"Should the Obama Generation Drop Out?" (New York Times)

Parents Forum
201

<p>Perhaps because Murray's contention of what someone can do, or not do, would be premised on a entrance standard which in itself has little credibility in accessing capabilities. </p>

<p>And unfortunately where one learns to 'do it' does have an effect. For example although I currently teach at a gateway school, the reason I am there is because of possessing better credentials than my predecessor. And by Murray's own concepts, it's very improbable that someone such as myself would have been permitted to enter higher education let alone attain a terminal degree. </p>

<p>The problem with Murray's essay is that he tries to use noble egalitarian phrases such as "“It’s what you can do that should count when you apply for a job, not where you learned to do it.” associated with concepts and processes which have a long history of the opposite effect. And some of his essay seems to be an evasion of the real issue which is limiting access to higher education, namely economic profiteering. </p>

<p>Token Adult not quite sure to whom your question was posed, but answered it for my part.</p>

202

<p>
[quote]
the real issue which is limiting access to higher education, namely economic profiteering

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think that is the issue he is addressing head on, but is being dodged by several people who evidently disagree with his proposal. How exactly, for the majority of the jobs in the American economy, is requiring a college degree for entry to the job an entrance standard that has more credibility than an entrance standard of showing ability to do the specific job?</p>

203

<p>tokenadult,</p>

<p>The funny thing is that I don't agree with most of what Murray says, but I shan't let ad hominem fallacious thinking get in my way.</p>

<p>The honest truth: a BA should not be required for most jobs. Sad but true. Now, I'm glad I got my degrees, but I certainly can't see how the majority of corporate drones need my level of education.</p>

<p>And yet here we all are, degrees in hand, wondering where our great paychecks are.</p>

204

<p>
[quote]
The funny thing is that I don't agree with most of what Murray says, but I shan't let ad hominem fallacious thinking get in my way.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't agree with much of what Murray says either. If someone had posted a link to an article in which Murray was writing about one of the fields he gets wrong (notably, genetics), I would have been among the first to disagree with him openly and to post to links where his errors are refuted. But, yes, I think a college-educated person ought to be able to distinguish an idea and its merits from the reputation of the person who happens to speak up about the idea. If people can graduate from college without learning that basic skill of thinking about public policy, then I'm all the more doubtful about college diplomas as a general requirement for entry-level employment.</p>

205

<p>And yet here we all are, degrees in hand, wondering where our great paychecks are.</p>

<p>perhaps you might spend sometime contemplating where you would be * without* that diploma?</p>

<p>Besides, I thought it wasn't about the financial payoff anyway ;)</p>

206

<p>emeraldkity4,</p>

<p>I'm not necessarily saying I'd be any better off without my degree, but there is something a bit perverse about companies hiring BAs and starting them at less than $30K a year. Why bother hiring a BA, then?</p>

<p>And as for me, I'd probably be an electrician. Not glamorous, but not awful, either. </p>

<p>And no, it wasn't all about making money, but you know what? It certainly helps.</p>

207

<p>Someone asked the other day about what could be expected of someone with an IQ of 100. That post received a very good reply while my attempt to reply was eaten by the posting bug. :( Here I'll post my FAQ on that general issue: </p>

<p>CORRELATION OF TEST SCORES </p>

<p>There is a quite persistent set of errors in many posts here about predicting one test score from another test score. </p>

<p>1) The first error is assuming that IQ scores stay at the same level across the lifespan. There is actually abundant information to show that this is a mistaken idea. Rather than asking, "What is his IQ?" one should really ask, "What score did he obtain on what brand of IQ test on what occasion?" All longitudinal studies of IQ have shown IQ scores moving both up and down on subsequent testing of individuals who were tested at various ages. Here are some citations to studies of this issue: </p>

<p>Anastasi, Anne & Urbina, Susana (1997). Psychological Testing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. </p>

<p>Deary, Ian J. (2000) Looking Down on Human Intelligence: From Psychometrics to the Brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. </p>

<p>Howe, Michael J. A. (1998). Can IQ Change?. The Psychologist, February 1998 pages 69-72. </p>

<p>Moriarty, Alice E. (1966). Constancy and IQ Change: A Clinical View of Relationships between Tested IQ and Personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. </p>

<p>Pinneau, Samuel R. (1961). Changes in Intelligence Quotient Infancy to Maturity: New Insights from the Berkeley Growth Study with Implications for the Stanford-Binet Scales and Applications to Professional Practice. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. </p>

<p>Shurkin, Joel N. (1992). Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up. Boston: Little, Brown. </p>

