examples: Woody Allen, Adam Sandler, Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, Phillip Hoffman.
Don't criticise a subject because it doesn't pique your interest. In fact it just makes you look like a jerk because you don't recognise that other people have different passions compared to you. Just put a sock in it.
They may be seen as "soft subjects" but think of it this way: if we were forced to do maths and sciences we aren't passionate about at AS level +, the results would just end up being awful... Not to mention it would bring down the national average and make us look less intelligent in the eyes of other countries.
We would have a even larger amount of students missing school because they are being forced to do subjects which they don't want to do. The entire point of Alevels and all other variations of qualifications including degrees is to encourage variation.
'Soft subjects' are the subjects that help kick start knowledge in another field rather than the likes of Geography, History and whatever else because we have freedom of choice that we didn't have at GCSE because we still had to do CORE subjects.
If we didn't have Drama at Alevel or as a degree, we probably wouldn't have a large percentage of our culture because they wouldn't have the knowledge they would have gained through education. We wouldn't even have plays, TV shows or movies because we simply wouldn't have the actors or any of the backstage crew (due to the lack of skill) Despite popular belief, acting isn't easy and it's something that actually has to be learned. Some examples: Woody Allen, Adam Sandler, Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, Phillip Hoffman.
Don't criticise a subject because it doesn't pique your interest. In fact it just makes you look like a jerk because you don't recognise that other people have different passions compared to you. Just put a sock in it.
The one thing I dislike about TSR is the constant debate around STEM vs non-STEM, pointless and soft subjects etc. Give it a rest, people 
my opinion is simple: let people do what the heck they want to do in terms of their education. Is it harming you? No. It's quite ridiculous the way some students believe they're totally superior because they study a certain subject 
Posted from TSR Mobile
my opinion is simple: let people do what the heck they want to do in terms of their education. Is it harming you? No. It's quite ridiculous the way some students believe they're totally superior because they study a certain subject Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Changing Skies
The one thing I dislike about TSR is the constant debate around STEM vs non-STEM, pointless and soft subjects etc. Give it a rest, people my opinion is simple: let people do what the heck they want to do in terms of their education. Is it harming you? No. It's quite ridiculous the way some students believe they're totally superior because they study a certain subject
Posted from TSR Mobile
my opinion is simple: let people do what the heck they want to do in terms of their education. Is it harming you? No. It's quite ridiculous the way some students believe they're totally superior because they study a certain subject Posted from TSR Mobile
Technically, yes, financially.
Original post by Solivagant
Technically, yes, financially.
Barely
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Changing Skies
The fact that people go to do "soft" subjects and then don't pay back their student loans ups the interest and means I have to pay back miles more.
So yeah, that's the only objection I have with it. Oh, and the fact that we'd be better off if some of these people spent 4 years learning a craft or becoming a skilled labourer or something instead.
Original post by Solivagant
The fact that people go to do "soft" subjects and then don't pay back their student loans ups the interest and means I have to pay back miles more.
So yeah, that's the only objection I have with it. Oh, and the fact that we'd be better off if some of these people spent 4 years learning a craft or becoming a skilled labourer or something instead.
So yeah, that's the only objection I have with it. Oh, and the fact that we'd be better off if some of these people spent 4 years learning a craft or becoming a skilled labourer or something instead.
Maybe you should have chosen a soft subject then
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Edminzodo
It is a truth universally acknowledged ( to coin a phrase) that Shakespeare is one of the geniuses of the country - has said more on most topics important to the human race than any one else and said it better than anyone else - and he decided to devote his life to Drama in the days when it really wasn't a top career move.
Did he get it wrong? Should he have studied maths? or is what he has written of such value to us all that it was the best possible use of his mind and time?
People are forgetting that not everybody is the 'best and brightest' and naturally gifted at 'hard' subjects. If all we did was science and maths then I probably wouldn't be attending anything education-related at all.
GCSEs are supposed to introduce you to a wider scope of learning and to give you a 'taster' of what there is to specialise in. Then, come A-levels, the aim is to do what you're good at. People say not to specialise too early lest you make the 'wrong choice'. But if you know what you're good at, and you take three 'hard' subjects that you absolutely detest, you are literally abolishing the point of further education.
You can't be good at everything. You absolutely do not have to attend a RG university or any university at all. You can specialise in whatever you like. Just because some people are good at science and maths doesn't go to say they'd also excel at sociology and drama just because they're 'easier'. They're in completely different fields and require different mindsets. It's not a build-up of subjects, e.g. drama and media at the bottom, leading up to the 'elite' science and maths at the top. Being good at the 'best' doesn't guarantee you being good at them all. They're not 'soft' subjects, they're subjects which require you to have a genuine interest -- and to some extent a natural talent -- in them, just like anything else.
