I never said that and I think college can be a good thing. But it should be something worth your time and money (especially that) and you should have a plan, not just going in and expecting to make six figures because you have a degree. And I'm open to the idea I could be wrong. As it is, I'm not even remotely close to a millionaire, so perhaps I'm not the right person to listen to (though alternatively, I'm still pretty young and have learned from my mistakes and in turn am sharing that with the world). My general message has been that college can be useful and is even necessary in some disciplines but is overrated in many regards, both by employers and it's ability (at a high financial cost) to mold people into being ready for the real world. Some colleges, particularly small ones, feel like a high school setting (from what I've seen).
Actually I think a lot of us are in that age band where we're having extended quarter-life crises and just trying to retcon our twenties. Regret does not equal wisdom.
What's the point of getting education at all? Is education only about getting esoteric knowledge you may or may not use. I admit most of the stuff I leaned in school is not being used by me to make my living. But, why do you not value the academic training, the experience, the process of learning, the diversity? If the argument is about colleges these days don't provide good service back in return for the money they charge, I don't have a problem with that. But it seems to me that you are questioning the value of college education in general. Let me tell you this, even for technical stuff like CS or EE, they don't teach you how to program specifically, but they teach you fundamentals, how to look up for stuff, how to approach problems. You don't learn that in high school so specific to a field. College is still essential.
This thread reminds me of a book I read. It's a good read if you are interested. The Lost Lawyer : Failing Ideals of the Legal Profession
I think we all need some formal education as kids to get us started. The way in which it is currently run is open to question but it's necessary. And as I said, if you go to college, just in my humble opinion (I don't know everything), at least go for something you like and something that can provide you a backup plan if nothing else. I'm preaching to the choir to some degree here, but don't go for the dumb reasons like partying, frats, sex, sports, etc... with no plan in mind and an easy major that won't land you anywhere without ambition and/or luck. I think we should go in with a plan and like I said, it doesn't have to happen at age 18 fresh out of high school, especially if you aren't ready. Figure out what you want to do, develop a plan and stay focused. Or, on the other hand, realize that college may not be for you and go about trying to figure out what is best for you, whether that means going the entrepreneur route, developing a trade or whatever. That said, I realize each person and situation is different and it's just my opinion.
My bro in law, who was my mentor in teaching me all i know about it, said he didn't use much of what he learned with his cs degree. All if it was during his professional life. You're seeing 6 week programming Boot camps where its graduates are landing real software engineer jobs. This is an arbitrage opportunity for those who want a second chance...and you know what? The us is the best placefor second chance, bar none. Just gotta look for it and reach for it But does that mean degrees are overrated? I don't think so. You shouldn't rely on the backup to throw out the system. Retool the system instead to meet todays needs
(continued from my last post) And as I said, technology has made it possible to disperse info everywhere instantly, as now we can get the latest news at our fingertips every second thanks to our cell phones. Compare that to 25 years ago, when it was inconceivable that newspapers would be going the way of the dinosaur. The immense dispersement of info doesn't mean that formal education, most specifically college, is completely unnecessary because as you, YallMean, even said there are concentrations that need guidance from an expert and are truly helpful in molding students into what they need to be to become professionals. But not everyone goes to challenge themselves. Many simply go to get a degree with no plan in mind. And that is becoming an ever increasingly expensive mistake to make as the cost of attendance (and debt that arises from that) has skyrocketed, good paying jobs are more scarce and some employers are starting to see through the illusion that going to college makes you more capable of doing a job than someone who didn't. I know I personally went to just get a degree because everyone around me told me to, possessing virtually no plan and waiting for school to hurry up and be over and it set me back greatly. Most of the curriculum I went through in my major was easily readable on my own without paying anything in tuition. Yeah, the professors could highlight a few things in the books for class but was that really worth thousands of dollars? Because of the advancement in technology, I can find literature on experts in that field for free, for the price of their books or attending their lectures, etc... Plus now, as I got out of school and actually began to mature some, there are really some fields I'd like to study (I have three in mind) but can't at the moment because I have to work so much, which is why I bring up how we pressure kids to go into school before they have a plan or learn what they're passionate about. That said, it still is what it is and employers expect to see at least a Bachelors for consideration so in that sense college is necessary but not as much in how it actually prepares you, at least in some cases. And lastly, one point you may have missed from me earlier, not everyone can have a high paying office job. There is actually a need for those doing stuff like manual labor and some are just better at that anyways, which is why they should pursue it over fields that require book-smarts, which can only be developed so much after a young age.
