Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of the reasons why is probably that the U.S. education system is very oriented towards job skills. This is true even at university. In Europe and many other places in the world, (part of) the education system's job is also to train future citizens and (the general view of what is supposedly a) well-rounded individual. It's not only about jobs - it's about being aware of the world you live in, how it got to be that way and where it is going. And this will be taught to you (to at least some degree) regardless of whether you are destined to work in a highly technical field where "culture" is largely irrelevant.
BTW, none of this should be seen as a condemnation of the U.S. way of doing things. I am just pointing out the obvious differences (to me).
Actually, in practically all American universities, students are required to take roughly two years which of "liberal arts" courses which are usually not related to their ultimate degree (unless, of course, they are majoring in something like History or English). To my knowledge, European universities start you off on your career track right away, and secondary schools to teach the "liberal arts".
In secondary school, however, the American curriculum may be less "culturally"-oriented and more practical. However, unlike many other countries, there is no national standardized curriculum; it's set by the individual school district and teacher.unl For example, even though I took all social science classes available to me, we pretty much never learned anything about world history - only American ... and we had ONE YEAR, total, of history (actually, it may have been 1.5 years, with a final semester devoted to "world history" or "modern history", but if I remember correctly, it was just a hodgepodge of topics). We also had one year of geography ... in 8th grade, and it was taught by a teacher who insisted on meticulous, neat hand-drawn maps and a well-kept binder (which we were graded on!) as much as he did actual knowledge. We had four years of English, but it was spent mostly studying how to write and reading American literature.
As for art, we had that too - but it was not "art appreciation" or art history, but drawing, painting, etc.
One of the reasons why the lower classes in Europe might know a bit more about culture and history is the simple fact that they are physically surrounded by it. If you live in a midsized European city, chances are that you have medieval houses, old streets and market places, a couple of churches and/or a cathedral (which often contain old paintings as well) very close by. And when you live in southern Europe, you probably stumble over some Roman via or you see an aquaduct or an amphitheatre...
Actually, in practically all American universities, students are required to take roughly two years which of "liberal arts" courses which are usually not related to their ultimate degree (unless, of course, they are majoring in something like History or English). To my knowledge, European universities start you off on your career track right away, and secondary schools to teach the "liberal arts".
.
Just so I am getting this straight - if I am going for an undergrad degree (bachelor's) in, say, computer science or mathematics, I have to take *two years* of liberal arts stuff as well? Sorry if I am misunderstanding.
In secondary school, however, the American curriculum may be less "culturally"-oriented and more practical. However, unlike many other countries, there is no national standardized curriculum; it's set by the individual school district and teacher.unl For example, even though I took all social science classes available to me, we pretty much never learned anything about world history - only American ... and we had ONE YEAR, total, of history (actually, it may have been 1.5 years, with a final semester devoted to "world history" or "modern history", but if I remember correctly, it was just a hodgepodge of topics). We also had one year of geography ... in 8th grade, and it was taught by a teacher who insisted on meticulous, neat hand-drawn maps and a well-kept binder (which we were graded on!) as much as he did actual knowledge. We had four years of English, but it was spent mostly studying how to write and reading American literature.
As for art, we had that too - but it was not "art appreciation" or art history, but drawing, painting, etc.
This is exactly what I was referring to, and differs greatly from secondary school education in many other countries, particularly Europe.
One of the reasons why the lower classes in Europe might know a bit more about culture and history is the simple fact that they are physically surrounded by it. If you live in a midsized European city, chances are that you have medieval houses, old streets and market places, a couple of churches and/or a cathedral (which often contain old paintings as well) very close by. And when you live in southern Europe, you probably stumble over some Roman via or you see an aquaduct or an amphitheatre...
It also much more present in the ambient atmosphere and makes its way through osmosis in Europe when compared to North America. In much of North America, even many nice(r) and chic restaurants will pipe in cheap pop music (Ã la Hootie and the Blowfish or Michael Bolton) on the sound system while you are dining, whereas in Europe you hear classical music in public places much more often.
