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

<p>
[quote]
I doubt this is the same 25% you would identify as worthy of a college education.

[/quote]
Absolutely agree. Someone's absolute value creating abilities is not known until their life is complete. Some of the hungriest, hardest working people I've ever met went to the school of hard knocks. In fact, I think going to the school of hard knocks can make you even hungrier for success. That, by itself, is probably the most important part of value creation.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The difficulty in determining who will be the most productive (and its definition) is the reason I made the TIC comment about payback.

[/quote]
Society should not expect education to be paid back. Society should dole out educational opportunities based on the best predictive techniques available.</p>

<p>Your arguments seem self contradictory. If we "dole out educational opportunities based on the best predictive techniques available," we'll undoubtedy eliminate opportunities for many of those who currently achieve through "the school of hard knocks." I consider scrapping to get an education part of that school.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Your arguments seem self contradictory. If we "dole out educational opportunities based on the best predictive techniques available," we'll undoubtedy eliminate opportunities for many of those who currently achieve through "the school of hard knocks." I consider scrapping to get an education part of that school.

[/quote]
Huh? In American society today virtually all the top academic performers get pushed into college of some sort. We are already depriving them of "the school of hard knocks". I think my point is that high value production does not neccessarily come from education at all.</p>

<p>I'm still wondering about your "best predictive techniques available." What says the "top academic performers" are the best risks for higher education, predictive techniques?</p>

<p>
[quote]

Yes, it's true that many start college behind the ideal study body Charles Murray dreams of, but many, many students catch up and become more thoughtful individuals and a better basis for a democratic society.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sorry, I like your points but this last statement does not seem to fit reality. What do you call "catching up"?! I have been assistant teaching for 2 1/2 years at a middle-tier, private 4-year university and I read senior papers that look like something my 16-year-old brother wrote 6 years ago! Students use colloquialisms and fillers (such as "like," "uh" and "well) in their [formal] papers. They don't know how to write with good structure or form. It's hardly even worth grading the content because quite a few would fail for lack of middle school-level writing skills! Furthermore, I know it's not only my school because I have heard similar complaints from TAs and professors at many other institutions.
To me, the things you cited as important in college are things students ought to be learning in middle school! If we have not taught students to manage their money by the time they get their first jobs in high school, we have failed. If students do not learn the basic sciences in high school, we have failed. If high school English courses do not get through at least one or two Shakespeare plays and/or poems, we have failed. I do not see why you think we need to teach those things in community college. Instead, I propose we toughen the requirements for middle and high school. Students are too often simply passed because of age. If a kid can't pass the 8th grade requirements until he's 17, so be it. Give him remediation, yes, but don't pass him on to high school teachers who then waste time remediating him because he's "too old" for middle school. If a student has not graduated high school by 21, he would simply be "let go" and allowed to finish his HS diploma elsewhere (at a private institution or community college where he would be footing the bill). The BA/BS has lost most of its value (but none of its cost) because it has become what you basically proposed it is -- a repeat of HS.
As politically incorrect as it may be, I think it's time we buckle down on the education system and stop passing students based on pity. If a student didn't complete the course requirements, he fails. If he completes them satisfactorily, it's a C. If he does an excellent job, give him a B, and if he does exceptionally well, he might get an A or an A-. Anything less than that is simply cheating the system. It's like the classroom that gives an "Excellent" for satisfactory behavior, a "Good" for only getting sent to the principal's office once that day and a "Fair" for disrupting class repeatedly and punching the kid next to you. Sure, we're keeping things "positive" but all it really does is relabel bad behavior and make the parents feel good b/c their kid got a "Good" (which is really quite bad but the parents don't have to face that fact because their kid got a "Good" and not an "Unsatisfactory" or "Needs Improvement.")</p>

<p>"There is a difference between the donut maker, and the donut shop owner."</p>

<p>My manager was Egyptian and the guy that owned the stores was Middle Eastern too (don't remember which country). Some cultures do have a history of doing well after starting small businesses.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm still wondering about your "best predictive techniques available." What says the "top academic performers" are the best risks for higher education, predictive techniques?