Cost of attendance is a misnomer. If everyone really attended every class and made their moneys worth, then they'd have that confidence and empowerment to do something with their degree. It's the entitlement that gets people. They think that being mediocre is enough to land something just becausespent 10+ g's on a piece of paper. Not gonna cut it in this day and age. You're not as special as you thought you were
This indeed is a huge problem facing this country. It is probably too complicated for me just to dump a few lines here pretending that I know how to tackle it. But, I will say this, this is education return issue is global, deep in structure, not just the schools to blame, IMHO. I hear you, but wasnt there something that could be done on your end to make that experience a little better, to say the least? It's not just the school. I am a little confused here ... it's the company's fault, the school's fault, or both? Again, even if there is a unreasonalbe bias, what are we going to do? I don't think not going to college will change anything. Hiring based on education requirement isn't going to be outlawed in any way, like never. We learn to live and to adapt, again, isnt' that what life is about. Not meaning to sound sarcastic, but, look if I had my ways, I probably wouldnt have wanted to spend $200K tuition just to get that fancy piece of papaer of saying I am a JD. Lastly, right on cue, someone wrote this on NYT. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/why-do-i-teach/?pagewanted=print
Well, I did plenty of extra curricular activities, I even joined a fraternity. It wasn't merely about the schooling and as a matter of fact I felt the seemingly pointless classes I was taking were getting in the way of me establishing my career. I wanted to spend my time building contacts, getting training for my field (which involved ZERO math or science beyond conventional, everyday ways) and making money. I could have gotten experience in my field without the excess fat of what I felt were boring and pointless classes. That last point goes back to how some kids don't know what they want to do in life and thus may be better off starting their post-high school life working and thinking about their future. It'd be the company's fault (though who am I to tell them what their hiring standards are) because they assume completion of formal education, except in some fields like nursing, engineering, etc... makes someone qualified to work for them and not other non-education factors. Besides, whatever happened to on-the-job training? It still happens, but not as much. Also, times change. As I mentioned, newspapers going out of business seemed unthinkable as recently as the early 1990's but like the horse and buggy, stone brick ovens, and the telegraph it has becoming virtually obsolete thanks to changes in society (including easier travel) and technology. The same is starting to become true of higher ed, which hardly means it is completely outdated and useless. Again, we need teachers and experts for every field, some much more than others. I think the op-ed is dead on and that's what I hope people get out of their schooling, not just merely writing down and regurgitating or worse yet just going through the motions because they heard all they need is a degree to get a job.
Its how we've been born and raised through the current education system. My degree of success is not measured by how much I know, and my ability to apply knowledge in the classroom and put it to practical use. My degree of success is measured by how much I can memorize bull**** one-liner facts and weak causal relationships on a single test. Even "rigorous" AP courses can almost entirely be traversed through common sense (like US History, Economics, World History, etc.) or memorization of processes and formulas (Calc, Physics, etc.). I am never asking why from my learning, I'm always asking how. I, we, don't form these relationships from our classroom knowledge to the real world. That is why the majority of high school grads are entirely confused on what they want to do in college, and how high school knowledge applies to jobs in the real world. Learning is not encouraged, memorizing is.