<p>Truch, Steve (1993). The WISC-III(R) Companion: A Guide to Interpretation and Educational Intervention. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. </p>

<p>2) The second error is assuming that any two brands of mental tests, or indeed any mental test given to the same group of test-takers more than once, will sort a group of test-takers into the same rank order. That never happens. In other words, there is no such thing as a test that has a correlation of 1.0 with any other test, and indeed there is no one brand of mental test with test-retest correlations that high. It's quite exceptional to see test-retest correlations above about .85, and that level of correlation allows for plenty of radical changes in rank order among test-takers between two instances of taking a test. For any score on any test, there is a RANGE, which can be quite broad, of expected scores on some other test. So it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of mental testing to suppose what a person's IQ score is from the person's SAT score, or the other way around, and an even greater misunderstanding to assume what a person's grade average in high school or college might be, or what occupation that person will pursue successfully, from such limited information. </p>

<p>See </p>

<p>Hopkins, Kenneth D. & Stanley, Julian C. (1981). Educational and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </p>

<p>or </p>

<p>Mackintosh, N. J. (1998). IQ and Human Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. </p>

<p>or plenty of other general titles on mental testing for more on this issue.</p>

208

<p>Well perhaps the distinction between entrance standards for academe and that of business resides in political and social symbolism. The majority of colleges are state entities, and as such are meshed into the conceptual expectations of social equality. The problem here is conceptual insofar as one of the means Murray advocates to establish entrance credibility is one which has a long and disturbing history of being used as it were, against the people rather than for them. </p>

<p>I would have no quarrel with Murray's premise that not all need to go to college. And certainly would agree with the idea that requiring a bachelors degree for every job is unnecessary and in some cases little more than marketing hype by the colleges. </p>

<p>But the problem is an entire system has been built up on the expectation that higher education is the upward ticket regardless of the circumstance. And the most dysfunctional aspect of that system is how we've allowed a bachelors degree to so often end up as 30,000+ of money borrowed under usurious terms. With academe and the government in outright collusion with this system. And so it would be difficult to reveal that 'lifelong learning' and other such comforting platitudes could be little more than a marketing scam to keep it all going. </p>

<p>Murray may have some legitimate points, but perhaps his effort needs to be aimed more specifically at the people who've manipulated our educational system into a 'industry' rather than the people entering into it after buying into a very hard sell image.</p>

209

<p>'m not necessarily saying I'd be any better off without my degree, but there is something a bit perverse about companies hiring BAs and starting them at less than $30K a year. Why bother hiring a BA, then?</p>

<p>ITA, I would be surprised if my Reed grad daughter makes $30,000 a year( although she works less than full time in the school system- her sister who is currently working as a cashier makes the same per hour) and I certainly agree that some parts of many jobs do not require a college background- I do a lot of volunteer work, working along side those with advanced degrees, and much of what I do without * any* degree is identical.</p>

<p>However- to get paid for it, I would need a degree and to go further into that sort of work, I would need the background and skills developed with that degree. ( or so I assume). Perhaps companies require degrees because they do not expect workers to stay at that initial salary, but will move up- but at the same time, they want them to have the experience and perspective from that entry level job.</p>

<p>And as for me, I'd probably be an electrician. Not glamorous, but not awful, either</p>

<p>I think working for yourself as an electrician/plumber/ etc is good, but you still need some experience. Years ago I tried to get hired in construction and gave up before I could find someone to hire me ( I am hard working and strong- but look fragile and didn't have experience or training) Now of course- those jobs pay well but are very unpredictable & most don't have benefits.</p>

<p>Husband as I have mentioned is a composite specialist working at an aircraft company building prototypes for the military and consulting with engineers on specs.</p>

<p>He is paid with 30 years experience barely over what a worker with a two year degree in composites is paid- ( who is younger than our daughter, and who he trained) without a degree he cannot move into another job description. ( he could have moved into management a long time ago, but he didn't want to at the time- and now I think they want a degree)
Electricians at his company without a degree are in the same boat I imagine.
If you work in a non union shop you are liable to be paid less, but when your title determines your grade, your salary is determined by grade, not ability or experience.</p>

<p>It is really a Catch-22.
Many of these jobs don't require a degree to do them, and don't pay what you would need, considering college loans and cost of living. However, everyone else applying for those jobs has a degree- even if unrelated, and giving that you aren't going to be out anymore money if you hire someone with college background, why not?</p>

