Talk:Mickey Mouse degrees

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article seems bias against the idea that some degrees are 'mickey mouse'.

I personally think that alot of degrees are mickey mouse but I wouldnt let that shine through into the article.

Im sure a degree in surf management can lead to very profitable careers in banking, insurance, the military, politics. Hey I mean surfing is even a pre-requisite for astronauts these days. Its a known fact that 101% of employers would take someone with a degree in surfing over one with a degree in econometrics to train as a city analyst any day of the week.

lol.

--lincs_geezer 17:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I can't imagine why someone who is even remotely interested in a career in politics or banking would take a degree in surf management, but that isn't really the point... I mean, a degree in econometrics (whatever that is) isn't going to be much good to you if you have your heart set on becoming a surfing instructor. 217.155.20.163 02:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Role of Media

Hi,

I made the last edits before 81.178.245.238. I agree with most of the edits - and am embarrassed by the errors in English :-) - but shouldn't some reference be made to the role of the media in this term? Or does this prevent a NPOV?

In the UK at least the summer is a very quiet time for news, so talk about Mickey Mouse degrees gives the "Moral outrage" brand of journalism something to talk about. Any media studies people out there know of any work that looks at news cycles, which might be applicable?

80.3.82.107 23:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

More than a year's gone by since you posed the question, so it would seem not. Mind you, I guess they're all pretty busy flipping burgers.Bedesboy 22:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reason of Criticisms

The article states : "One thing these courses share is that they are vocational, whereas degrees have traditionally been in purely academic subjects". I would argue the criticism of these courses is not that they are vocational, it is that they have no perceived academic rigour. There has been a long tradition of erudite vocational courses; Dentistry, Electronic Engineering, Computing, etc --Ade myers 17:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect to Mickey Mouse subjects

It would be better to use the more general one above. Skinnyweed 21:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Politics

Looking through the past edits I see that very recently politics was removed. Well done to whoever did that. Politics is a prestigious subject that has existed for many years, and to group it with subjects like wine studies and surfing is very insulting to politics students. I hope the edit is not reverted. 86.136.152.254

In a scientific and non-dysfunctional society - what possible role does politics have beyond supporting unscientific decision making processes? This all depends upon how you define politics. But to say that a politician would be inclined towards making more sound and valid judgements than a scientist is questionable....So in a way, Politics IS a Mickey Mouse subject!!!

Politicians aren't the ones who study politics... if they did, things would be different. Leushenko (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Appraisal of the Term

Generally, I think that most people would agree that, for example, courses in the Hard Sciences both develop common sense and, even if such courses didn't result in profitable careers, they would probably be worthwhile in and of themselves. The article provides examples of Mickey Mouse degrees – but does not why they might be Mickey Mouse degrees (of course, they don't help improve human living standards in any real or concrete way). People could argue that the sheer waste of human and capital resources that some “Mickey Mouse” degrees are associated with should be made illegal. I was especially shocked by the statement that there are “43 times as many Media Studies students in higher education as there are jobs available in the media annually”. Then why on earth does Higher Education both funding such degrees?

Perhaps counter-examples to Mickey Mouse degrees could be provided also. Explaining why Mathematics and Physics AREN'T Mickey Mouse degrees would be a good idea. For example, some people would call String Theory a Mickey Mouse subject as it probably has no direct application to real life, and some scientists even go so far as to state that String Theory isn't Science – yet most people wouldn't state that String Theory is a Mickey Mouse subject. Perhaps it would be a good idea to explain why some specialisms are a lesser waste of time than are others (there seem to be issues concerning the scientific foundations of economics here – Plumbing seems to be eminently more practical than either Mathematics or Media Studies.... : ).

ConcernedScientist 14:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Media Studies (as opposed to Media Production) students might not necessarily want to work in the media. Of course, although developing the article is a good idea, it must, absolutely must, be developed with reliable sources. I'm not sure some journalist on a rant in order to fill some blank space against a deadline is a reliable source here. Journalists are likely to have their own agenda (protect their expertise, and attend to the face of their readers). The JPStalk to me 16:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism of the Term

The term Mickey Mouse degree could probably be criticised (and is criticised) for not taking into account course contents (for example, a “Computing and Media Studies” course could end up using the same software as is studied within a CAD course, or a Design and Engineering course where advanced schematics are studied – using the same skills as are required to generated films like The Matrix). There are, of course many more reasons to criticise the term. The most obvious one being that NO-ONE HAS DEFINED WHAT A MICKEY MOUSE DEGREE MEANS.

There should probably be an etymology section. ConcernedScientist 14:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

ConcernedScientist 14:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

In my experience, there are four main categories of degree that are commonly described as Mickey Mouse, often based purely on the name of the degree rather than a detailed analysis of the course contents:
a) Socially trendy or liberal topics, e.g. Gender Studies, Racism Studies, Lesbian and Gay Studies
b) Easy to trivialise, e.g. Sports Studies ("anyone can kick a ball around"), Media Studies ("reading papers and watching telly")
c) Vague and non-specific, e.g. Decision-making Studies, General Studies, Study Studies
d) Very specific topics, e.g. Glass-blowing Studies, Playing The Xylophone One-Handed Studies
Other common indicators are: the word "studies" or "management" in the degree title; and a degree subject with a connection to popular culture, sports, or entertainment. But that's not a given by any means.
One could say that it's a catch-all term for a number of unrelated educational trends that the media have arbitrarily chosen to lump under one banner as part of a wider debate about academic standards. The journalists who constantly rail against these things rarely manage to define and pin down what exactly it is that they're criticising. 217.155.20.163 01:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)