PDA

View Full Version : Sociology Major



Sandman
10-29-2009, 05:15 PM
Just read the following comment to the headlined Recruiting Rules Changes article:

"I am eagerly awaiting the proposal from these moral paragons about academic reforms. I'm sure Coach Cal, Bob Huggins, and Coach K (yes you too, coach K. I know why so many of your players major in sociology) will be demanding that players go to class, stop taking Jim Harrick classes, and stop majoring in basket-weaving. These coaches are making a statement, and that statement is: "No to shadiness that makes coaching harder, but yes to shadiness that makes coaching easier." Not hypocritical at all. And way to call them out for being huge hypocrites, ESPN. I'm sure Dickie V will be grilling coach cal about his atrocious academic standards during the very first UK game that ESPN covers."

I have read other similar snide comments about Duke players taking "basket weaving" type Sociology courses, and I am curious. When I studied engineering at Duke, a few easy electives was something eagerly sought by most of us, but I don't remember Sociology as having a reputation for having "crip courses".

Has this changed? Is Sociology now in the "basket weaving" category? Or is this just "academic penis envy" from the Duke haters out there? I would appreciate comments from those with knowledge of the current state of Duke academics.

speedevil2001
10-29-2009, 05:18 PM
Just read the following comment to the headlined Recruiting Rules Changes article:

"I am eagerly awaiting the proposal from these moral paragons about academic reforms. I'm sure Coach Cal, Bob Huggins, and Coach K (yes you too, coach K. I know why so many of your players major in sociology) will be demanding that players go to class, stop taking Jim Harrick classes, and stop majoring in basket-weaving. These coaches are making a statement, and that statement is: "No to shadiness that makes coaching harder, but yes to shadiness that makes coaching easier." Not hypocritical at all. And way to call them out for being huge hypocrites, ESPN. I'm sure Dickie V will be grilling coach cal about his atrocious academic standards during the very first UK game that ESPN covers."

I have read other similar snide comments about Duke players taking "basket weaving" type Sociology courses, and I am curious. When I studied engineering at Duke, a few easy electives was something eagerly sought by most of us, but I don't remember Sociology as having a reputation for having "crip courses".

Has this changed? Is Sociology now in the "basket weaving" category? Or is this just "academic penis envy" from the Duke haters out there? I would appreciate comments from those with knowledge of the current state of Duke academics.

nothing wrong with players taking less rigorous classes or majoring in sociology. btw when u studied engineering at duke, did you play for the duke basketball team too?

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-29-2009, 05:23 PM
nothing wrong with players taking less rigorous classes or majoring in sociology. btw when u studied engineering at duke, did you play for the duke basketball team too?

What's easy to some is difficult to others. I've heard some science majors talk about how difficult their language or social sciences courses were while language and social majors speak of math and sciences as more difficult.. ... ...

allenmurray
10-29-2009, 05:23 PM
I did my undergraduate work in Sociology at a university far less rigorous than Duke. In my courses within my major I was expected to read and be able to critically analyze works by Peter Berger, Max Weber, Erving Goffman, Claude Levi-Strauss (not the blue jeans guy), Karl Marx, C. Wright Mills, Alexis de Tocqueville, Emile Durkheim, and others. My reading responsibilities at the University of Maryland (which does have a very strong Sociology department) were greater than most of my friends in other majors. I've never understood the disdain in which the major is held. Are there easy courses in Sociology? Sure. Is it an easy major? Hardly.

Taco
10-29-2009, 05:51 PM
I took an Intro to Sociology class as an elective (Computer Science degree, not at Duke). It was pretty easy and very interesting, so when I needed more humanities I registered for a 2000 level class. After a week I realized it would require a ton of time and work, and dropped it for a 4000 level psych class which seemed a lot easier ... shrug.

El_Diablo
10-29-2009, 06:08 PM
I'm guessing the person who posted the comment did not attend Duke and did not major in sociology. The two of those together would suggest that s/he doesn't know what s/he is really talking about, and is thus merely taking a swipe at Duke out of envy.

