<p>
</p>
<p>Big Yellow Taxi came out in 1970. I was 3 years old. A classic is a classic. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a real issue. D wants to take a GAP year, but that is not going to happen if she is uninsured.</p>
<p>HDHP for a healthy young person is in the range of $1000/yr</p>
<p>I think it depends on what you feel is right for you. I do think that many kids do not want to go to college, they’re just pushed by their family/friends and school systems are also beginning to do the same. To me, this crisis seems analogous to our entitled grade school education. Hundreds of years ago, the literacy rate was astoundingly low, and people rarely received an education- now its an entitlement to have a free high school education. I don’t see why people shouldn’t keep receiving a better education as long as they want to try. Improved critical thinking skills and a better work ethic are likely benefits for college graduates, and I believe that is what a free society needs. However, I do not think that a college degree necessarily means a better paying job, or any job at all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I agree, that’s only because the cause and effect are intermingled. Society demands college degrees is because too many people have college degrees - companies can therefore demand college educations for jobs that require nothing of the sort. I once worked for a company where every single secretary, despite the lowly wages, had bachelor’s degree as a bare minimum, with some holding master’s degrees. Let’s face it: you don’t really need a college degree to do secretarial work. But as long as an oversupply of college graduates exists, employers can afford to be picky at no cost to themselves. After all, they’re not the ones who have to pay, either in terms of tuition or time, for those degrees. If people drown themselves in thousands of dollars of student debt just to be eligible for a scrimpy secretary’s job, that’s not the company’s problem. </p>
<p>An educational arms race is at hands. People need college degrees in order to be eligible for jobs, which only further increases the need for college degrees to be eligible for jobs. The logical conclusion is that eventually everybody will need PhD’s for even the worst jobs. </p>
<p>While certainly the greater economy does expand because of the improvement of human capital due to the proliferation of education, whether it does so by enough to justify the resources invested into education to foster an overall net benefit for society is ultimately an empirical question. And even if education as a whole is a beneficial investment to society, that’s not to say that every subsector of the educational-industrial complex is, even if difficult to identify them for reasons of political correctness. For example, I would daresay that many humanities PhD programs may not actually benefit society, for while the production of creative works may improve the overall intellectual wealth of society, the critique and deconstruction of existing works is of questionable value. Lest I be accused of being technocentric, I would also proffer that many PhD programs in theoretical mathematics are also probably not beneficial for society. While it may be valuable to construct a proof that actually pertains to a particular scientific problem that the world faces, most theoretical mathematics deals with constructs and methods that the world doesn’t use and perhaps never will. {As to the argument that the world might use those mathematical techniques in some distant day in the future, then my response is that we should then develop those techniques during that distant day, not right now when we have far more pressing concerns.}</p>
<p>Post 104:</p>
<p>You’re simplifying an aspect of education as a job qualification, while missing an important social development that came out of the late '60’s through early '80’s: college-educated women entering the work force, often had no speciifc “training” in the field of that company (nor experience in it per se), but sought to gain a career from that entry level. (= No different from what men used to do in previous decades – starting as a clerk, “working their way” up to executive positions, sometimes even to owner/ President.) </p>
<p>It actually in some regions produced a glut of very-educated secretaries and administrative assistants – some, yes, with advanced degrees. Smart & enlightened employers used that resource to promote from within; others merely exploited and stalled those employees indefinitely. But in all cases it created a windfall for employers (sometimes restlessness as well, which was the downside). Even today, when given the option, most employers like to have someone educated to answer phones and interact with the public, particularly if their own customer base or clientele are themselves educated. It improves communication (thus efficiency) to have articulate, knowledgeable employees who can figure things out and who have the confidence that often results from a college education. It elevates a company’s image to have educated employees. And it continues to provide added value to the employer, of getting something more than what the employer is technically paying for.</p>
