Although education undoubtedly needs reform in the United States, I believe Mr. Snell is wrong to undervalue math and science. Before elaborating on my position, I want to acknowledge my bias: I am a senior in mechanical engineering and took offense to both the statement that my education is inferior due to the lack of focus on the classics and the attempt to treat engineering as the epitome of a wasted education.

Mr. Snell asserts that the education of the past has been so diluted that modern education does not prepare students for their life, necessitating a college education. According to the 1840 Census, just 55 percent of children aged 5 to 15 actually attended (not necessarily graduated from) a school or academy. It wasn’t until 1940 that 50 percent of adolescents would earn a high school degree. As of 2008, roughly 72 percent of all public school students have graduated with a high school degree on time.

Economic analysis supplies a more logical explanation for the decreased value of a diploma: When the market is saturated with supply, the demand and value of a given product will decrease. I agree that the value of a bachelor’s degree is also decreasing, but the reason is economic and not a reflection of the quality of education.

Mr. Snell argues that my degree will only prepare me for a career in engineering and instead I should study the classics and specialize to engineering at graduation. This is impractical based on the knowledge currently required of an engineer. Many of the concepts that were researched when apprenticeships were common are now the basis for elementary engineering courses. Additionally, the wide range of fields a mechanical engineer can enter expands the amount of knowledge required further.

Companies cannot afford to pay the salary of an unqualified individual trying to work in engineering in addition to the salary of whoever is required to get the individual up to speed — a process that will likely take four or five years (aka the anticipated duration of a B.S. in M.E.). This results in a demand for specialized degrees.

History tends to agree with specialization. The Ford Co. showed, via the assembly line, that specializing not only increases quality but efficiency. Specialization and the increased placement of specialized individuals into relevant positions can only aid achievement. That is to say, I would not trust a fashion major to design the engine of my next car, nor should they trust me to design Armani’s spring line.

Specialization has grave consequences as it pertains to our government; “our government sucks because we’re getting the government we earned.” It is far more logical that the shortcomings of our government is a result of voters being forced to elect unqualified individuals, not because my college degree has made me a “socially naive, politically ignorant and law-abiding subject …” The overwhelming majority of sitting senators have Bachelor of Arts degrees — which Mr. Snell says qualifies them to understand the problems — and the senators are unable to solve many major national issues. I prefer my elected officials to solve problems, not just understand them.

I will be graduating from Iowa State in two weeks and have accepted employment as a product development engineer. Based on my internship experience, I know there is a strong possibility that I may never use some of the concepts I have learned over course of my education. However, in the process of learning these concepts, I honed my critical thinking skills and my problem-solving skills while developing a stout work ethic. What other tools do I need to analyze the problems America faces?

I may not be able to quote Thoreau, but my education has prepared me to be successful in my career and to put thought and expertise into solving America’s problems. That being said, what does one do with a B.A. in history? I would wager a guess that for the overwhelming majority of graduates, the answer is go back to school.