I've learned that it's best not to read the ESPN user comments relating to Duke. But, FWIW, here are the current players' majors, per goduke.com:

Jordan Davidson - Psychology (currently enrolled in master of management studies program at Fuqua)
Jon Scheyer - History
Brian Zoubek - History
Lance Thomas - Visual Arts
Nolan Smith - African and African-American Studies
Kyle Singler - Visual Arts
Steve Johnson - Economics
Olek Czyz - Undeclared
Casey Peters - double major - Economics & Environmental Sciences and Policy (also, National Merit Scholar semifinalist and scored a perfect 800 on the math SAT)
Miles Plumlee - Undeclared (but was high school salutatorian)
Seth Curry - Undeclared (but was high school honor student)
Mason Plumlee - Undeclared (but was high school Wetmore Scholar, whatever that means)
Ryan Kelly - Undeclared (but was high school honor student and National Merit Semifinalist)
Andre Dawkins - Undeclared (but was high school honor student with several AP classes, fourth place finish in the ACSI Math Olympics)

So, yeah, we have a grand total of ZERO sociology majors on our team. And for the people who haven't declared yet, they are pretty smart kids who did well in high school. Probably better than whoever made that silly comment on ESPN.

JaMarcus Russell
10-29-2009, 06:20 PM
I took a few sociology classes at Duke, and they were a little easier than classes in other departments, but it wasn't really an incredible drop-off.

Grouping K with Huggins and Calipari is an embarrassing comparison on the commentator's part, and there haven't even been that many players majoring in sociology recently. I am sure there are far more egregious examples at just about every school in the country (especially those that have general studies).

FWIW, the juniors and seniors on the team are majoring in the following subjects: History, African American Studies, Economics, Environmental Science, and Visual Arts. The players from last year majored in International and Comparative Studies, Political Science, Psychology.

Yet another myth.

Bluedog
10-29-2009, 06:30 PM
Miles Plumlee - Undeclared (but was high school salutatorian)

Miles has indicated he's planning to major in history, FWIW. He originally enrolled in Pratt.

I took one sociology course at Duke - intro to sociology first semester, freshman year. (The last year that Duke automatically enrolled first semester freshman in courses based on their "preferences" as opposed to giving them the choice of registering online like everybody else in the school). No tests, just a lot of papers. Not terribly easy, not terribly difficult.

But, yes, as shown above, our basketball players major in a fairly wide variety of subjects. Frankly, it's amazing that they can balance Duke basketball and academics. The time commitment that basketball requires is astounding, and keeping up with work would not be easy, IMO. That's all I'm going to contribute to this thread....

ScreechTDX1847
10-29-2009, 06:34 PM
At my university (not Duke), Sociology did have easier classes but it is only by the nature of the major. Its reading and fact learning; not much application at an undergraduate level. I was on a path to double major in it but stopped as I became jaded that it wasn't actually a science and couldn't really ever be empirically tested (in the way other sciences can).

yancem
10-29-2009, 06:53 PM
I was a sociology major and for the most part I thought the courses I took were relatively easy but sociology makes sense to me. It is how my brain works. I can't tell you how often I have had conversation with people about the inter-workings of people and society where the other party was completely clueless. These people would likely found sociology at least frustrating if not difficult.

I get made fun of all the time by friends that ended up with a BS degree because they think sociology is a joke but I use what I learned in everyday life. Many people with "hard" majors can't make that claim. In the end, sociology is a liberal arts degree. Looking at the list of majors offered by Duke, I can't image it is any easier than art history, English, history, literature, medieval & renaissance studies, polysci, or religion. And then there are a few majors that I'm not even sure I know what they are: classical civilization, international comparative studies, program II , and visual arts.

CEF1959
10-29-2009, 07:04 PM
Weird that he would single out sociology anyway. I'd bet at every school there are courses and disciplines that are generally thought to be easier than others. But making generalizations about specific fields of study seems pretty bold. I don't know why sociology necessarily would be any more prone to lax standards than any other social science.

A lot of football players at a lot of schools major in criminal justice or speech communication. Maybe those are slack majors at their schools. I can't say. Or maybe these young men are preparing themselves for careers in law enforcement or careers that require good communication skills. It seems unfair to assume they just want to ball without being distracted by education. A young person might major in sociology because he or she finds it interesting and values a good liberal arts education.

Note, by the way, the number of Duke players who are majoring in history and similar subjects. Those are courses that place an emphasis on reading and paper-writing, two things that can be done in airplanes, airports and hotel rooms.

west_coast_devil
10-29-2009, 07:06 PM
I was a Poly-Sci major before entering law school (not Duke), but during my undergrad studies I took a 300 level Sociology course; Sociology of Religion. I have to be honest, it was one of the top 3 most difficult classes I took while in college, period...lots of difficult analytical papers. Other then that I really enjoyed my other sociology courses, not difficult but not that easy.

