<p>I meant parents or household income - all I am saying is that people with advantages, even middle class, can help move child along.</p>
<p>^
possibly and interesting. Perhaps it explains why for most families the American Dream takes generations. Maybe being a first generation college student is the key.</p>
<p>The problem a community college, or any college, for that matter, or any school has is providing the courses at a level that is digestible and passable for the students taking them, and yet providing what is necessary in the standards such a course may have. </p>
<p>In schools where the average academic profile of the students is not strong, this becomes a particularly difficult issue. To fail nearly everyone in the class is going to mean the end of the course and probably the teaching position. To pass everyone when they don't deserve to be passed is not right either. So what many teachers do is try to present as much of the material in a way that can be absorbed by much of the class, and hope that the gaps get filled. </p>
<p>This can work all right when the course is the last one someone is taking in the subject, but if a student needs that course as a foundation for higher level ones, that can be a big problem if everything is not thoroughly covered. This is the issue that often exists. It's not just a community college problem, by the way, but one that a lot of colleges have.</p>
<p>On a positive note, a good friend of mine went back to college well in middle age to take premed courses. She took all she could at a local community college that is not renown for the quality of such courses, and then took the rest at a local college. She just about maxed the MCATs and is in medical school today. She had no problem getting the knowledge she needed from the community college and the locals school. And I've heard these schools sharply criticised for dumbying down courses and not adequately preparing students for the next steps. She did not find this an issue at all. </p>
<p>But then she was an "A" student through college 30 years before that, and though she was not in the maths and sciences, had the intellect, motivation and study skills. She strongly feels that the community college is a true treasure.</p>
<p>Many community colleges and other colleges for that matter have different levels of instruction. Not only honors but in other courses as well.
This is why the Physics that biology majors take is different than Physics that engineering students take.</p>
<p>This has zero to do with the study as this is a moot point by the time the student has a PhD.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>And I've heard these schools sharply criticised for dumbing down courses and not adequately preparing students for the next steps.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I helped tutor a friend's son who was taking the 2nd and 3rd tranches of calculus at the local CC. I was surprised to see the rigor of the courses. No sloughing off there! Of course, many of the kids were taking the course for the second time...</p>
<p>Many of the people I know started at CC and went on to very good careers. I think that in each case, they went on past a BS--one got a MS in engineering, the other a DDS. I expect that extra year(s) spent on the added degree helped them make the transition to the increased rigor.</p>
<p>I do not feel that starting at CC affected my salary / carrier any negatively. I got job rignt after CC and many jobs after that paid for education and ended up with MBA that was paid by vaious employers. I started working professionally in my field 2 years earlier compare to somebody who went to 4 years college. Worked for me!</p>
<p>As Cpt of the House has noted there are considerable variables in the situation with the CC students. </p>
<p>A primary consideration is economics-CC students on the whole are as intelligent as their brethren at the Universities but the conditions under which they have to operate dictate that some of that ability is diverted from studies. CC students for example do not use the outside job for college money, they have to use it (literally) for life. And as such when schedules conflict these students have to place the job as primary emphasis. In their case to lose the one entails the loss of everything else. </p>
<p>Often the CC students do come in from the less affluent areas and as such the local schools have done a very poor job in preparing them for either collegiate studies or work. In the poorer districts too much of the educational resources tend to be directed to social engineering rather than teaching. This may be necessary to a degree but the irony is that with the over engagement of these programs the schools are unintentionally ensuring that many of these students will have to struggle even harder to elevate their condition. Compared to learning proper writing or other skills requiring students to wander about the school carrying an electronic baby or a flour sack has got to be a profound misapplication of resources. </p>
<p>Concerning the quality of curriculum obviously that depends on the institutions involved. Although between CC's and Universities the credentials of the teaching faculty are not that dissimilar in that most of the FT profs have the usual collection of expensive alphabet soup. </p>
<p>What does differ is the CC's do tend to use a higher proportion of adjuncts which may have a detrimental effect. Simply because for the academic sharecroppers (adjuncts) the time and resources needed to fully expand a teaching situation are simply not available. Difficult to do when one is working for several schools, has no office or office hours, and may be holding other jobs outside of teaching. </p>
<p>And depending on the CC yes there can be substantial pressure to 'dumb down' the curriculum for various reasons including enrollment numbers, self esteem for students, and etc. Universities and privates do this also but the frustration is that for the CC system to do this ensures the marginalization of some of their own students. Granted there often is some adjustment needed for compensating for poor secondary prep, but to continue that across the board is compounding the disadvantages which many CC students already have to deal with...