And "Entertainment Tonight"-type media in Europe (consumed by lower and middling classes) tend to talk about blockbuster movies and pop music of course, but also pay attention on occasion to books, live theatre, painting, etc.
I think it's normal that you study your own culture and history at school. In Europe this is also valid. So it's normal that european people know more about what surrounds them than americans do. It's also normal that american people tend to know less about Europe than the europeans do themselves. It's true the other away around too. Personally at school I've learned almost nothing about America, just things that impacted us (discovery of America, the role of the USA in the second WW) but I really don't know anything about American history and literature. So yeah when I'm there I'll probably go to Times Square and the Grand Canyon due to my lack of knowledge about other things.
This is so true!!! I know people (argentinians) who lived and studied in the US and have said this same thing, and i even had this same conversation with americans (from usa) living here. University here is more like you say to train citizens, careers are much longer and not as practical. For instance, careers in the UBA (university of Buenos aires) all last 6 or 7 years. This cause that when you graduate you have more of a world culture but it also cause that a lot of people who starts studying dont finish it. Here most people have passed through university with few percentage have actually graduated. In the US careers are shorter, more practical and most people actually graduate. At the same time maybe the people who graduate dont have this well rounded world culture than a person than studied 7 years has. Im comparing with argentina cause arg is probably more similar to europe in the education system. And VERY different to the US in this particular matter.
Given the price of higher education in the US one can hardly afford to not graduate once one has started.
In the US life is much more about money and career, and that shows in every aspect of life. Work seems to be the goal of life almost. In other countries that is just not the case.
By the way, is South America considered part of the West?
I think it's normal that you study your own culture and history at school. In Europe this is also valid. So it's normal that european people know more about what surrounds them than americans do. It's also normal that american people tend to know less about Europe than the europeans do themselves. It's true the other away around too. Personally at school I've learned almost nothing about America, just things that impacted us (discovery of America, the role of the USA in the second WW) but I really don't know anything about American history and literature. So yeah when I'm there I'll probably go to Times Square and the Grand Canyon due to my lack of knowledge about other things.
It depends on where you go to school, I guess. We studied all the American presidents, American geography and general American history (from discovery to WW2). We had special debate sessions about American politics around the time of the elections in 2008 and we learnt about the Democrat and Republican views on things. But this was mostly during the later years of secondary school. In primary school and the first part of secondary school, the focus was mainly on national and European history.
I think it's normal that you study your own culture and history at school. In Europe this is also valid. So it's normal that european people know more about what surrounds them than americans do. It's also normal that american people tend to know less about Europe than the europeans do themselves. It's true the other away around too. Personally at school I've learned almost nothing about America, just things that impacted us (discovery of America, the role of the USA in the second WW) but I really don't know anything about American history and literature. So yeah when I'm there I'll probably go to Times Square and the Grand Canyon due to my lack of knowledge about other things.
Despite the geographical and population size the US is not very diverse in terms of culture. The underlying culture is pretty similar, no matter if you are in NYC, LA, Houston, Denver or Chicago. There simply is no great difference because it's such a young country. People might look different here and there, but the overwhelming bulk of them are united by the standard American culture. Sure, Americans (in the US) keep stressing their little internal differences, but from a global perspective they are all the same, especially nowadays.
If French and Italians are family-oriented as you claim, then why have so many of them stopped having families? The birth-rate of native-born French and Italians (except for their immigrant population) is now below replacement level.
You say that like its a bad thing.
The world doesn't need replacement level breeding.
_____________
I travel regularly throughout Europe, and mainly to cultural sites.
I spent last weekend in Leipzig, an amazing center of music and art.
I've seen most of the great museums in the world because it's what interests me.
I see it more as an issue of education, not of class; I wanted to educate myself in the great artwork of the world. What better place than in Europe?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