[/quote]
This spawns another question: What is the current goal of higher education? What <em>should</em> the goal be?</p>

<p>At my school/major, [Cal Poly/Mech. Eng.], the goal was generally to teach people to become the best engineers possible. Our program was heavily lab & project based (moreso than other engineering programs). A high GPA was supposed to show a general competence in both theoretical and practical knowledge of mechanical engineering skills. I'm not sure that a high undergrad GPA had anything more than a weak correlation in the general engineering skillset upon graduation, however I'm sure high undergrad GPA correlates quite well with graduate engineering performance.</p>

<p>Highly ironic, coming from someone who was educated at Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard.</p>

<p>I don't really give a ****. I'd like to see a high school dropout do the job of a mechanical engineer.</p>

<p>"There is a difference between the donut maker, and the donut shop owner."</p>

<p>Yes, I meant the guy making the donuts, or the gal making beds at the motel. Lots of hours, lots of work, poor pay. It's no wonder that people 'expect' their kids to go to college.</p>

<p>I agree with apumic, we need to raise our expectations throughout. My own experience with my kid was that the teachers were in a mild panic in K, 1, and 2 over course coverage, writing skills, etc., and gradually the pressure wore off to the point that middle school was far less demanding than it should have been. Is that because some form of tracking begins in middle school, at least around here, such that the 'smart' kids are challenged and the rest are (IMO) tricked into thinking that they are receiving a college prep education?</p>

<p>I mean what I say about parents being tricked re: college prep. momof2inca, do you think that strong messages about course rigor, grades and student effort during grade school would help alleviate the problem you see?</p>

<p>"Yes, I meant the guy making the donuts, or the gal making beds at the motel. Lots of hours, lots of work, poor pay. It's no wonder that people 'expect' their kids to go to college."</p>

<p>Places which do a lot of business can provide a lot of opportunity. I saw the starting pay for assistant managers at McDonalds was higher than average salaries for humanities graduates at a McDonalds near my son's school. A little checking shows salaries in six figures for district managers.</p>

<p>A friend of my son's at college is a supervisor or manager at the local Dunkin Donuts. My guess is that he got the supervisor job just because he's a college student in an engineering program and presumed reasonably responsible. But it is certainly a job that someone without a college degree could work their way into.</p>

<p>One interesting thing that I saw at that McDonalds was a kid that was interviewing for a summer job. I think that he was about 15. They asked him where he lived, what jobs he had held, what his grades were like and his references. He was a minority kid with a Catholic upbringing and he had all of his ducks lined up and sounded like a very responsible kid. This is in a city where median household income is $38,000. I think that this kid will do well in the future whether he goes to college after high-school or not. Sometimes you can see the drive, motivation and habits of making good decisions leading to good things, even if your household can't afford a four-year college.</p>

<p>I don't like the article. It stereotypes the majority as hopelessly unintelligent, which I think is foolish. I'de think it's fair to say that the majority is unintelligent, but bad academic habits when young lead to intellectual stupidity later on if uncorrected.</p>

<p>Certifications overall seem like they would be somewhat trivial. Usually it's safe to say that the guy with no college degree, when applying to some job, if going to have less knowledge about how the field runs, than the guy who has a college degree.</p>

<p>"Certifications overall seem like they would be somewhat trivial. Usually it's safe to say that the guy with no college degree, when applying to some job, if going to have less knowledge about how the field runs, than the guy who has a college degree."</p>

<p>Do you think that you'd prefer to use a browser created by high-school kid that later dropped out of college or something created by a team of engineers with college degrees?</p>

<p>
[quote]
The ideal of preparing all students to enter a four-year college is worthy at a certain, simplistic level, yet as the saying goes... you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. As one of the people holding the horse's head an inch from the *&%# water, it's very, very frustrating. There should be options for those students who are determined not to engage in rigorous work; they are taking up seats in my classroom but they aren't really there. In general, they are nice people and I fear for their future and that the system we have devised is failing them as much as they are failing it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, momof2inca, I could have written those words myself. Except sometimes we aren't really holding the horse's head an inch from the water, we are dribbling the water into the horse's mouth one teaspoonful at a time. </p>

<p>I teach AP and regular history, and the AP course is very rigorous. It is also very small. Truthfully, the students are bright but not geniuses, and they have to work pretty hard to maintain a B. The regular courses are large and include some students who could have taken AP but did not want to work hard. The regular courses also include quite a few special education and second language students who have no background at all in US history. I know all about the ideal of differentiated instruction, but I already work as hard as I can possibly work.....I teach to the middle and give extra help and retesting to all who will take it, but I do not have any illusions that I am providing more than basic historical literacy in my regular ed courses. A few of these students will move successfully and directly to 4-year institutions, but most will end up in community college (and some - but not all - will succeed there).</p>

<p>
[quote]

I'd like to see a high school dropout do the job of a mechanical engineer.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That would be an example of a job that actually requires higher education and thus not what Murray is criticizing.</p>

<p>The author (M. Murray) of the NYT essay did hit on some social changes which are upcoming regarding education. However he did miss the actual causes, in part because of what appears be his own specially fitted set of elitist blinders. </p>