That being said, I have the upmost respect for any college player (especially in D1) who embark in a college major, go to class, engages in the material and is able to balance that with the expectations of the sport. That snide comment about Duke players being soc majors is flat out stupid.

throatybeard
10-29-2009, 08:28 PM
I was a sociology major and for the most part I thought the courses I took were relatively easy but sociology makes sense to me. It is how my brain works. I can't tell you how often I have had conversation with people about the inter-workings of people and society where the other party was completely clueless. These people would likely found sociology at least frustrating if not difficult.

I get made fun of all the time by friends that ended up with a BS degree because they think sociology is a joke but I use what I learned in everyday life. Many people with "hard" majors can't make that claim. In the end, sociology is a liberal arts degree. Looking at the list of majors offered by Duke, I can't image it is any easier than art history, English, history, literature, medieval & renaissance studies, polysci, or religion. And then there are a few majors that I'm not even sure I know what they are: classical civilization, international comparative studies, program II , and visual arts.

Well, obviously, if you don't know what it is, it must be worthless.

I detest these threads. They inevitably involve people trashing the Humanities without knowing what they're talking about.

Exiled_Devil
10-29-2009, 08:32 PM
Not to drop down into the b-school sidebar again, but isn't sociology where the Markets and management certificate officially 'lives'?

IIRC, J-will was a sociology major, and his 3 year graduation still gets some people riled up.

JaMarcus Russell
10-29-2009, 08:49 PM
IIRC, J-will was a sociology major, and his 3 year graduation still gets some people riled up.

That never made sense to me. Assuming he took 2 summer classes each session in the summer, he essentially took 12 classes in each of his first two years. That leaves him with 10 classes for his junior year (and one summer session). It isn't that hard to do, and J-Will is a smart guy. He graduated with a 3.3 while playing basketball.

JG Nothing
10-29-2009, 09:03 PM
Weird that he would single out sociology anyway. I'd bet at every school there are courses and disciplines that are generally thought to be easier than others. But making generalizations about specific fields of study seems pretty bold. I don't know why sociology necessarily would be any more prone to lax standards than any other social science.


Generally speaking, courses are hard or easy because of the instructor. I could design a basketweaving course that is just as difficult and time consuming as anything else. Student-athletes often know which instructors are easy or demanding.

tallguy
10-29-2009, 09:16 PM
Not to drop down into the b-school sidebar again, but isn't sociology where the Markets and management certificate officially 'lives'?


Bingo...and I'll say this, sociology classes at Duke aren't cakewalks. The level of difficulty depends on your tolerance of reading several reams of dense material.

YourLandlord
10-29-2009, 09:16 PM
I detest these threads. They inevitably involve people trashing the Humanities without knowing what they're talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBIHrA4Q3JI#t=1m56s

weezie
10-29-2009, 09:21 PM
Ya, well, didn't Hansblah major in communications?:rolleyes:

Edouble
10-30-2009, 02:37 AM
Sociology 10 was known as an easy class when I was at Duke. I never took it. IIRC, my friend was in it at the same time that Wojo was taking it.

cspan37421
10-30-2009, 07:58 AM
If you dig further into the history books, I think you'll find that sociology was once a popular major among Duke basketball players. I can't speak for its difficulty - I never took a soc. course - but was a 2nd major in psych. As someone above described sociology, it was not that difficult, but very interesting.

If one is going to raise suspcions about academic integrity, one should be equally concerned with majors for which the main grades are based on papers, not tests, because of the ease with which they can be ghost-written (one needn't rely on term paper banks).

Having said all that I think that it is unreasonable to expect college athletes to churn out the same amount of work - and quality - as regular students. The time commitment to the team, and the exhaustion that comes with it, takes its toll on the balance of the waking day. A college athlete that earns good to very good grades with the same workload as a non-athlete is truly an extraordinary person both on the field and in the class.

JasonEvans
10-30-2009, 10:40 AM
1) At an elite academic institution like Duke, there is no such thing as an easy major. Is it possible to get a degree from Duke while taking a less rigorous course load than some other students? Of course. But, is it possible to get a degree from Duke while not putting in some serious academic work and learning a heck of a lot? No way. This is just an absurd argument.

2) What on Earth are we doing debating the merits of a comment by a random rambler on an ESNP article? It is not like some mildly reputable journalist made this comment. This is ridiculous.

--Jason "I like that some have noted that it is possible for some people to find science and math easy and Soc to be hard... duuuh!" Evans

uh_no
10-30-2009, 10:46 AM
Having said all that I think that it is unreasonable to expect college athletes to churn out the same amount of work - and quality - as regular students.