In that regard CC's will find themselves immersed in a variant of the old argument between W. Du Bois and B. Washington insofar as to what function education should serve. </p>
<p>Rural schools are obviously another matter these colleges are often short on resources and the schools from which they draw their students are under the same limitations. (Or they spent it all on the team bus). </p>
<p>One strange advantage that some CC students do possess is a certain degree of cynical street smarts. As such although they do not possess direct knowledge of the inner workings of academe they are in some ways more able to see through some of the collegiate marketing subterfuge. They may not be able to voice their observations as succinctly but their life experience has taught them to spot a scam. Often those who start direct at university studies lack this ability and so are more vulnerable to collegiate marketing and etc. Simply because the system has generally worked for them, and as such they are more prone to trust it unreservedly.</p>
<p>The study is available at Community</a> Development Publications - St. Louis Fed. I was particularly interested to see details about the researcher's conclusions on how people who started at a CC earn less than those who started at a four-year school, regardless of "gender, race, education, experience level, field of study and type of college attended."</p>
<p>I can't tell from the paper how field of study is controlled for. That's especially important, since, as the authors note,</p>
<p>
[quote]
Among people who have at
least a bachelors degree, 17 percent report having
received an associate degree. This study finds that
people with a prior associate degree were significantly
more likely to attend less selective (and perhaps
less expensive) institutions for their bachelors
studies. Students with an associate degree are
also more likely to be enrolled in public colleges
than those who do not have an associate degree
and less likely to attend private colleges. People
with an associate degree are less likely to major in
sciences and engineering and are more likely to
major in health, technology and management than
their counterparts.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>(my emphasis)</p>
<p>The actual salary differences are in the 5 to 10% difference relative to what the study says are average salaries, and the differences are mitigated when people's work history is considered. </p>
<p>
[quote]
when work experience is measured
more carefully, the estimated negative
effect of having an associate degree is somewhat
smaller. Overall, people with an associate
degree earn $2,426 less a year than people with
the same highest degree who have no associate
degree. The earnings gap is smaller for bachelors
and masters degree holders ($2,269 and $2,117,
respectively) and larger for people with doctorates
and professional degrees ($6,884 and $7,768,
respectively).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The authors note that the data they have really doesn't allow them to delve deeper. They speculate at the end about possible causes.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why is there an observed, persistent salary gap
between people who had a prior associate degree
and those who had not, even among the highly
educated? Data available from the NSCG survey
are not sufficient to answer this question. A
caveat of the above analysis is a lack of ability and
school performance measures and data on family
characteristics, such as family income. One could
hypothesize that because community college
students are more likely to come from families
with lower incomes and education, they are also
more likely to attend poor performance schools
for their elementary and secondary education. It
is possible that they fall far behind even before
entering the post-secondary education system
and that this disadvantage affects their educational
and labor market outcomes throughout their lives.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For like people, I don't see how a CC would affect a students their salary potential, especially since many/most employers are only concerned about the bachelors/masters/phd degree along with experience.</p>
<p>However, there are students who attend a CC first who essentially delay their entry into the workplace in which case they could be a year or two behind where they would have been if they started at a 4 year college - i.e. students who attend a CC for 2-3 years then a 4yr school for 3 years or more. This is especially true for some who go into engineering/CS because they have so many classes to make up. Of course, this point will vary considerably depending on the specific colleges, majors, and student.</p>
<p>I don't think the delayed salary issue is always considered by students yet it can amount to quite a bit of 'lost income'.</p>
<p>"People with an associate degree are less likely to major in
sciences and engineering and are more likely to
major in health, technology and management than
their counterparts." Slitheytove </p>
<p>There are several possible reasons for the tendency for health, technology and etc to be favored by the CC contingent. </p>
<p>First is that historically these fields have tended to be the routes out of the working class and into the middle classes. Therefore there would be a tendency to continue within those fields because students would know someone for whom that path worked. On the negative ledger it is possible in some areas that advisers may tend to direct students in those directions because most of the students in the past did take those routes. </p>
