Funny: I just watched that last night and that line really stuck with me this viewing.

Well, it depends on what on eis sad about. I am sad for the lack of caring and understanding portrayed by Ms. L as this is a symbol of what many people in our society are. But at the same time, I am quite glad that Professor X chose to take what I believe is the right path. Social Advancement is a horrible concept.

THIS is sad.

WTF? It is a SHAME that so many people are educated? That makes no sense to me at all. In fact, I find it quite arrogant!

When a person with a Bachelor's (or higher) degree is only able to make a buck or two above minimum wage, I say that person is doing something wrong. Having the piece of paper is not some magical ticket where the world owes you something, it simply gave the person a better base of knowledge and understanding of how to learn and how to grow. One's education does not end on graduation day: there is a reason it is called a "Commencement": it is the beginning, not the end.

I think what the author was getting at was more exemplary than simple fact. Let's face it: some people aren't cut out for traditional college education. my take was that the author was just giving an example from his area of experience. The issue was the complete lack of critical thought by Ms. L. She was unable to grasp simple instructions and repeated (and polite) admonitions of "you're doing it wrong: here is the right was to do it."

Well, in this instance, this is truly a situation where that person should not be allowed to own a DVD player. But this is the exception.

Except that I don't think that so many people ARE educated. I think that the social promotion trend is so strong that a bachelor's degree now *is* relatively worth less than it was - not because so many have it, but because so many of those that have it don't deserve it.

The more it becomes a requirement, the more people want to obtain one, and the more schools are tempted to increase their business by making sure people get them. Maybe I am just a huge snob, but frankly I think many of the people receiving degrees don't deserve them. I don't think they are actually educated at the level a college degree SHOULD reflect. It doesn't mean that I think they're stupid, just that they don't have the particular knowledge set that a college degree should represent.

I and *do* think you that not being able to pass English 101 makes you not college material. As I said already - doesn't mean you're stupid, but a college degree is suppose to indicate a minimum competence in certain areas. I can't right this moment think of a degree field where effective communication is not an important skill.

I'm flat out to lazy to go find it - but 5-10 years ago UoP was going to lose it's accreditation because it was a degree mill. Pay your money, wait the amount of time it took and get your degree. Teachers were forging attendance records, letting students come late, leave early. Everyone gets an A.

Now, you have to come on time, stay till it's over and they aren't supposed to give everyone As, but they do. My group was the curve in the class. And we weren't anything spectacular, just average people doing average level work. It was very sad - people who couldn't speak well, write well or follow basic project instructions were still getting As.

No Kevy, that's not what I meant. Jobs that 30 years ago would only have required a high school education (and therefore no acquisition of student debt) now require a college degree. They are still low paying, but the person who gets the job has amassed thousands of dollars in debt just to get to that level, which they should have been able to get to without the degree and debt.

And that fact is part of what forces the Ms. L's of the world to get in over their heads, because that piece of paper is starting to become the "base" level of education. In other words - enough education to actually get by in life is no longer free for all.

I blame Hitler (seriously).

Well, my father, who fled Hitler as a boy, decided to show him a thing or two by not going to college on the G.I. Bill after his military service when he could have and should have.

I don't think our grandkids will look at our Bachelor's and be amazed, I think there will be a completely different system in place. I think we will start seeing a great deal more specialized, non-university training. People working in communications or human resources, for example, might not be required to have a full bachelor's degree, but might be required to have higher education in subjects pertinent to their field.

And one more thing, at the community college I attend, you have to test into English 101. I already functioned at a college level in this area, so I had no problem getting in. If I had scored lower, I would have been put in a lower level class and had to work up to 101. I thought all community colleges were like this.

Most are - it's the matriculation testing. Most universities are too. Not all though - some of the accelerated programs don't require it.

I wish I knew what school the article was written about.

Doesn't Europe do something like this? They focus more on the field then overall knowledge once the student hits university level. They also groom students for a specific type of further education early on based upon their compententcies and interests.