Was the solution actually that it's true for any k,p,A,t then?
I'm not sure a very strong argument can be drawn from A levels. The ones I took were borderline irrelevant for uni, and I only took pure sciences then went into engineering. So unless you're suggesting that both general studies and economics as A level subjects are irrelevant, I'd say general studies as a degree is far less useful than one in economics. I have a suspicion that all A level subjects are trivial relative to university courses though, so I don't think I'm following your reasoning.
@Nix at no point have I said humanities are easy. How did you misread " "Reading" is evidently more difficult than I can fully understand as an engineer."? Reading from my perspective is a dozen or so pages of theory followed by a ludicrous amount of mathematics, so I tend to consider reading the easy bit. However I've also mentioned the Iliad in Greek as an example of reading, and I'd be unwise to say this is simple.
Geography is not something I've ever shown interest in. Despite this I acknowledge that I'd find a geography degree more difficult than an engineering one. However I will also stereotype and say that you'd have found an engineering degree much more difficult than your geography one.
Having done Maths, Physics and Chemistry at A-Level I went on to start a degree in Civil Engineering, dropped out after a year and did Geology (not quite Geography but similar) and I can honestly say Engineering was FAR more difficult than Gelolgy.
I went from 20+ hours of contact time and around 10+ (minimum just to do the hand in stuff) per week to 15 hours and a few hours every few weeks in my first year of Geology. Even in my third year I was doing less work than I was in my first year Engineering. That doesn't include the weeks away I had to do as part of my geology course however.
As for contact time vs "reading" I went from around 15 hours in my first and second year to 12 in my third year and we were expected to do 2 hours of reading for every hour of contact time. Doesn't seem much (especially when most of that wasn't done and others were crammed into a few days every couple of months) but it doesn't include the 3 weeks of 9-12 hour days on field trips each year and the month of independent fieldwork we had to do on top of that.
All in all I worked it out to be around the same amount of contact time as my engineering first year.
As for the OP, well is sounds like you went to uni not to lear but to have fun, like so many others. Luckily they got dumped (or jumped) after the first year, leaving mostly those that chose work as more impottant than having fun. I still miss uni and it definately gets better in the second and third years, you get closer to your friends and more relaxed in your surroundings, then it all gets torn apart and you move all over the place.
I think that is partly the governments fault, trying to push more people into uni and then opening more spaces for them, a lot of the time on courses that aren't really needed. Not all degrees ARE equal IMO, some people need a degree (at minimum*) to do they job they want, whereas other degrees aren't particularly needed and are there as someone "has a degree" rather than specifically what that degree is (not that that is necessarily a bad thing as graduates wil probably be more mature in some respects than non graduates).
*For example Geology (and engineering), to get into a job in the major fields (Oil + Gas, mining, construction) you need at least a degree, with preferences for (and most graduate schemes needing) masters. PHd's are regularly requested in job adverts too!
(Please ignore the appauling spelling, grammar and general sentence structure!
)
, but its disconcerting to see so many Chinese, African people etc, whose grasp on the language and involvement in the university is minimal.
) it's obviously most advisable to take a well regarded course at a well respected university