<p>And, the book the secretary picks out to read, the show he or she watches on TV, the places traveled, the conversational content, all may be more enriched as a result of that college degree. The choices made as a parent, the involvement with schools and homework, and how kids are treated also may be better. All of that makes going to college better than not, even if a a job doesn’t require it. I have a carpenter relative who cherishes his liberal arts education, and made sure all his children attended college. He said he would not have been the same person without it. The same is true for another police officer close relative, who after years on the force went to college and was changed by it. College is just not about getting a job, it is about improving our lives in many ways, even if it is obtained at the local community college or regional state university.</p>
<p>^ Yes, I was going to add that breadth of experience (vicariously in college, through reading/discussion, as well as directly in college via association with people from different backgrounds) is also an added value to any employer operating in a very culturally diverse environment. </p>
<p>Personally, I agree with idad’s several posts on the intrinsic value to the person of a college education, but I was even more narrowly responding to the business arguments, which even within the business model are not convincing to me. As an employer, you want to get the maximum value for the buck, as long as the satisfaction quotient to your employees is similarly high.</p>
<p>sakky’s point about the march to educational credentialism should be well heeded. The highest correlation between IQ & terminal education degree occurred in the 1960’s. To me that means our post-high school educational institution is less of a meritocracy now than back then.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or it might not be. We must disabuse ourselves of the notion that education alone will always improve the well-being of either the individual involved or society as a whole. </p>
<p>For example, one of the most pernicious effects of education is its proven effects of reducing certain types of individual productivity by engendering feelings of professional entitlement and resulting aversions to certain categories of ‘menial’ jobs, especially those that involve manual labor in favor of more ‘professional’ pursuits that provide psychological and sociological justification for the expensive educations obtained. For example, all of those secretaries could have surely made more money working as waitresses in the numerous bars and restaurants around town - and indeed, some had done exactly that while as students in order to support themselves. But the college degree meant that those types of jobs were now beneath them, a sentiment I heard expressed several times by those secretaries who said that they would feel ashamed to have their old college friends see them working as waitresses after they had graduated (although this was not a problem while they were still students). They would rather hold office jobs as secretaries in order to save face, even if that meant earning lower pay. Similarly, a guy I knew from college who used to deliver pizzas part-time as a college student, immediately quit that job as soon as he graduated for the very same rationale: he didn’t want to face the ‘embarrassment’ of having to deliver a pizza to his old college friends. He would rather take no job at all, and in fact did exactly that for several months after graduation. </p>
<p>Nor does society benefit from the intellectual ‘enrichment’ that education instills within individuals , even if that education were costless to provide. At the risk of bringing politics into the discussion, the fact is, some of the most extremist and rapacious ideologies in world history, such as Fascism and Marxism/Communism to modern-day terrorist movements, have been topics of deep sway amongst the intellectual class. Fascism was philosophically rooted by the works of Italian educator and university department chair Giovanni Gentile, and attracted and was promoted by intellectuals throughout the world from philosophers and writers Martin Heidegger, Louis-Ferdinand C</p>
<p>I go to an inner city school and it’s definitely not “degraded” - even though 40% of the kids don’t graduate. The other kids are taking 8 or more (sometimes even 13) APs. The ones who fall out of my HS fail not because they aren’t smart. They’re just not used to working and they don’t have parents pushing them. I posted on another site that from what I see, the Over-involved parent argument is really a fad argument, not based on what I see at my HS.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please don’t assume to speak for others, or that you know what they consider “beneath” them. As one who in a previous life did both (secretary, waitress), I know exactly what the latter makes, and yes, my tips were good in grad school. But I wasn’t about to advance to restaurateur from that position, whereas I did (and others did) advance to executive positions from clerical positions. It’s called white collar.</p>
<p>First let me say this. There is nothing wrong with trade workers. When I was 18 years old I was training to be a tool and die maker. But after about 1.5 years I can no long stand on my feet for long periods of time because of a disability .</p>
<p>Learning a trade is good, but if you get disable you have nothing to fall back on. So I think that anyone learning a trade should get an A.S/A.A degree on the side.</p>
<p>So now I’m working on my BS. in Computer Science(part-time). And I have start a new job as a software developer making of 55K a year this is without my degree.</p>
<p>They are many jobs in the USA for Software Engineers, and other type of engineers.