<p>Another factor is obviously the limitations of the economy and how the PS's have often inadequately prepared less affluent students for collegiate studies. Simply stated many at the CC level need education to have economic returns as quickly as possible. Their economic conditions tend to make a condition of deferred reward less probable or advisable. So those students who lack the skills in writing or math necessary to pursue professions in the sciences or such as academe or law may make the conscious decision not to engage in the additional courses needed to do so...because it would defer the benefits of education. </p>
<p>And as ucsd ucla dad noted many do have delays in getting to the next level and given the limited economic resources of many of the CC population these delays can be problematic or fatal to their aspirations. Very different from some affluent kid 'taking a year off to find themselves" which is no doubt a much rarer phenomenon for even the affluent due to escalating college costs and a poor economy. </p>
<p>And finally the last consideration is the effect of cultural and social marginalization. Many CC students might desire to move into upper echelon professions but may also hold some beliefs that the system will not let them do so. Or that the costs will be too high for them to bear (which is a quite legitimate concern). Others do perceive themselves as bound to their class and condition and therefore would believe that to aspire too high is an impossibility. And at some Universities this limited perception of their own class or abilities can make acclimatization incredibly intimidating. The frustration is that all of these conditions excepting the second, do tend to be self fulfilling limitations...</p>
<p>Good grad degree, kiss ass, and earn alot of money....</p>
<p>"November 1, 2007
Education Department Extends Loan Deferment for Medical-School Graduates</p>
<p>Washington The American Medical Association has successfully lobbied the U.S. Education Department to plug a gap in medical-student loan deferment that was created by a student-loan bill signed into law in September. The move follows a letter, released last week by the association, that asked the department to postpone the elimination of economic-hardship deferments for medical-school graduates.</p>
<h2>Shortly thereafter, the department extended the deferment eligibility, prompting applause from the association. If the Education Department had not dealt with the issue, some medical-school graduates would have been unable to apply for economic-hardship deferments for nearly two years" Chronicle of Higher Education </h2>
<p>"March 11, 2008
Medical Schools Ask Congress to Continue Loan-Deferment Program</p>
<p>Medical schools are asking Congress to reverse the Education Departments decision to end a program that has allowed borrowers with high debt-to-income ratios to defer interest on their student-loan payments.</p>
<p>In a joint letter sent Monday, the Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Medical Association ask the chairmen of Congresss education committees to preserve the debt-to-income pathway of the federal economic-hardship deferment.</p>
<p>That option allows college graduates with federally subsidized loans to defer interest payments if their total debt is more than 20 percent of their income and their income minus their loan payments equals no more than 220 percent of the poverty level. The option has benefited many medical-school students during the three to eight years they are in residency programs.</p>
<h2>In 2007 the average medical student graduated with $140,000 in debt, and the average first-year resident earned less than $45,000, according to the letter. Eliminating the provision, the letter warns, could discourage students from pursuing less-lucrative careers in medical education, research, public health, or primary medicine" Chronicle of Higher Education </h2>
<p>Tick; unless your being intentionally ironic (and I'm not sure). What you are hoping for with the grad degree and having the world at your table is a condition which increasingly doesn't apply. The above quotes refer to the members of the AMA (who certainly possess credible graduate degrees) who were literally beseeching the USDOE to change policies because too many members of the medical profession were finding themselves in an impossible situation. </p>
<p>In academe itself (the people who teach those graduate degrees) many are in the same trouble as the docs, but not having an overall trade organization like the AMA they don't have the political voice or the clout. </p>
<p>Although I no longer teach at the grad level (thank gods) in my current posting I do advise people to be very careful when thinking about pursuing graduate studies because the cost to potential benefit ratio is getting very skewed. And in the soft fields such as history, and the humanities the most truthful thing to say to aspiring students would be to not pursue a grad degree. Rather it would be better to take what can be gotten with a bachelors and leave it at that...</p>
<p>In many regards under the current situation, getting a grad degree and laugh all the way to the bank is little more than another version of the 'lifelong learner' nonsense still bandied about academe. </p>
<p>Back to the CC contingent, these conditions are why they do have troubles. It's a dilemma for them, because an AA or AAS won't get them that far. But the costs of anything more than that might also be problematic. </p>
<p>Quite a quandary, and it would be academe's equivalent of "Catch 22" or Gut Soldaten Sweik" if it were not for all the very serious problems attendant to the whole situation.</p>