The late 1940s brought a post-war boom, with which America propelled itself to the forefront of the global market, both economically and technologically. Since then, our job market has become increasingly saturated with tech-related job opportunities, ones for which students aren’t always adequately prepared. Quite obviously, there are sectors outside of STEM for those students who aren’t; however, the advent of widespread computer use and increasingly advanced jobs has brought with it a new standard for all semi-skilled and skilled labor. Artists use programs to animate their creations, economists use complex math and calculators to foresee market predictions, and anthropologists use the latest breakthroughs in science to help further their studies. As our teachers have so often reminded us, there is an important difference between memorization of a process and the comprehension of such process. That, in of itself and in terms of future employment, aptly explains the necessity of STEM literacy.

There is, however, a second, significantly uglier reason backing up my claim: the advantage STEM classes establish in school.  Being a “humanities student” myself, I adamantly abhor the science and math bias cultivating like a spoiled biology experiment on the third floor of our building. Still, it would be wholly ignorant to suggest that this ideology is without entirely without backing. STEM students are undeniably better off than their counterparts because of the uneven distribution of advanced classes. Should this be changed? Absolutely. In the meantime, however, students taking AP calculus instead of pottery will have a higher GPA, and they’ll be better prepared for stem-heavy standardized tests. I write this series as a part of my journalism class, which, enjoyable as it may be, does set me at a disadvantage. It’s one I’ve voluntarily accepted, but a disadvantage nonetheless.

In a debate such as this, it’s important to recognize the differences between reality and idealism. As a school, community, and nation, it would be remarkable to applaud a unidirectional English major as enthusiastically as we do a steadfast astrophysicist. However, given the future our generation will inherit, that simply isn’t feasible. STEM literacy is important in all facets of our school and economic system, whether that be history and literature or chemistry and calculus. In the end, it’s not that humanities are of less importance, but that STEM is of more.

A poor English education, simply put, puts out poor writers. Even in the STEM fields, scientists are expected to write about their research to publish in a journal, and poor and unpolished writing skills can mean the difference in acquiring funding for that scientist’s endeavors. No matter the job, it is necessary to be able to convey ideas to others effectively. The neglect of an English education could be disastrous for that student beyond high school.

History teaches us about the past, but more importantly, it teaches lessons that can be applied to the modern day. George Santayana once said,“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Without knowing of Germany in 1930s, how are we to recognize the growth of a fascist movement? In addition, without knowledge of why the world is the way it is, how can one be expected to be an informed voter?

Each of the other humanities has an important function: geography provides necessary context for geopolitical problems, philosophy teaches us about who we are and seeks to answer the deeper questions we all ponder at times, government and political science language studies interconnect people from around the world, the arts provide a place for the expression of human creativity.

Ultimately the humanities serve two purposes: to educate about the world around us and to explore what makes us human. To ignore any of these subject areas is to ignore a massive part of the world and humanity.