<p>wow look at the yahoo article that shows all these people who got rich without a college degree!! That means I can do it too!!!</p>
<p>Its like dreaming to be an NBA basketball player. Chances are 1/1000000000000000</p>
<p>I don’t know why some people keep emphasizing how you can become rich with only a high school degree. Its possible…but unless you can come up with some kind of million dollar idea, its very low.</p>
<p>Redroses, I don’t know what you consider an “elite” career but my kids have shadowed/interned with surgeons and other specialists, pharmacists, attorneys, engineers, and the like…and we live in a tiny town in a fairly rural area and are definitely not affluent! I believe one could also have spent time in a state senator’s office. Some of these connections were through a program our high school offers, which is competitive and serious, and they go to great lengths to find willing, interested mentors for our kids. They were not just one day and done type of things - for example, several hospitals in our area offer semester or year long rotations through various departments for kids interested in health careers. It does take time and some networking ability to ferret out these opportunities though. So, I think it’s entirely possible for some 18 year olds to know exactly what they like and don’t like…but it’s perfectly okay if they don’t! Most college-educated people I know have changed careers at least twice so age isn’t necessarily a prerequisite for determining a good career fit. People and interests change in a very individual way and going to college at 18 versus 25, or even 50, isn’t a guarantee that the student will be receptive to the opportunities offered at a particular time. </p>
<p>BBdad, there are different types of electricians and many don’t go the apprenticeship route because they’re working for power companies, wind farms, industrial/manufacturing plants, etc. I know several kids who completed their AOS/AAS at two year SUNY’s, which includes an internship, and both received offers before graduation at a salary that, with overtime, easily rivals that of new engineering grads in this area (and demand will likely continue as the green energy industry grows…someone has to wire for all that power!). They enjoy the work, have great benefits, and NO DEBT…it’s not a bad life for a 20-something year old! One is working on his BS, on his employer’s dime, by taking a few classes a semester at a very good school. The other just bought his first house (needed rewiring, got a great deal)! I went to high school with kids that chose culinary arts and went on to travel the world as chefs and have wonderful careers. The point is, people who don’t want a four year degree also choose their careers based on their interests/aptitudes/passions…it’s still not a “one size fits all”! I think those who are motivated to work hard and to continue learning and growing can always find rewarding careers.</p>
<p>Looking around CC, the elite careeers kids seem to find later: investment banking, management consulting, private equity–hedge funds, venture capital, actuarial science, Fortune 500 training programs …every kid knows what a doctor, lawyer and pharmacist is–not that they know what being these things entail and others can correct me, but yours is an unusual HS, but many never hear about many careers until college.</p>
<p>Redroses, I semi-agree with the idea that it IS because they are 18. However, I would like to point out something many probably have not considered yet, which is the application of “Correlation is not causation” towards why most 18 year old don’t have a clue. Yes, most 18 year olds don’t have a clue, but being 18 doesn’t lay at the heart of why they don’t have a clue. </p>
<p>I didn’t say they should choose based on their personality, but rather that if they don’t have a clue, then knowing their personality is a very easy, and likely effective, means of figuring out where to start. I think a primary goal that needs to be emphasized is that, students need to start. “Starting is only 50% of the way.” By starting, everything else will fall in much easier than if not starting (“everything” includes desire to research, desire to explore, desire to try, etc. as well as the lucky epiphany - for the most part, note that the underlying concept is desire, not age). I will certainly say that too many 18 year olds have not yet “started.”</p>
<p>Don’t forget that career fairs (not career fairs, but I forget the actual terminology - parents coming in to talk about their job) and such don’t happen at all, really, in high school. However, “career fairs” are pretty common in the lower years - why would they do this if it’s useless since they’re so far from being 18+? Also, why would they not do the same for kids in high school? for it could be argued that doing it in high school would be way more effective. That’s partly because the moment you grow a conscious (very young), you can begin taking control. Students in high school should be making their own way to finding means of exploring various potential careers. Most students, however, are too busy to do this because their time is absorbed with watching TV, playing video games, Facebook, partying/having fun, being lazy/simply laying around, etc. (note that doing homework is not one of them).</p>
<p>Yes, the Wall Street careers would certainly be more difficult for a high school kid to experience in a meaningful way. Luckily, not one of mine had the slightest interest in anything remotely connected, being more in the “avoiding desk job” camp. But, other than actuarial sci, are these really careers that many colleges would have the connections to help kids experience?</p>
<p>Careers don’t have to be chosen before one begins full-time work, let alone when one hasn’t yet entered college, or even when one is enrolled in college. I’ve got a sense that a lot of careers are built piece by piece, based on gaining experience and making connections and learning about your talents and newly developing opportunities over time.</p>