<p>In some cases though, you could get away with * only* a BA. A friend of Ds is working with a Bio BA, doing research ( at Fred Hutch I think) at a lab that would prefer a Ph.d but for some reason, they haven't been able to find one with her skill set available, so she gets to stay there for the time being ( but it is going on several years)</p>

<p>I am assuming that while my older D didn't need her degree for her current job, it did give her knowledge and skills that she is able to utilize and expand on & the combination will lead to other places that will require a degree.
She also enjoys her work very much & that counts for a lot.</p>

<p>I think that is where I see the difference.
Two jobs may have similar benefits & pay, but the jobs that require a degree, may have more autonomy, respect & better working conditions.</p>

210

<p>
[quote]
ITA, I would be surprised if my Reed grad daughter makes $30,000 a year( although she works less than full time in the school system- her sister who is currently working as a cashier makes the same per hour) and I certainly agree that some parts of many jobs do not require a college background- I do a lot of volunteer work, working along side those with advanced degrees, and much of what I do without any degree is identical.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, chew on this: I'm currently making just a little more than $30K and I have a BA from UCLA and an MA from UCSD. And in this economy, I'm happy to be making this much. I have friends waiting tables with degrees from Cornell.</p>

<p>Now, I realize that this isn't the right time to be saying what the value of a degree is, but don't be surprised if your Reed graduate daughter graduates in 2009 and gets shafted. Lots of us have been. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I think working for yourself as an electrician/plumber/ etc is good, but you still need some experience. Years ago I tried to get hired in construction and gave up before I could find someone to hire me ( I am hard working and strong- but look fragile and didn't have experience or training) Now of course- those jobs pay well but are very unpredictable & most don't have benefits.</p>

<p>Husband as I have mentioned is a composite specialist working at an aircraft company building prototypes for the military and consulting with engineers on specs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sure, but you also don't give up 4+ years of income to get there. And if you're smart enough to get through college, you'll probably make a really good electrician or plumber and get licensed and operate as a small business in the long run. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Two jobs may have similar benefits & pay, but the jobs that require a degree, may have more autonomy, respect & better working conditions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But that's the point: Do all the jobs that ask for a degree today REALLY require a degree? And how many offer more autonomy or respect? I daresay that a self-employed electrician is less saddled with bureaucratic BS than I am and always will be.</p>

<p>Honestly, the job I do right now could be done by a high school student. Maybe even a reasonably intelligent middle school student. But here I am.</p>

<p>And I know where this inevitably goes: "But it's a recession!" or "But clearly you haven't tried hard enough!" Or something along those lines. To that I say, "Trust me, I know it's a recession." And, "You have no idea how much I've been trying right now." And being tried by my BS job and toxic harpy of a boss.</p>

211

<p>
[quote]
But the problem is an entire system has been built up on the expectation that higher education is the upward ticket regardless of the circumstance. And the most dysfunctional aspect of that system is how we've allowed a bachelors degree to so often end up as 30,000+ of money borrowed under usurious terms.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, I agree that this is a problem. And right now, the system screens out of college entrance a lot of young people who personally have good intellectual ability for enrolling in and completing college, but who don't have the economic means to get started in college. </p>

<p>BW</a> Online | July 7, 2003 | Needed: Affirmative Action for the Poor </p>

<p><a href="http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0621.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0621.pdf&lt;/a> </p>

<p><a href="http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ff0615S.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ff0615S.pdf&lt;/a> </p>

<p><a href="http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/carnrose.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/carnrose.pdf&lt;/a> </p>

<p><a href="http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/kahlenberg-affaction.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/kahlenberg-affaction.pdf&lt;/a> </p>

<p>A</a> Thumb on the Scale | Harvard Magazine </p>

<p>The</a> Best Class Money Can Buy - The Atlantic (November 2005) </p>

<p>The</a> Harvard Crimson :: News :: Recruiting a New Elite </p>

<p>Cost</a> Remains a Key Obstacle to College Access </p>

<p><a href="http://www.jkcf.org/assets/files/0000/0084/Achievement_Trap.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.jkcf.org/assets/files/0000/0084/Achievement_Trap.pdf&lt;/a> </p>

<p>Legacies</a> of Injustice: Alumni preferences threaten educational equity--and no one seems to care. - Reason Magazine </p>

<p>Promise</a> Lost: College-Qualified Students Who Don?t Enroll in College (IHEP) </p>

<p>Colleges</a> reach out to poorer students - The Boston Globe </p>

<p><a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hkBGMsvJKRKaL67qxkOCaDByDJFAD94R70G02%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hkBGMsvJKRKaL67qxkOCaDByDJFAD94R70G02&lt;/a> </p>

