I entered college in China in 1981. Many things seemed to remain the same. For many things are dominated by one thing: the national entrance examination to get into college. In my year, about 4% high school students went to college. Now the number is 22%, as compared to 40% in the US. The significant increase in the entrance rate doesn't seem to have relieved the anxiety. As a parent to a freshman college student, I can prove that junior and senior years in high school are not much fun even for students in the US. Once a country has vastly increased the rate of college entrance, students will still want to get into "better" colleges. _ , no matter where you are. The NYT Magazine article also mentioned the Soviet-style  over-specialized  education in Chinese colleges. My class in college had maybe 60 students specialized in compressors, another 60 students specialized in refrigeration, and yet another 60 students specialized in welding . I was among the 60 specialized in mechanics. I cannot recall the numbers exactly, but you get the picture. It really wasn't as terrible as it sounds. In order to specialize in mechanics, we had to study math, physics and chemistry. We studied electrical circuits, alloy treatment, mechanical drawing, Fortran. We even had a continuous stream of humanity courses: history of communist party, political economics... I'm not sure I enjoyed all the courses, but I cannot claim that these courses damaged my brain, either. I remember some of the humanity courses required writing, which turned out to be a useful skill. As a consequence of specialization, we did learn a lot of mechanics. By the end of college, we had courses on analytical mechanics, strength of materials. I often feel sorry for American students in my undergraduate class, knowing that strength of materials will be their first and last course in the mechanics of materials. So many beautiful sights unseen! But they also seem to turn out to be OK. A liberal and superficial eduction doesn't damage their brains, either. All this high level debate about education makes me dizzy, and turns me off. So far as I can tell, both systems of eduction work fine, and have their own limitations. The bottom line is that the quantity of knowledge is too large to be crammed into 4 years, and you'd have to make choices, making it either narrow or shallow or perhaps both. You'll just have to be prepared to engage yourself in life-long learning. What is the author's attitude towards his courses?
He doesn't like them at all. He doesn't think that all of them are necessary. He is sick of the humanity courses. He likes humanity courses just for the future writing.