<p>Sometimes its easier to see the relationship between career path and earlier training after the career is established than before it has begun. I’ve seen this with both of my kids and many of their friends. My son, who graduated from college 10 years ago, looks like he’s been on a perfect career path for his skills – that is, he looks so now – but there’s no way when he was 18 that we (his parents) or he himself would have predicted how this career path would evolve. Economic consultant, poker player, journalist-writer. That’s what I call a compound career line. And he’s earning most of his money now in an occupation that scarcely existed 10 years ago.</p>
<p>My daughter, now out of college 7 years, has also been following a compound career path, starting in arts and moving to business with several years of work experience and a couple of years of post-graduate study.</p>
<p>In both cases, we can see how their abilities and interests from high school (and earlier) led to their present occupations. But neither occupational outcome was predictable 10 years ago. It only seems continuous now, since we recognize in retrospect the early precursors of their current activities.</p>
<p>In cases like these, it would have been silly to lock into a single well defined career line from age 18. It’s better to acquire a variety of skills and experiences – including a compound education, mixing work with college – and to look for opportunities as they evolve.</p>
<p>I know what I want to do, I’m only graduating HS this year. I know the range of careers I could do, but I know what I really want/desire to do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are two problems with your analysis. The first is that the college graduate is earning their money later in their career, meaning that interest is working against them. The second is that a student doesn’t pay $30,000 for their degree, just because they only go $30,000 into debt. Assuming 4 years to get a degree at a cost of $20,000 per year, the college student pays $80,000 for their degree and is $180,000 behind the person getting a job directly.</p>
<p>Your first comment is correct. Your second, however, assumes that the student is paying the entire $80,000 in college cost (net of the loans). In most cases that $80K cost is borne by the prior generation – the parents – and thus isn’t a cost incurred by the student.</p>
<p>As well, if accounting for in-state tuition, the general price tag is likely to not hit a full 20k/year depending on where you’re attending.</p>
<p>“I know several kids who completed their AOS/AAS at two year SUNY’s, which includes an internship, and both received offers before graduation at a salary that, with overtime, easily rivals that of new engineering grads in this area (and demand will likely continue as the green energy industry grows…someone has to wire for all that power!)”</p>
<p>Well now we are talking an AA degree, I thought we were talking about alternatives to college. That a two year college works for many is something else. </p>
<p>Demand may grow, but I suspect supply will grow as more people (including both experienced blue collar workers, and young people who were never considering a four year college) are directed towards “green” jobs. Unless the supply is contrained by the number of slots in AA programs. In which case we are back to the original problem. </p>
<p>I would also think that demand will grow for the engineers who design and manage the projects. </p>
<p>Again, I am not arguing against trades via apprenticeships, or via community colleges. I just think we need to make apples to apples comparisons, and I see a lot apples to oranges comparisons here.</p>
<p>Of course one needs to adjust for individuals. If someone enrolls in a four year program, and never finishes the degree, the cost benefit is not going to look too good. Of course thats why folks look at things like 4 year and 6 year graduation rates when examining colleges, and I hope look at the prospectives students abilities and commmitments.</p>
<p>For someone who is unsure of that commitment, community college is a good choice. If they decide NOT to go on, they still have Assoc degree. But they also have the choice to go on to a 4 year degree, if after 2 years that makes sense.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That varies from family to family. It’s nice work if you can get it to be a student on the parents’ dime, but that doesn’t always happen. And it is precisely this phenomenon of lower-income applicants being priced out of college that makes the supposed higher incomes of college graduates somewhat bogus–high school students who go on to college started adult life with more funding to begin with.</p>
<p>I am not quite clear on the purpose of the ROI analysis anyway?</p>
<p>Are we trying to determine the optimal path for a high school senior? In that case there are too many individual factors at play to use averages.</p>
<p>Are we trying to determine if society needs more college grads? Well again, I think we would have to look occupation by occupation. We need more trained arabic linguists, and more environmental engineers. And also more electricians, I gather. We probably don’t need as many of some liberal arts majors from bottom tier schools as we get, and we also don’t need more unskilled HS grads. Again, averages don’t really help. </p>
<p>Are we trying to forecast demand for places in college based on income streams? I am not sure the discussion is even addressing all the items you would need for that either.</p>