<p>Given that some employers treat a college degree as an implicit employment qualification, that reduces opportunity for poor people to become less poor. I think poor people, with whom I have a lot of shared experience and for whom I have a lot of compassion, ought to have opportunity to seek jobs simply on the basis of being ready to do the jobs, without an expensive ticket to punch first.</p>

212

<p>"Perhaps companies require degrees because they do not expect workers to stay at that initial salary, but will move up- but at the same time, they want them to have the experience and perspective from that entry level job." </p>

<p>Perhaps, but in many cases the economic mobility implied by their better qualifications is not a reciprocal condition. The companies benefit from being able to employ quite well qualified people whilst often ensuring they cost no more than lesser trained people. A preeminent example of this trend ironically resides within academe-the very same entity which promises a rise in status if one spends on education. Adjuncts are often quite well versed, at times having the same credentials as their more fortunate tenured or full time colleagues. But many are paid little more than 'do you want fries with that'. As many adjuncts are finding it a desperate fools game and are economically forced from academe the next phase will be hiring less qualified adjuncts. But colleges will still charge students and families the same fees and tuition. </p>

<p>"I think working for yourself as an electrician/plumber/ etc is good, but you still need some experience. Years ago I tried to get hired in construction and gave up before I could find someone to hire me ( I am hard working and strong- but look fragile and didn't have experience or training) Now of course- those jobs pay well but are very unpredictable & most don't have benefits." </p>

<p>Sometimes they pay well, more often that's not the case. And the tradition which once ensured these people got their training has been largely superseded. Not that long ago apprenticeships from either the union or the industry itself achieved that end. However with the campaign against the Unions that's largely a memory. Now the colleges have largely stepped into that void, but the problem is tuition is still too high. So now a carpenter or mechanic often gets their initial training from the colleges but while he or she is learning the trade they make no income and certainly incur debts. Obviously not as much debt as a professional degree but given the relative income it can still be a problem. And the issue is compounded by the fly by night schools who prey on those desperate to learn a trade.
Another complication is that these trades tend to be something which are not livelong potentials. Carpenters for example tend to end up with various forms of arthritis, which can be debilitating. </p>

<p>"It is really a Catch-22.
Many of these jobs don't require a degree to do them, and don't pay what you would need, considering college loans and cost of living. However, everyone else applying for those jobs has a degree- even if unrelated, and giving that you aren't going to be out anymore money if you hire someone with college background, why not?" </p>

<p>The catch 22 there is the overall decline of status by the American middle class. The corporate people (or government) can ask more for qualifications but pay no more than a less skilled trade would have paid back in a not too distant past. </p>

<p>UCLAri-Unfortunately you and many of this and the last generation have been on the receiving end of a broken social contract. And it is a widely spread phenomenon, the Brits recently noted they expect revolts (of a kind) from the middle class when the loss of status causes them to reject the current system. And within our own country our government is making studies on whether it may need to move against its own disaffected people (there are some really disturbing proposals being floated by the people at the army war college)</p>

213

<p>"Yes, I agree that this is a problem. And right now, the system screens out of college entrance a lot of young people who personally have good intellectual ability for enrolling in and completing college, but who don't have the economic means to get started in college." </p>

<p>Token Adult, astute observation. But one which could have some unsettling consequences. In our economy many of the trades are no longer a viable economic alternative and so the people who've been economically excluded from college studies cannot use the trades as an alternative. </p>

<p>How will they decide to apply their intellectual ability in a society which makes no allowance for them and within which they may feel they have no place?</p>

214

<p>Right now the system also pushes into college a lot of young people who are completely unprepared or unmotivated, who just take remedial courses and then drops out after the first year.</p>

<p>Here is a report about the situation in Boston, and Mass is considered one of the better state for high school education.</p>

<p>In</a> college, but only marginally - The Boston Globe</p>

215

<p>Charles Murray is a joke. His obvious motive is to manufacture information that will help his people, the Republican Party, make the case for the elimination of programs that are not intended to benefit people of Murray's station. One of the programs he targets is affirmative action in school admissions. </p>

<p>So, I ask Murray and his supporters on this board, are you saying that one of your own, Clarence Thomas, an affirmative action baby, is really not qualified to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court? The man nominated by President George H.W. Bush, who proclaimed at the time that Thomas was "the most qualified candidate." </p>