That statement is so wholly out of line of reality its incredible. Athletes are required to do the same amount of work, and it is quite possible. There are plenty of non scholarship athletes who's activities take up as much time as the basketball team's practices.....should they not be required to do quality school work? Freshman year, i was on a club sports team which demanded about 5 hours per day.....should I not have to do school work? I was away 5 weekends a semester.....is that an excuse?

Athletes are required to, and fully capable of being exemplary students. As an engineer, I have been in classes with people on the swimming, cross country, and fencing teams. Are their schedules any less rigorous than the basketball team? How, then, do they manage to fulfill the such stringent requirements of being engineers?

Athletes are students, and in the classroom (at duke at least), they are the same as everyone else.

sagegrouse
10-30-2009, 10:47 AM
(a) There are no sociology majors on the Duke basketball team.

(b) If everyone on the team majored in sociology, so what?

(c) What cares what that idiot has to say, anyway?

sagegrouse
'Planning a trip to downtown San Francisco, even though the Bay Bridge is closed!'

allenmurray
10-30-2009, 10:48 AM
--Jason "I like that some have noted that it is possible for some people to find science and math easy and Soc to be hard... duuuh!" Evans

I have a friend locally who did both his undergraduate studies and medical school at Duke. His undergraduate degree was in engineering. When I asked him one time why he chose that for ugrad he said becasue he needed good grades to get into med school and engineering was an "easy" major. He also fully admits he would have found any of the social sciences or humanities to be incredibly difficult.

flyingdutchdevil
10-30-2009, 01:11 PM
I really have no opinion on this subject, because what players study is their business and no one elses.

But I will say that when I was at Duke from 03-07, sociology was known as the 'jock' major. Did a lot of jocks take it? No idea. But every school has a 'jock' major, or a major that you can tailor to make it fairly easy (at least in comparison with other majors). I'm guessing that's where the author came up with the link of Duke and sociology.

Bluedog
10-30-2009, 01:27 PM
I really have no opinion on this subject, because what players study is their business and no one elses.

But I will say that when I was at Duke from 03-07, sociology was known as the 'jock' major. Did a lot of jocks take it? No idea. But every school has a 'jock' major, or a major that you can tailor to make it fairly easy (at least in comparison with other majors). I'm guessing that's where the author came up with the link of Duke and sociology.

Here's a USA Today article regarding what they call, clustering (i.e. more than 25% of a team majoring in the same subject).

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2008-11-18-majors-graphic_N.htm

Duke basketball isn't listed. Duke football is with 40.7% majoring in sociology (sample size of 27) and Duke baseball is listed with 33.3% majoring in history (sample size is only 9 though, so kinda worthless).

And another:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2003-11-18-atheletes-majors_x.htm


Players at some NCAA Division I schools are more likely than other students at their schools to major in certain disciplines.

Duke - Sociology
Number and percentage of football players in major = 14 of 43 (32.6%)
Number and percentage of all undergraduates in major = 123 of 3,821 (3.2%)

Obviously, this is using different years. The former is 2008, the latter is 2003. And since when did Duke only have 3,800 undergrads? Obviously, the data is incomplete.

So, yes, it's clearly true that certain majors are popular among sports teams at various colleges across the country. It's not unique to Duke. And Duke's basketball team doesn't really even show clustering like that of many institutions...And, honestly, I don't really care even if they did. Some schools have a general studies major that seems BS, but Duke doesn't have anything like that.

Here's another article for your reading pleasure:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2008-11-18-majors-cover_N.htm

jyu181
10-30-2009, 01:35 PM
And since when did Duke only have 3,800 undergrads? Obviously, the data is incomplete.

They're probably not counting freshmen and other students who have yet to declare a major.

Bluedog
10-30-2009, 01:37 PM
They're probably not counting freshmen and other students who have yet to declare a major.

Ah, duh, good point.

Kfanarmy
10-30-2009, 02:18 PM
I'm guessing the person who posted the comment did not attend Duke and did not major in sociology. The two of those together would suggest that s/he doesn't know what s/he is really talking about, and is thus merely taking a swipe at Duke out of envy.