<p>BBdad - the AOS/AAS is one alternative. They can also choose the union training program or the two-year high school program. I believe the first two end up at journeyman level, while the HS programs start at helper level and apprentice up to journeyman…something like that. All three have classroom hours involved, and there’s no way one could become competent and licensed in trades like electricity without the book work. Re demand, it’s not likely to go down any time soon…it’s increasing faster for those trained in new technologies but there’s been fairly steady demand for licensed electricians and, of course, they don’t all specialize. Several of the SUNY 2 year colleges and CC’s are now starting/incorporating green energy programs. The AOS is really a trades degree - there is little to no unrelated material in the courses, so it’s unlike the traditional 2-year college degree. But making this training available at public institutions relieves the student of paying for expensive private trade schools.</p>
<p>“Assuming 4 years to get a degree at a cost of $20,000 per year, the college student pays $80,000 for their degree and is $180,000 behind the person getting a job directly.”</p>
<p>this is what I mean by apples to oranges. 20k a year for a state school, in state, usually is full cost of attendance. IE includes room and board. </p>
<p>Somehow our HS grad making 25k is not paying for room and board. Thus enabling them to save 100 k in four years. Which for most kids 18 to 21 is quite a feat, I guess.</p>
<p>Apples to apples. Either we have them both living at home - in which case the state college kid can probably pay well under 80k for a 4 year degree. Or they are both living away from home, in which case our young worker cannot save 100k. </p>
<p>for amusement I looked up the 4 year state school closest to my home
[George</a> Mason University Office of Admissions](<a href=“http://admissions.gmu.edu/common/undergraduateTuition.asp]George”>Cost of Attendance | George Mason University)</p>
<p>8k a year, if you live at home. So a george mason kid ends up with 32k in debt after 4 years, versus young worker with 100k in assets. </p>
<p>I leave to others to discuss whether the typical employed 19 yo living at home is going to live as frugally as a college student, and save their entire earnings.</p>
<p>that also assume our young worker is continually employed, never laid off or fired or whatever. Even in good times, I think thats a tad optimistic for a 19 yo with no post HS education.</p>
<p>“Several of the SUNY 2 year colleges and CC’s are now starting/incorporating green energy programs.”</p>
<p>and that does not make you think that supply may catch up with demand?</p>
<p>"They can also choose the union training program "</p>
<p>Which as I think I pointed out, are not necessarily easy to get a slot in.</p>
<p>Pardon if I sound harsh, I was trained as an economist. I am skeptical of free lunches - I tend to think most people are more or less rational (at least on practical things that effect their own lives directly), and if something sounds so appealing, theres a catch. Or, in more technical terms, disequilibria do not last indefinitely.</p>
<p>"I think I found that list of the fastest growing jobs, where most don’t require a college degree:</p>
<p>Occupations with the largest job growth"</p>
<p>that list includes RN’s who can get an AA.</p>
<p>interestingly, there is much debate about the importance of a bachelors degree for RNs</p>
<p>[Book</a> Highlights from Educating Nurses: A Call for Radical Transformation | Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching](<a href=“http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/elibrary/educating-nurses-highlights]Book”>http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/elibrary/educating-nurses-highlights)</p>
<p>[More-Educated</a> Nurses = Better Care - CBS News](<a href=“http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/24/health/main574923.shtml]More-Educated”>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/24/health/main574923.shtml)</p>
<p>Do I think that having 100 or so electricians statewide formally trained in green energy technologies each year will exceed demand? No, I do not…I think it is a larger industry than that and has many residential, commercial, and industrial applications. But not all of them will choose to specialize in that area anyway, and it’s not as if they will be unemployable! It’s simply an enhancement of their skills, which is what continuing education does in many fields. Why should the trades be any different? They must learn new skills to keep up with new products and technology. Btw, there is a cap on how many students are accepted into these programs since the schools must provide lab space for them. </p>
<p>The difficulty of getting accepted into a union training program likely varies by region. There is a testing/application process which would weed out those lacking critical math and reading skills and I think there is a background check and drug test. Obviously, having some related experience, even at the high school level, helps. The locals in heavily populated areas probably receive many more applicants than they can accommodate.</p>
<p>Too many people are going to college. Roughly 60% of college students graduate in 6 years. The job market gives little partial credit to people who don’t graduate. Take for instance, engineering, people who graduate from the top schools, almost regardless of GPA, will land decent jobs. People who graduate from your average to mediocre state school with a 3.5, a strong co-op experience, or networking will still find good jobs. However, many of these graduates at your typical public U are going to be practically unemployable in their chosen field and may end up working for around minimum wage.</p>
<p>For those of you in this thread who bridle at the notion that “not everybody should goto college, and encouraging them to go may be economically hazardous and immoral” I think it’s important to remember that we aren’t talking about you; we’re talking about the bottom 40-50 percent of high school grads, most of whom would be better served by attending community college or vocational school. I also don’t think anybody is suggesting that a high school diploma by itself is sufficient for any measure of success in life, everybody needs training of some kind.</p>