Academic experience hurt by north-south division

  Victoria Tai Tai is a second-year
microbiology and history student who is vice president of the
Society of Automotive Engineering. She believes that UCLA racing
and design are part of a complete nutritional diet. Email her at
[email protected].
Click Here for more articles by Victoria Tai

The inspiration for this column came to me countless times while
attending this school. It came from family, old friends and new
acquaintances alike. It’s the tendency to categorize people
as “North Campus” (liberal arts and history junkies) or
“South Campus” (science and engineering
brainiacs).

Sitting down to dinner dinner with a bunch of friends, the
foolproof conversation starter would go around: “So,
what’s your major?” I would then respond,
“Biology and history.” Biology and history! Who’s
ever heard of that? And for the most part, people would be
genuinely shocked, if not impressed by a double major. “Wow,
a North Campus and a South Campus student? What are you,
crazy?”

No, I’m simply fascinated by both fields, although they
have nearly nothing in common. Surprised by the diversity? You
shouldn’t be. A person with a wide range of capabilities and
interests should not be anything new. In fact, most of the student
population here are those kinds of people.

As a student of two opposite interests, I find myself
befriending groups of both types. But despite their differences,
they have one similar characteristic. They are both unwilling to
profess any interest in other disciplines. In fact, they revel in
their specialization of one distinct field. And while that’s
wonderful, the things they say are troubling.

Too many times, I’ve heard people excusing themselves from
analyzing a math problem or writing a decent paper on the basis
that they are “North Campus” or “South
Campus.” It’s as if upon having determined a
specialized discipline, abilities in all other disciplines
crumble.

Somehow, upon entering a fine university people lose the
versatility they had in high school, the same one that got them
admitted in the first place. But I don’t buy that.

The way I figure, the majority of people here ought to be coping
with if not also seeking to understand, the discrepancies between
unrelated fields. After all, weren’t we admitted based on the
fact that we were able to excel in a wide range of subjects?

Remember the infamous buzzword, “well rounded?”

  Illustration by ERICA PINTO/Daily Bruin We all had to
write wonderful personal statements for our application. Many
students here were valedictorians or salutatorians in high school.
Many more were in the top 10 percent of their class. How is it that
the students who mastered six or seven different subjects in high
school lose all their academic versatility within a few years?

There’s widespread indolence on this campus and it’s
disgusting. Even with the wide variety of student groups, there is
little participation. There are probably more who prefer lingering
in the campus arcade than enlisting in community service. There are
probably more who would rather go to the beach during lectures than
involve themselves in the debate team. And perhaps there are more
who would choose playing video games and watching movies over
exercising their bodies.

It’s time to compare the intended population the
university recruits versus what students become after being
admitted.

The intended population demonstrates promise and vigor; they
were active go-getters in high school. They were not people who
shied away from challenges or situations but rather, tackled
different subjects to the best of their ability. The question is,
what happened?

Now, don’t misunderstand me, I do believe that people
should specialize in their respective fields. That’s what
distinguishes elite professionals. But people should also embrace
multifaceted talents and not ignore them.

My skin crawls when I hear the excuse “I don’t do
papers; I’m an engineer,” or “Math problems are
for science brains; I gave up on that as soon as I got into
college.” Give me a break. These are the people who scored As
in calculus and English in high school. These are the people who
rocked the SAT or ACT. Yet seemingly, they are the ones who
discourage the mingling of different fields.

Students are automatically categorized based on their major. And
perhaps that’s for good reason. Certainly, some trends do
justify these comments.

Life science and chemistry students tend to focus less on
creative arts, whereas liberal arts students tend to focus more on
expression. Computer science and engineering students generally
tend to master computational mathematics while art and film
students tend to be more involved with interpretive visuals.

But at the same time, the automatic categorization and confining
of people to their respective majors can be debilitating.

The stereotype causes us to associate with only certain types of
people. It causes us to define ourselves by a fashion that is
simply wrong. Who made up these classifications anyway? Who is to
say that math students do not enjoy classical theater and
psychology students aren’t interested in Chicana/o
studies?

As people exclude themselves from disciplines and groups, they
fail to fully take advantage of the college experience. When they
renounce groups, they also exclude themselves from other people.
These are people who can provide powerful connections or referrals
in the future.

All of us are in this school based on our diversity,
versatility, and flexibility. It’s disturbing how intolerant
and rejecting some are of people in other majors. I’ve heard
more comments and criticisms of certain majors here than I do of
USC ““ and that’s just ridiculous.

It’s not only the rejection of individual disciplines
involved in this negative categorization, but general personalities
and appearances as well. It’s insulting when I dress up
nicely and someone says, “You don’t look like a South
Campus major today.” What’s that supposed to mean? I
feel like saying, “You idiot, science girls like to look
attractive and we care about hygiene just like anybody
else!”

Right now solutions to this problem don’t look promising.
The roots of stereotyping and classifying are an innate function of
human logic. It is difficult to re-program this logic because
people have historically made generalizations of groups based on
their perceptions of common characteristics.

The fact that the university is lowering required general
education units doesn’t help. Now, students are encouraged to
graduate quickly and take fewer courses that don’t pertain to
their major.

Although this alleviates the university’s financial
pressure for Tidal Wave II ““ the expected increase of about
60,000 students over the next decade ““ it discourages
students from exploring different fields. Because of this decision,
some students may never find that one random subject that appeals
to them and invigorates their college experience.

The only way students can diversify their education is through
self-motivation. That includes taking extra G.E. classes that
“don’t count” or joining campus clubs. Like the
high school days when we needed to take initiative to get ourselves
into college, we must continue that here.

In my college years I’d like to pursue a wide range of
studies and I’d like my colleagues to embrace that ideal too.
That’s what makes people interesting and intriguing.

It makes me cringe when people automatically reject the unknown
and take the easy way out. I thought the intellectual setting of a
world-class university would abolish that.