GCSEs are supposed to introduce you to a wider scope of learning and to give you a 'taster' of what there is to specialise in. Then, come A-levels, the aim is to do what you're good at. People say not to specialise too early lest you make the 'wrong choice'. But if you know what you're good at, and you take three 'hard' subjects that you absolutely detest, you are literally abolishing the point of further education.
You can't be good at everything. You absolutely do not have to attend a RG university or any university at all. You can specialise in whatever you like. Just because some people are good at science and maths doesn't go to say they'd also excel at sociology and drama just because they're 'easier'. They're in completely different fields and require different mindsets. It's not a build-up of subjects, e.g. drama and media at the bottom, leading up to the 'elite' science and maths at the top. Being good at the 'best' doesn't guarantee you being good at them all. They're not 'soft' subjects, they're subjects which require you to have a genuine interest -- and to some extent a natural talent -- in them, just like anything else.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by 2en1
Woahh, yeah! How did you get that from the minimal description I gave? :O
Wow get over yourselves. Everyone likes different things, end of. Medicine and maths isn't for everyone. If everyone did STEM then there who would cook your dinner in Pizza Hut and who would drive your bus. Geniuses.
Original post by thechemistress
I do think maths is really important though. I think everybody should do some form of maths up to the age of 18. Whether that is A-Level maths or some other foundation maths qualification is irrelevant- even the tiniest bit of maths will help. I was watching a YouTube video the other day and the youtubers couldn't even work out 7 × 8 ?!?! It's scary that such a large proportion of the population can't do basic maths.
Why? Don't get me wrong I like maths, but people shouldn't be made to do it beyond GCSE level. Maybe they should get more help at GCSE, but it would be unnecessary for them to do A level maths which just wouldn't come into play in their day to day and in working lives (for people who don't like maths and don't want a career involving it).
Is psychology a soft subject?
I don't know about the other subjects, but psychology is a really important field. It definitely shouldn't be abolished. And no, I'm not planning on doing it at university but it has been a good choice for me at AS level- it's something I can actually apply to real life situations.
I don't know about the other subjects, but psychology is a really important field. It definitely shouldn't be abolished. And no, I'm not planning on doing it at university but it has been a good choice for me at AS level- it's something I can actually apply to real life situations.
Original post by Malorys ballsack
Psychology (the study of behaviour? pfft that's what we have biology for
And biology is just chemistry, chemistry just physics and physics just applied maths (which itself is a branch of logic which in turn is associated with philosophy). Yes, whatever. This is old news. Don't see how it means psychology shouldn't be studied at all. I don't care what you call it (psychology or just a specific branch of biology), but the study of behaviour, psychopathology etc. etc. Is without question important.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Typhoon235
Hey I did food tech at A level and I enjoyed it. And I wouldn't call it a ****ing soft subject given the amount of work I had to do in that.
Should it be abolished? No. Believe it or not, it can be useful if food science is a career path you want to go down.
I'm really getting sick of the STEM elitism on here. Just let people do what they want to do. A levels like food tech don't stop you getting into good universities- I managed to get into a top 15 university with it. So there.
Should it be abolished? No. Believe it or not, it can be useful if food science is a career path you want to go down.
I'm really getting sick of the STEM elitism on here. Just let people do what they want to do. A levels like food tech don't stop you getting into good universities- I managed to get into a top 15 university with it. So there.
Was it part of the offer?
Original post by daisychain_
Why? Don't get me wrong I like maths, but people shouldn't be made to do it beyond GCSE level. Maybe they should get more help at GCSE, but it would be unnecessary for them to do A level maths which just wouldn't come into play in their day to day and in working lives (for people who don't like maths and don't want a career involving it).
No, they don't have to do maths A-level. A basic maths course or something like that is what I was thinking of.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Are single-sex schools a thing of the past? Should they be abolished or not?
- Which A level subjects would go well with english lit?
- A-Level choices
- A Level Options PLZ HELP
- Help me with my a level choices to study law (at Oxford)
- 2 soft a levels with a strong one
- A Level choices + combinations?
- Best 4th A level to go with maths,further maths and economics?
- Mature Student.
- Would taking A level film studies be fine?
- Why am I constipated ?
- Post-College Question: Psychology, Biology and Art
- Personal Statement Procrastination and Dilemma
- What Alevels should I choose?
- RE or Business GCSE?
- What A levels should I choose?
- Kallisto's Saturday Question: Fire Work
- Questions about computer science degrees and maths a-level.
- Is business, economics and maths good a level options ?
- should I either pick biology or sociology a-level?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