Education unfortunately has become or denigrated to 'Knowledge Acquisition' which is why Caltex2 - can say that knowledge can be gained anywhere. . . .which is true Education should be about Application of knowledge. It is one think to know "Lefty loosy Righty Tighty" but IT is another to know when to use it . . .and how tight or how loose etc etc etc My biggest problem with Caltex2's Theorem is that . . . I compare it to someone readying the dictionary to learn new words then using BIG and EXOTIC words to talk to you . . .to feel intelligent and smart when they use the inappropriately.; They may 'sounds smart' . . .they may use 'smart words' but that is not intelligence but . . that is what our education system has become it is a show . .. it is more important to LOOK SMART [4.0s, high standardized test scores, etc etc,] than to actually BE smart [comprehend string theory, advance calculus, true literary interpretation, etc ] Programmers can teach anyone to make a bubble sort . . . but you have to know when and where to put it into a program. Education is suppose to do that. Programmer A learned that through hours and hours and hours of work, trial and error EDUCATION would be taking what he learned and giving it to PROGRAMMER B to learn in days BUT Caltex2's method would have Programmer B . . . going through those same hours and hours yea it will work but EDUCATION is suppose to be a short cut of sorts so that programmer b can use those hours and hours to further programming tech, ideals, theory,etc etc etc forward from where programmer A left off Loosely translated . .. it is not that education and degrees are useless but more that the system is broken and needs to be fixed A Car with a broken engine may seem useless. . . hell it is more useless than a man walking The man walking can definitely outpace the car with the broken engine However Fix the engine and the man walk is not going to even be close We have a broken education system . . and it is so broken that people like Caltex2 think that . . .well walking is the same as this broken engine car I say focus on fixing the car . . . Caltex2 seems to indicate the idea of . . .forget the car . . let's walk. Rocket River
To re-direct this thread closer to where I originally intended (not necessarily about the pros and cons of college alone), does anyone think more bright and gifted students should be home-schooled with a legit academic tutor (not a parent with wild ideas) or sent to alternative school (which isn't necessarily for bad students)?
The issue is . . . I believe all kids have the potential to be BRIGHT AND GIFTED however their social circumstances can enable or cripple them At what point would you suggest 'divie-ing' up the students? The BRIGHT AND GIFTED Kindergarteners? 5th graders? 9th graders? NOTE: These won't necessarily be the same kids. Rocket River
I've said more than once that my opinion is not end all be all and just the way I've experienced things. Plus you're right, using big words doesn't constitute intelligence, though I know you were using that to explain how you feel about my arguments. I actually wouldn't mind being given less than an A in many cases even if I tried my hardest because at a certain point, just trying hard shouldn't be enough. There are coaches and players in the sports world that try their hardest yet they still grade out to an F for results in specific circumstances. Doesn't mean the effort wasn't there but sometimes effort isn't enough, just ask the Jacksonville Jaguars last year. That's a solid way of putting it. I'm more saying figure out if the car is worth fixing (time and money) and how far you need to go distance-wise. You may have been better off walking in the first place. But I'm not sure the analogy fits. And if college is a car, then we have alternative means to get there such as by bus, train, bike, plane, helicopter, etc... LOL, I'm not sure where I'm going with this but I guess I'm saying that traditionally the best way to get where we want (educated, which would be the car) is now but one method of transportation we have to try and land at where we want. Sometimes the best way is for us to walk (i.e. self-education) but in modern times we've developed other transportation methods that can get us there quicker than a car ever could and we can use them in combinations. A plane can get you to places quicker than any other method, so maybe in that sense the car is good for short distance but can't take you as far and as quickly as a plane. Maybe the internet is the plane, I don't know, I was just trying to follow his analogy, LOL. And yes, your head can stop spinning at any time now.
If the internet is the plane . . . . . someone still needs to educate people on HOW TO FLY THE PLANE!! Rocket River
You're right. As I said in the OP, pacing can hurt students either because they need more time grasping certain subjects or grasp them with ease and would be better served moving on quicker. I'm not sure how that would be implemented but it's clear that not everyone of the same exact age is at the same level mentally and thus should be moving at the same pace. I realize schools address this to some extent and occasionally, for example, you'll have students skip a grade or be held back but I think both because parents and students don't like the idea of a child academically falling behind his/her classmates and because teachers are pressured to pass students to improve the school's ratings, you get scenarios where as long as you put a solid effort in, you pass whether or not you actually grasped the subject matter or not. Then there are those who get it so easily they get bored and school becomes a chore. I say this because there have been subjects that have been like that for me in both ways. It's just my opinion, I'm not an educator so perhaps it's better left to someone who is in the education field.
I am against that idea. Social skills and experiences are still important. That's a big part of school too. Some of those kids may get bullied and get down on themselves. Parents tend to be protective. But, again, they will have to handle those issues on their own after growing up anyways. I say unless the kids cannot absolutely survive in group settings, try something like that. Otherwise, put them through it, let them learn and figure out, along the way do whatever necessary mak to help them. Personally, I wouldn't give a kid a idea that he is gifted so he can be different.