Right now I know a company that needs about 30 software engineers, but they can not find anyone that can pass a sample programming tes</p>
<p>They are also many jobs of the skilled trades too.</p>
<p>The guy who inspects my parents’ cars has a PHD in English. He owns his own car shop, a busy place and says he’s glad that he could go to college and then get off the traditional path.</p>
<p>^^^^because what we do for a living is only part of what makes up our lives.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t speak for others; I’m letting them speak for themselves. When women quit waitressing jobs upon graduating because they say they would feel strange about serving former classmates, that’s them speaking for themselves. When a guy I know quits his job delivering pizza after graduating and moves back home to be unemployed for months because he doesn’t want to ‘risk’ delivering pizza to his old friends, that’s him speaking for himself. </p>
<p>To quote Thomas Sowell: </p>
<p>"…negative human capital [may be] increased by education, so that those who have been to schools or universities now regard a higher range of occupations as being beneath them. "(Conquests & Cultures p.340)</p>
<p>“Formal education, especially amongst peoples for whom it is rare or recent, often creates feelings of entitlement to rewards and exemption from many kinds of work…In short, education can reduce an individual’s productivity by the expectations and aversions it creates.” (Race & Culture p.23-24).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it’s called social aversion. Let’s be honest: people don’t enjoy embarrassing themselves. Whether certain people consider certain tasks to be embarrassing is an individual predilection, and depends on the social prestige of the job in question, as well as the individual’s sensitivity to social pressures. </p>
<p>For example, right now, in my (relatively well-educated) town, the unemployment rate is fairly high and many people complain about not having jobs. Yet I can immediately think of at least 3 fast food restaurants or department stores that are hiring right now. The problem is that those jobs are not only low-paying but also socially unprestigious. Let’s face it, nobody with a college degree really wants to flip burgers at McDonald’s. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We’re not talking about trade workers. We’re talking about manual service jobs that have become synonymous with low prestige. </p>
<p>Now, to be clear, the issue is not whether we personally connote certain jobs with low prestige. I personally think that any job - however lowly its social status may be - is still better than no job at all. But society unfortunately doesn’t always see it that way. </p>
<p>The upshot is that education is not always an unadulterated positive. Surely we can all think of people who have become averse to working at certain jobs as being beneath them once they’ve graduated from college. Worse, some educated people become enthralled with destructive ideologies that wreak havoc upon others - Communism, Anarchism, & Fascism being far more popular amongst the intellectual class than amongst the uneducated peasants and laborers who the intellectuals were supposedly helping. To paraphrase Sowell, the educated class have been a prominent source of unemployment and social strife throughout world history.</p>
<p>Post 115 is filled with so many non-responsive reponses and off-topic issues that it’s difficult to know where to begin, except that it’s been apparent several times in a row now that this is a critical reading problem. </p>
<p>Ideas are meant to follow in logical order, same for sentences, and words within a sentence. Thus, the phrase ‘white collar’ which you later misappropriated to refer to some pet peeve of yours, versus the discussion about advancement resulting from a college education, was within the context of promotion/betterment, in my post. You cannot compare secretaries to waittresses, in the context in which I described those opportunities, because waittressing is largely devoid of opportunity, no matter how many degrees one has before, during, or after. Not so for secretarial work necessarily, if that secretary is degreed, articulate (often via a degree), informed & well-read (often via a degree), and working for a company where promotion from within is possible and even probable. </p>
<p>Further, all you’ve “cited” is your personal & rather few anecdotes. I could cite you many more than that which demonstrate that my co-workers in brief waittressing similarly saw waittressing as brief, lucrative, and limited in opportunity – a way-station between degrees and/or advanceable jobs. If there were other (social) aspects to the position - such as being self-conscious of “service” (to peers, 'inferiors," or what have you), that may or may not validated in any statistically applicable study, but in any case that aspect is probably subordinate to the larger reality of the dead-end nature of waittressing for a degreed or soon to be degreed waittress.</p>
<p>I should have known this would also deteriorate into a O/T race discussion, which has absolutely nothing to do essentially with the OP and cited article.</p>
<p>I agree with Dr. Murray that only 10% of 18 year olds belong in college, defined in the traditional sense. </p>
<p>I see the sad results of our B.A degree orientated society buried deep into the lecture halls of my University everyday. Even the University of Texas, which I attend, one of the top public schools in the nation, has too far too many unqualified students. These students despise their courses, struggle mightily with the work, and are often burdened with thousands of dollars of debt. </p>
