The Northern Star Editorial Board asks, “Why can’t gen. ed courses teach information with real-life applications?” To answer I have to refute three common misconceptions:

First, that classes should “teach information.” Gen. eds that only convey information are miss-taught; we have Wikipedia for that. College courses should convey skills, sensibilities and modes of inquiry that students wouldn’t get otherwise. Gen. eds are valuable because their disciplines are foreign to the student’s major.

Second, that some parts of life are more real than others. This is nonsense. What students do after graduation isn’t more important than what they do in school, only better remunerated.

Students should learn to balance a checkbook in sixth grade; college is for exploring the universe. Dumbing down curriculum, “teach[ing] … the math behind taxes, loans and managing a bank account,” won’t create graduates who can take their place in the world as informed members of society.

A college math class should reveal mathematics as a method of inquiry and verification that deserves respect, even from non-majors.

People don’t have the option to live in a world without math any more than they can live in a world without philosophy, physics, politics or art. Figuring out how a subject relates to your life is part of studying it.

Third, that having a major is a precondition of learning. A well-taught gen. ed recruits majors, double majors and minors.

Yes, gen. eds need reform: They should be taught better and students should expect more from them — and advisers should never tell a student to “get your gen. eds out of the way.”