<ol>
<li><p>There are fewer people in poverty today than there were in the 1960s. Also, more people have degrees. Correlation or causation, I don’t know. But maybe the increase in degrees granted actually isn’t as “inflationary” as thought… maybe people are actually better off.</p></li>
<li><p>To people saying that people should start specializing in high school, I disagree. High schoolers don’t know what they want to be for the rest of their lives. It might sounds good, but it really is not a good idea. What is more important is teaching them basic skills that they will use for the rest of their lives. Skills like grammar, reading, writing, basic knowledge that people expect others to know, and logic… that is what high school is for, not learning how to fix a car.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I feel jaded by the whole education system. I thought pre-college education was a huge waste of time and I think college is a huge waste of time and money, except to party and have fun. But I go because “it will secure me a good job”. Not to focus on something I am interested in.</p>
<p>Enginox…sorry I don’t agree. Lots of learning certainly takes place from K-12. But college is different in many ways. First, the level of learning is taken much higher. Second, many subjects are taught in college that are not taught in K-12. Entire fields of study cannot start until college. K-12 teaches the basic core subjects. College offers a wide array of subjects, fields, and skills. For example, the field my older daughter is in was not something she could have studied in K-12. Third, college is much more than what you learn academically. It is an entire developmental experience and a good transition from the K-12 years and living at home, to a life as an independent and employed adult.</p>
<p>Prothero, that is too bad. My kids loved college in every aspect and also loved their chosen field of study. They did not go to simply secure a good job. I hope you find your passion.</p>
<p>I like the risque comment that was made about the library. We don’t always have to depend on educational institutions to teach us things. Some of the most capable people I know were self-taught in whatever they’re doing.</p>
<p>I agree with all points made about the role of education prior to college (or what it’s role SHOULD be… but isn’t in reality) made by users.</p>
<p>Once again, I don’t think “college” can be viewed as a single lump product. This thread attests to the variety of experiences that can be had.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This kind of thinking needs to disappear.</p>
<p>The “college is different in many ways” seems to be code for “college is a magical place filled with unicorns and elves.” An exclusive social club is also different from a public one; Texas is different from New York; workplace is also different from college. Nevermind that people are learning calculus and beyond in high school; seems that in some cases. you may start your college learning during high school. College certainly teaches you concepts that one may only learn in college but that does not mean everyone needs to learn those concepts to properly function in our society. </p>
<p>The notion that only in college one may attain enlightenment is absurd; the belief that people should go to college to become independent and responsible adults is probably the most ridiculous!</p>
<p>The fields my kids are in cannot be learned solely in a library. That may be true of some fields, but not all. My kids’ fields are hands-on ones.</p>
<p>I never said that only in college one may attain “enlightenment”!</p>
<p>I was saying that there are fields of study you learn in college that are not taught in K-12! </p>
<p>I also said that college is a certain kind of experience that has a lot of value beyond what is learned in the classroom. You may not value that experience, but I do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The “outside” experience is probably what society and employers value most- the sociological aspect of education. It doesn’t have to do with learning or being curious and developing intellectually. It’s about conforming to the norms of college, being independent and producing work on time. This explains why a graduate degree is becoming the “new” high school degree.</p>
<p>@Soozievt:</p>
<p>I think that’s fairly obvious, no? There are many things you may learn somewhere that you may not learn elsewhere; what is your point? The premise of the thread is that our society is unnecessarily (over)educating many people for professions that do not require such level of (over)education. A Bachelor’s degree holder performing tasks that a high school graduate may perform satisfactorily is a waste of resources, both societal and individual.</p>
<p>I value education just as much, if not more, than you. I am currently a STEM major. Thankfully, I’m largely insulated from people that view a college education as job training but unfortunately people in more general fields are there because they need or think a college degree will catapult them to a middle class lifestyle.</p>
<p>Is college overrated? Yes, it is overrated for many of the jobs and positions available out there. Many of us know many people that managed to attain success, whatever that is, without the need for a college education. From your famous successes, like B. Gates, to your local pizza parlor owner, these people proved, time and again, college was overrated for those tasks they performed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hilarious. Exactly how are you insulated from these people? I attended school at very highly rated scientific and technical schools and this was not my experience at all.