<p>They attend school because they must get a B.A, society expects it of them, they are failure if they do not obtain it. Most will never use the knowledge they supposedly gained during their four years or more struggle with the “sociology”, “psychology”, “marketing”, or other fluff majors. (I suppose some attend my school for the “Football” aspect, not a terribly bad idea given this years undefeated season and BCS championship birth, or the vibrant partying scene, but let us forget about those for a second). </p>
<p>Many students majoring in Business (mostly top 3-5% kids) that I have met seem ill prepared for the rigors of college work. Our school requires Business students to take two semesters of calculus, a fine requirement in my opinion, except for that fact that 30% of the students cannot handle calculus. Not everyone can handle calculus. This is a simple truth. High level math, requires high level students. The calculus taught at my University is fairly dumbed down as it is, it requires simply a memorization of practice problem solutions and methods to achieve a high mark. But a lot of kids simply can’t handle it even in the simplified form. They scheme to wiggle their way out of a calculus course through a variety of “community college courses” and “online courses”. This is a disgrace. Calculus is not necessary for them. They cannot understand it or its applications and implications. You can teach them the mechanics behind solving an integral, but that doesn’t do anything for them. They want to be salesmen and saleswomen, fashion consultants, brand managers, etc. Do you need calculus for that? </p>
<p>Some of the students I have encountered often have difficulty writing a coherent one page paper. They are saved only because many classes involve group work where there glaring weaknesses can be hidden, or because the grading standards are laughingly inadequate. They can graduate with a decent G.P.A without ever having their severe deficiencies uncovered. (I had one professor whose grading criteria was the following for essays. If it was of the right length and on topic, the student received full marks. If it was too short or off topic, they simply received 90/100. No checks on grammar, punctuation, logic, etc.) I remind you this at one of the top business schools in the nation. </p>
<p>The rest of courses offered (aside from a few quant heavy accounting and finance ones) are simple formalities in the process of obtaining the coveted B.A (or in this case, a B.B.A). Grade inflation is rampant. Student interest is shockingly low. </p>
<p>90% of the students I encounter choose their classes based on the professors grade distributions. Not on the academic accomplishments or research findings of the particular instructor. Not on their interest in the subject matter. But on HOW EASY THE CLASS IS. You can earn a B just by showing up to class everyday, doing half the assignments, taking the tests. No studying required. If you study a little bit, you can make an A. Neither takes much work. If you are at college for the purpose of getting good grades, a degree, and a good job, you are here for all the wrong reasons. </p>
<p>In this system, good professors are PUNISHED, because student evaluations trash professors who grade fairly and teach at a high level. I want professors who challenge me to think critically, to ask questions, and to solve difficult problems. I want to be graded fairly and justly. I’d rather get a C that I deserve, then an A I don’t. </p>
<p>Most students think that office hours are for them to go in and argue about a grade, ask for remedial instruction on simple concepts that are easily answered by opening the textbook, or to brown-nose(sometimes downright flirt) with the professor so that they may one day come back and ask for a recommendation. Many of the instructors bemoan this fact, rightly. Gone are the days where office hours were an opportunity for students and Professors to discuss the subject matter in depth. </p>
<p>I like going to professors office hours to chat with them about subject matters and their research. Its enlightening to me. Its a refreshing breath of air for them. It makes me furious when there are thirty people in line pleading for grade raises or asking for factual answers easily found in the text. </p>
<p>I attend class most of the time, because I love it. I want to be surrounded by individuals who love it just as much. I want to take essay tests, do meaningful research, and participate in engaging in-class discussion. I wish it were like that…but it is not. </p>
<p>Many of the good students in liberal arts are left unchallenged and their potential untapped because of the failures of the system. Ask any intelligent and passionate student what they think about the liberal arts education here, and they will tell you straight up, that it is a joke. Many will cruise through their education, crapping out mediocre and sometimes downright silly essays that will nevertheless earn them a high mark (believe me, I have done this far too many times), never challenging themselves, while the lucky few will find their way into Professors offices and onto meaningful research and inquiry. </p>
<p>I can’t even imagine how it is at a lesser school, with lesser students, when even the flagship university is plagued with this unfortunate overabundance of marginal ability. These students should be elsewhere, doing something they enjoy doing and are good at, not laboring away fruitlessly because society demands a B.A. of them. </p>
<p>This is the sad state of college today. We need to offer the opportunity of an affordable college education to everyone. But we need not EXPECT it of everyone. It is not for everyone. It is only for the top 10%, top 20%, of college-aged students. This is not demeaning or elitist. If we get rid of the idea that a B.A represents some-quasi-signal of knowledge possession or first class citizenship, then many kids will simply not choose to go to college, and they will be happier and more successful because of it. </p>
<p>I agree with Dr. Murray, more tests such as the C.P.A, are needed to test job applicants.</p>