<p>Concerning his contention that some refocus is needed concerning the bachelors degree, he does have some relevant points. However what he does miss, is the economic costs of such a degree versus its long term potential for individual success. Simply put the costs of a bachelors (courtesy of usurious lenders) is increasingly impossible to reconcile in regards to potential income. 30,000+ for a Bach, to obtain a jobs which often pay less than that amount yearly simply cannot be sustained. And this is very evident from the NEA's attempt to gain concessions on educational loans for its members (and being a teacher is obviously a trade where a minimum should be a bachelors). So basically it won't be simply the unworthy scions who will drop out from higher education, it will be those within the economic classes who can no longer afford the imbalance between educational costs and benefits. It is a problem which academe has been ignoring but one which cannot be blissfully passed by too much longer. For example I currently teach at a gateway school and have come to advise students to look very carefully at the consequences of pursuing their education beyond a certain point. This is a disturbing necessity insofar as I have a terminal degree in my field, but cannot in good conscience recommend others do as I did. </p>

<p>About the idea that a certain percentage of high school students lack the abilities to usefully finish or apply a bachelors, quite true. But this has little to do with inherent ability rather it is a condition caused by the mire which has conceptually contaminated our primary and secondary schools. </p>

<p>In my experience incoming college students have been denied a functional grounding in the skills and knowledge essential for college success. And having worked in communities ranging from reservations, to small towns, to large cities it is distressingly consistent how poor the preparation has been with incoming college students. </p>

<p>As a result at many gateway schools what the academics have to do is first remedy for 12 years of questionable primary and secondary education. Granted those who come from affluent communities or can attend good private schools can escape this box, but very few others are able to do so. In that regard the elitism of the author can barely be justified, it is more a matter of but for the grace of god and fortunate birth can one avoid these problems. In that regard CC's are not educational ghettos in and of themselves it's more a matter of the adaptations they have had to make to compensate for limitations in the lower echelons. But if they do not make these adaptations the only alternative will be to write off a generation which has been the product of failed primary and secondary educational philosophies. Much of the blame can be placed on constructivist philosophies which were quickly enough corrupted into a educational version of narcissism. At least with other philosophical emphasis such as Dewey or Vygotsky the imperative social aspects of this approaches do ensure that students learn enough to function in group contexts. </p>

<p>As noted with Renee V and others there are school curriculum such as AP's which do achieve the desired end. But these are the exceptions by which the entirety of schools should be operated, but alas are not...</p>

<p>Another factor is that whether or not a bachelors degree is actually needed for certain trades it is needed for the propagation of higher education itself. This is very obvious with all the cliches tossed about in academe about 'lifelong learners'. Usually when this little platitude is tossed about, there is rarely a correlation that higher education needs to serve an stated end. Essentially due to cutbacks and the moral perversion caused by the intrusion of usurious lenders into academe, students are no longer viewed as a population to be served, but rather an asset to be served up to the institution. Until that changes, its very probable that a bachelors will be little more than a expensive right of passage. </p>

<p>And unfortunately its obvious that is exactly what many bachelors degrees have become as is evident from the army of people who possess them who are currently reciting the mantra "do you want fries with that?"</p>

<p>By far the most outrageous thing I've ever heard...</p>

<p>I want to know where that journalist went to college, and ask him if he think he'd be writing for the NY Times with a community college degree...</p>

<p>A few additional random thoughts . . . </p>

<p>I did not mean to imply that I think community college is a last resort. As a nontraditional student, that is where I started my higher education. I had many fine instructors, and on behalf of many students like me, I'll say a personal thanks to one like them: Thanks, mythmom!</p>

<p>My first full-time job was in a bank, where I ran proof and did customer service. My very basic high school education was completely adequate to prepare me for that job, but I think it would be hard for an 18-year-old high school graduate to be hired in such a position now (and the actual technical knowledge required is less now than back in the old days). It is unfortunate that even work like that is becoming more unattainable without a degree. But at the same time, when I think of the people I know who work in similar clerical jobs now, they are raising children and active in the community, and I think the education they needed to get their jobs helped prepare them for what they do outside of their paid work - I think they would say their lives are better and fuller because of their education.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I want to know where that journalist went to college

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Charles Murray received his bachelor's degree from Harvard and his Ph.D. degree from MIT. He is not a journalist by occupation, and he is not a staff member of the New York Times. He is a widely read author on social policy issues, and was invited by the New York Times to comment on education policy issues facing the new presidential administration.</p>

<p>I don't know why a reply I posted was posted much farther up the thread than the post to which I was replying. I have notified forum management about this reappearance of the post-order bug.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm still wondering about your "best predictive techniques available." What says the "top academic performers" are the best risks for higher education, predictive techniques?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Let's say they are the best predictive technique available, they are mid-level at best. It's also worth noting that high IQ also corralates with a higher than average drop out rate. Of course, that's not the predictive quality typically brought up in these discussions.</p>