I've learned that it's best not to read the ESPN user comments relating to Duke. But, FWIW, here are the current players' majors, per goduke.com:

Jordan Davidson - Psychology (currently enrolled in master of management studies program at Fuqua)
Jon Scheyer - History
Brian Zoubek - History
Lance Thomas - Visual Arts
Nolan Smith - African and African-American Studies
Kyle Singler - Visual Arts
Steve Johnson - Economics
Olek Czyz - Undeclared
Casey Peters - double major - Economics & Environmental Sciences and Policy (also, National Merit Scholar semifinalist and scored a perfect 800 on the math SAT)
Miles Plumlee - Undeclared (but was high school salutatorian)
Seth Curry - Undeclared (but was high school honor student)
Mason Plumlee - Undeclared (but was high school Wetmore Scholar, whatever that means)
Ryan Kelly - Undeclared (but was high school honor student and National Merit Semifinalist)
Andre Dawkins - Undeclared (but was high school honor student with several AP classes, fourth place finish in the ACSI Math Olympics)

So, yeah, we have a grand total of ZERO sociology majors on our team. And for the people who haven't declared yet, they are pretty smart kids who did well in high school. Probably better than whoever made that silly comment on ESPN.

On the other hand, there are a couple "majors" here that one might suspect are offered simply to provide diplomas rather than to provide an educated graduate....who knows, they might be difficult...the names suggest otherwise for a couple.

flyingdutchdevil
10-30-2009, 02:23 PM
On the other hand, there are a couple "majors" here that one might suspect are offered simply to provide diplomas rather than to provide an educated graduate....who knows, they might be difficult...the names suggest otherwise for a couple.

Like what? Visual Arts? African-American Studies? Those are pretty legit. I haven't heard anyone say otherwise.

Kfanarmy
10-30-2009, 02:44 PM
Like what? Visual Arts? African-American Studies? Those are pretty legit. I haven't heard anyone say otherwise.

If we both pick out the same ones, without conferring, it would seem their names suggest otherwise...Visual Arts sounds like something someone made up and could be anything the eye can see....African and African-American studies also sounds a bit open to virtually anything from art, handcrafts, sociology, psychology, anthropology, linguistics, education, theater, etc. etc...too squishy for an outsider to evaluate.

yancem
10-30-2009, 03:43 PM
Well, obviously, if you don't know what it is, it must be worthless.

I detest these threads. They inevitably involve people trashing the Humanities without knowing what they're talking about.

First off where did I say that any major was worthless. I was merely pointing out that there are many majors that I would consider on par with sociology in terms of difficulty and some that I am not sure what they are. That doesn't mean that they are worthless, simply that I am unsure what someone majoring in those subjects would study.

Secondly,I said that I was a sociology major, so why would I then disparage the Humanities majors?

Olympic Fan
10-30-2009, 04:31 PM
The sociology comment is the residue of an ESPN special from the turn of the century that looked at bogus academic credentials for various schools. They linked Nolan Richardson's Arkansas program, where almost no basketball players went to class or got degrees, with Duke's "supposedly pristine" academic reputation.

Their big knock on Duke was that a large percentage of the team at the time majored in sociology. They had one disgruntled student and one anti-sports professor (who admitted that he didn't have any basketball players in any of his classes), claiming that the Sociology Degrees the students were obtaining were fraudulent.

It was an absurd hit-piece, but ever since it aired, "sociology" became of those buzzwords that Duke haters use (kind of like "flopping" or, to be fair, the way UNC haters use "Octogon" to knock the Heels). No matter that it has no basis in reality, it's merely a convienent slur on a program they envy.

Duvall
10-30-2009, 04:48 PM
If we both pick out the same ones, without conferring, it would seem their names suggest otherwise...

Or that critics of the humanities are depressingly predictable.


Visual Arts sounds like something someone made up and could be anything the eye can see....

If only there were a website ( http://lmgtfy.com/?q=visual+arts+duke) that allowed people to search for information they don't have. Someone could make a fortune.


African and African-American studies also sounds a bit open to virtually anything from art, handcrafts, sociology, psychology, anthropology, linguistics, education, theater, etc. etc...too squishy for an outsider to evaluate.

Handcrafts?

I have long found it curious that studying the various aspects of a culture that ended millenia ago is generally considered legitimate, while studying the various aspects of a culture that is very much alive is considered by many to be, well, "squishy."

Curious.

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-30-2009, 05:32 PM
The great divide between the science and the humanities sometimes reminds me of the Grand Canyon.

NSDukeFan
10-30-2009, 07:38 PM
Or that critics of the humanities are depressingly predictable.