<p>LOL. The Repugs eat their own.</p>

216

<p>
[quote]
his people, the Republican Party

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm pretty sure that Charles Murray criticizes the Republican Party for not adopting many libertarian policy positions. He doesn't run for public office under any party label. </p>

<p>
[quote]
One of the programs he targets is affirmative action in school admissions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There is a different thread for making an affirmative case for affirmative action policies in school admissions. </p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/568159-race-college-admissions-faq-discussion-2-a.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/568159-race-college-admissions-faq-discussion-2-a.html&lt;/a> </p>

<p>You are very welcome to join the discussion there, where you will find considerable diversity of opinion, and at least a few people who have changed their minds about that issue over the years.</p>

217

<p>
[quote]
Okay, so I don't have time to read this entire thread, but I'm just wondering how in the world IQ could have anything to do with race when it's been scientifically proven, over and over again, that race is a completely man-made construct?

[/quote]
Functionally? What does this even mean?</p>

<p>Okay, so race does not exist. What exactly do we use to describe the vast amount of physical differences between people with different ancestors. What word should I use to describe the fact that West Africans are faster in sprinting, on average, that Caucasians or East Asians? What word is scientifically correct?</p>

218

<p>I was looking around for internships and one of the websites had an interesting position: solder trainee at almost $12/hour - they were looking for high-school students and the hours were 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM. They provide 120 hours of training. It's pretty clear that they are looking to train high-school kids to do manufacturing work with $12 as the training wage. That's better than the jobs that I've seen at my son's school for undergraduate students. It would be interesting to see what they pay those kids once they graduate and work full-time.</p>

219

<p>
[quote]
Okay, so race does not exist...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The only choices are something is biological or it doesn't exist? No human construction? No enviroment? </p>

<p>If I thought those were my only choices, I'd probably be a big fan of IQ as well.</p>

220

<p>"Right now the system also pushes into college a lot of young people who are completely unprepared or unmotivated, who just take remedial courses and then drops out after the first year." </p>

<p>Bomgeedad That is a substantial problem, and to a point the blame would reside on unmotivated students. But the larger assignment of blame can be laid upon economic conditions and certain philosophical approaches used within primary and secondary education. </p>

<p>Economics is obvious- areas with poor economies tend to lack the resources to run functional schools. And the problem is only compounded by some communities which will take undue amounts of the school budget for local teams (little prairie towns are especially notorious for that approach-things like the team buses often costs more than every book, computer, and desk in the district). </p>

<p>The philosophical approaches are somewhat more subtle in their problematic effect. Over use of self esteem theories has resulted in a condition wherein students feel no need to excel...they perceive themselves as wonderful. And since the school culture in many institutions tends to pillory the 'nerds' that's another additional factor. We don't exactly have a culture which values academic excellence. </p>

<p>And unfortunately in communities such as reservations the misuse of theories about different cultural learning styles often leads to a situation where students as a whole are deemed incapable of excelling academically. It's been one of the results of misplaced forms of multiculturalism and the long ago intrusion into educational philosophies by neo-Marxist victimization theories. And this kind of nonsense is still bandied about within some education programs. And those obviously train the teachers who work within these communities. </p>

<p>And even discounting the aforementioned conditions, many students enter college by no means prepared. For those of us teaching the first 2 years of of college courses it's become almost a situation were we are remedial programs for the High Schools. </p>

<p>And that seems to be almost a viral condition-having taught in varied communities around the country I've noticed that in general the preparation for collegiate studies is inadequate. Unfortunately some of the blame for that issue can be set unto academe itself. Education programs have an unfortunate reputation for being very fuzzy in regards to curriculum. And even without that hairy problem they are caught in a bind; the states ask for more and more teacher training. But they will not provide enough support to make the tuition affordable for that enhanced training. And since most teachers are not paid all that well (and it worsens in marginalized communities) what we're going to get is less and less qualified teachers. Simply because the intelligent and ambitious will know they cannot afford the tolls to become certified as a teacher. </p>

<p>BCEagle, very possible that the people doing PC board type assembly will stay at 12.00 an hour. Or they will get kicked into piecework. Pragmatically many can't stay at PC assembly too long as the vapors from the solder do get people sick. </p>

<p>"Okay, so race does not exist. What exactly do we use to describe the vast amount of physical differences between people with different ancestors. What word should I use to describe the fact that West Africans are faster in sprinting, on average, that Caucasians or East Asians? What word is scientifically correct?" </p>

<p>M. Payne, you could probably use the word "McDonald's". In many western countries where 'Caucasians' are the predominant population the diet isn't exactly suited for developing a runners physique.</p>