They came to the University with many passions that did not quite add up to a degree. If they knew what interested them they could select a major. If they knew what was definitely of no interest they could remove that option from the list. But this being undeclared all the time left them positively uncertain.
Everybody in college had chosen to go to college. And everybody at this University had chosen this University - so it appeared they were in agreement and their selective difficulties behind them.
Actually, after choosing roommates, and housing, and/or Greek involvement; after choosing gym and library and dining hall preferences, and two more years, came the major decision, a major decision.
The simple question was what to major in. But then what was a major? For a major included not only a field of knowledge but a method of study; while different majors could know similar things, an engineer engineered, a philosopher philosophized, and a humanities student went to law school.
There was advising but the advising left problems. The problem with advisors was not that advisors were entering and leaving through the window to avoid students catching them in their office. The problem was that most advisors, or advising family and friends, had graduated with a single (major) or double (major major) and so lacked a comparative insight when discussing major possibilities.
There was however the received wisdom passed down to every generation like an unwanted debt that could be withdrawn for the major decision. This wisdom said college was an investment so be practical. The wisdom said the average person would switch his or her major and given you're average, hedge your bets and take general courses.
All this guidance deferred to the student's interest. This was in fact the problem to start. The advice seemed only to delay the question while the student was begging the question for an answer.
But the students were not without their wits and began to find themselves, using Google. For one thing, they learned that this type of incomplete information was typical of decisions. For another, they discovered psychological tests (Myers-Briggs), theories of choice (rational expectations) and philosophic concepts (incommensurability) that might resolve their dilemmas. Yet accepting the terms of one of these fields felt like ipso facto accepting the primacy of that field's assumptions. Inquisitive students were now faced with the additional choice of choosing what to study for assistance in helping them choose what to study.
Meanwhile there was the interdisciplinary major. The interdisciplinary major, although appealing to the undeclared for its breadth, required a detailed outline and measure of specificity that would not do for the multi-interested or ambivalent. So instead students checked out the departments' websites, which were redesigned and beautiful.
It seemed the main role of the major was taking a bulk of courses weighing about thirty credits. To get a real crack at major activity, the student needed to take some core courses. This was almost always not possible. If not barred by a year limit, core courses were typically limited in class size - and upperclassmen were given priority to register. What was recommended for the underclassmen were introductory or 'survey' courses, courses whose scope and difficulty were usually not indicative of major activity but rather gave a useful 'survey' of the discipline.
There was also the matter of prerequisites. At some schools, every time a student tried to declare a major the professors raised the number of prerequisites. Fortunately that was not the case here, but prerequisites were nevertheless troubling. For students with academic certainty the prerequisites were nothing but a small shoe-tying stop on their path to majordom. Still, for the undeclared and overwhelmed the prerequisite came as the major decision in disguise: Prerequisites ensured that students dedicated a large portion of their schedules to taking the requirements for a major.
As the students took courses they finally came closer to their major decision - not because they gained resolve but because semesters were passing.
There was only one catch, which specified that the only way to glimpse the nature of a major was to declare that major. A major consisted of major advisors, major seminars, major research and the possibility of a thesis - activities all restricted to majors. If you were undeclared you would have no access to major activities; once declared, you would have no means of comparison. The undeclared had flexibility but ignorance; to the declared was knowledge at the price of time given to requirements. The major decision always was a flight in the dark with an eye toward an unknown target.
That's some catch.
Aaron Eisen is an opinion editor for The Cavalier Daily. This year is the 50th anniversary of Joseph Heller's Catch-22.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 2 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 4 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