Please, I beg you, tell me this ivory tower you attend where nobody even considers the possiblility of a future career?</p>
<p>^It’s quite obvious your “highly rated scientific and technical school” did not properly develop your reading comprehension and analytical thinking skills. Few people pursue studies in mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. with the goal of making big bucks or to simply get a job, any job. While these individuals are interested in having a professional career, the purpose of said career is to help them advance scientific knowledge and not the career itself.</p>
<p>Engineers, applied mathematicians, biochemists, etc. eschew more towards more lucrative career paths but their main focus remains in advancing scientific knowledge.</p>
<p>I am largely insulated from individuals that major in, well, less demanding fields whom are only there to put piece of paper on the wall. I hope this helps you understand.</p>
<p>How about we use a substantive argument about the use of giving more people a college education? People may also be taking upon unnecessary debt if they don’t finish college, but is it certain that they don’t make that money back using the skills they learned in the year of college they attended? Again, I refer to the relatively lower levels of poverty today as compared to 1960 to raise the question that maybe all of this “over-educating” is actually economically beneficial.</p>
<p>Also, being granted a degree does not make a person any more valuable in n economy. It is only in how that degree was attained, via advanced learning, does the degree have value. The degree means nothing. It only indicates something</p>
<p>
I imagine if you could read, you would answer my questions.
What the heck does this mean anyway - “eschew more towards”
Let me ask you directly one more time, because you continue to refuse to answer -
Where do you attend school? How are you insulated from these individuals? What exactly is it you do at this school? Because what you say here sounds like nonsense. Especially the way you assess people’s motivations like some starry eyed dreamer.</p>
<p>And please don’t try to tell me you are some sort of advanced scientific researcher or post-doc. Only undergrads say “I am a STEM major.”</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I attend City College of New York.</p></li>
<li><p>My peers focus less on future careers and more on the kind of scientific research they will be performing. Our discussions do not focus on I’ll be a professor at <insert prestigious=“” univ=“” here=“”> or similar remarks. In contrast, several engineers focus a bit more on future earnings and many non-STEM majors focus a bit more on future jobs they may obtain.</insert></p></li>
<li><p>I am an undergraduate therefore I am currently learning.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Eschew: to abstain or keep away from; shun; avoid. </p>
<p>It was incorrectly used. I meant lean towards.</p>
<p>Enginox, I think it is quite insulting to many people when you state: “I am largely insulated from individuals that major in, well, less demanding fields whom are only there to put piece of paper on the wall.” Um, no. So, only students in scientific fields are in demanding fields and are there to actually make a difference in the world and all others are there just to put a piece of paper on the wall? Geez, you come across as needing to learn about life beyond what you are studying.</p>
<p>Soozievt, I respect all fields of knowledge in an equal manner. Unfortunately, many individuals majoring in technical fields view many non-technical fields as less demanding. Pay a visit to the engineering subforums or simply ask a random sample of math, science, and engineering majors. Realistically, we can not say the workload in an English Lit program is not similar to the workload in a Mathematics program.</p>
<p>However, once out in the practical world, a musician’s contributions to society are just as valuable as a physicist’s contributions to society.</p>
<p>
Fair enough. That’s what I thought. Just checking.</p>
<p>I don’t usually like to get so argumentative on these threads. Soemthing you wrote apparently didn’t sit well with me for some reason. I went to UCSD (first degee in Physics) and UCLA (EE degree). So it was similar to your school, and I just have to say my impression was very different. I saw all sorts of motivation from the students.</p>
<p>But I guess your experience is your experience.</p>
<p>
As are we all.</p>
<p>Enginox, my kids were in college programs that were extremely demanding in the hours alone and they are not scientists or engineers. I know engineers have very demanding courseloads, however. </p>
<p>My point wasn’t as much about that. You insulted those in other fields by saying they were there just to put a piece of paper on the wall and that you were trying to advance scientific knowledge. Let me tell you that those in my own field and my kids’ fields are in it to also make a difference in the world and not to put a piece of paper on the wall.</p>