As LSE entered the second half of Lent Term, it emerged that a 1st year student, who cannot be named at this time, had developed a horrible, sinking feeling that LSE100 might actually not be that good. LSE100, the university’s flagship interdisciplinary programme, aims to broaden students’ horizons by giving those on qualitative degree programmes the chance to work with data and by reminding the quants that real people with feelings actually exist.
Just a few weeks into term, the undergraduate in question developed symptoms of what is described by medical professionals as ‘academic ennui’. Their hopes that LSE100 would be a valuable addition to their university experience were reportedly dashed against the intellectual rocks by the onslaught of half-baked worksheets and inhumane group activities.
This is by no means an isolated case either. In a recent poll, just over 80% of undergraduates responded saying that they felt that their quality of life had declined ‘partially’ or ‘substantially’ as a result of the course. One 2nd year econ student described their disgust at being forced to spend extended periods of time ‘pandering to the naïve utopianism of sociologists’ and ‘reading words’.
Sources from the private sector told us that employers are also less than impressed with LSE100, with one recruitment consultant saying: ‘if I have to read one more CV that lists Tableau as a skill, I will cry’. A study carried out by LSE’s Department of Psychology and Behavioural science found that LSE100 was about as effective at increasing students’ transferable skills as making them listen to a ten-minute self-help podcast.
LSE100 if, of course, no stranger to controversy. In 2018 two class teachers had to be hospitalised for shock after their entire class actually did the assigned readings in what was described as a ‘freak accident’.