If only there were a website ( http://lmgtfy.com/?q=visual+arts+duke) that allowed people to search for information they don't have. Someone could make a fortune.



Handcrafts?

I have long found it curious that studying the various aspects of a culture that ended millenia ago is generally considered legitimate, while studying the various aspects of a culture that is very much alive is considered by many to be, well, "squishy."

Curious.

I never saw that link before. That's fantastic! Thank you.

cato
10-30-2009, 07:54 PM
On the other hand, there are a couple "majors" here that one might suspect are offered simply to provide diplomas rather than to provide an educated graduate....who knows, they might be difficult...the names suggest otherwise for a couple.

You are suggesting that Duke University hands out diplomas to uneducated students. Please provide your evidence.

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-30-2009, 08:26 PM
If we both pick out the same ones, without conferring, it would seem their names suggest otherwise...Visual Arts sounds like something someone made up and could be anything the eye can see....African and African-American studies also sounds a bit open to virtually anything from art, handcrafts, sociology, psychology, anthropology, linguistics, education, theater, etc. etc...too squishy for an outsider to evaluate.

I'm curious, kfanarmy. I've read your comments about some of the departments and wonder if you have first hand experience from taking some of the courses at Duke.

sagegrouse
10-30-2009, 08:48 PM
I'm curious, kfanarmy. I've read your comments about some of the departments and wonder if you have first hand experience from taking some of the courses at Duke.

DBD--

Here's the synopsis for one of the entry-level courses in the Duke Department of Art, Art History and Visual Studies:

"Theory, practice and epistemology of computing and simulation. Creation of artificial models of life, culture, and evolution for prediction and exploration. Social processes embedded in simulation. Hands-on introduction to C++ to create and modify highly visual, sims with color and sound. Critical exploration of state-of-the-art multicausal, multiagent simulations. Topics include: cellular automata and emergence; human and non-human agency; self-organizing cultures. Historical and cultural contextualization through computer artifacts and applications in science and the arts, industry and entertainment, military and intelligence communities. No programming experience required. "

Sound like a crip course? Ri-i-i-i-i-i-ght!

There are a huge number of jobs in the Web design field, which is in fact a visual arts. Art majors all of a sudden came into huge demand in the past ten years.

sagegrouse

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-30-2009, 09:00 PM
DBD--

Here's the synopsis for one of the entry-level courses in the Duke Department of Art, Art History and Visual Studies:

"Theory, practice and epistemology of computing and simulation. Creation of artificial models of life, culture, and evolution for prediction and exploration. Social processes embedded in simulation. Hands-on introduction to C++ to create and modify highly visual, sims with color and sound. Critical exploration of state-of-the-art multicausal, multiagent simulations. Topics include: cellular automata and emergence; human and non-human agency; self-organizing cultures. Historical and cultural contextualization through computer artifacts and applications in science and the arts, industry and entertainment, military and intelligence communities. No programming experience required. "

Sound like a crip course? Ri-i-i-i-i-i-ght!

There are a huge number of jobs in the Web design field, which is in fact a visual arts. Art majors all of a sudden came into huge demand in the past ten years.

sagegrouse

Thank you for that course description, sage. I was trying to find out if the poster from NOLA is a Dukie like you and me and thus would have some direct knowledge of what coursework at Duke is like. ;)

sagegrouse
10-30-2009, 10:48 PM
Thank you for that course description, sage. I was trying to find out if the poster from NOLA is a Dukie like you and me and thus would have some direct knowledge of what coursework at Duke is like. ;)

I could claim direct knowledge, but quite frankly, the only courses I remember from 40+ years ago are Art History, Probability and Statistics, and Intermediate Microeconomics.

The latter two became the basis of my career. The only reason I remember Art History is that it was the classic "Darkness at Noon," a course with a ton of visuals, which were a lot easier to remember over the decades than a mathematics problem set.

sagegrouse

DukeUsul
10-30-2009, 11:34 PM
Sociology 10 was known as an easy class when I was at Duke. I never took it. IIRC, my friend was in it at the same time that Wojo was taking it.

I think Anything 10 was known as an easy class when I was at Duke.

cspan37421
10-30-2009, 11:35 PM
That statement is so wholly out of line of reality its incredible. ... Freshman year, i was on a club sports team which demanded about 5 hours per day.....should I not have to do school work?

Hello, uh_no. Around here, it is preferable to use civility, e.g., "I beg to differ." Also, I would request you lay off the straw men; if you can demonstrate that I suggested college athletes not do school work at all, I will gladly retract my request.