College for all - right?

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

That is a double-edged sword. If a high-school counselor told a student that they were not good enough for college, and that they should consider a vocational program, then they run the risk of a parent bringing down the wrath: "How dare you say that my child is too stupid for college."

True, but that kind of presumes that the parent is involved. A lot of people in this country don't have parents involved - and in many cases, those are the people who can't read, don't graduate, aren't encouraged to go to trade school and end up in financial crisis. They need the motivation for trade school as much as anyone does.

But then, this relates to the crisis in our public schools K-12. I just finished reading Freakonomics and was appalled to find out about teachers who fill in the bubbles on their students' standardized tests to come out looking like better teachers. No Child Left Behind is dreadful, and is not the way to help students truly learn. Pushing all students to pass the exact same test, pushing teachers to teach to the test, does nothing but limit the accelerated learners and steamroll the slower ones. Alternative education can do wonderful things for slower learners (and I don't mean "special ed" - I mean slower learners) as well as faster learners: not everyone has the same learning capabilities (or styles.)

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Whereas someone with a Bachelor's degree has many more options.

I'm not sure this is true. Students have to take a bunch of classes within their major, but other than that the classes are academic, not practical. Unless talking about history or renaissance literature is a skill, A graduate with a BA is really only trained for one thing.

[tracilicious]

At my high school students had the option of going to a trade school for half the day. There were computer certification programs, beautician programs, fire fighter programs, etc. It was a really cool thing for kids that didn't want to go to college. There were even programs aimed at preparing students for certain majors. You could go half a day to an engineering program, score a low level job working with engineers (they had job placement) that would work around your school schedule.

[3894]

Originally Posted by CoasterMatt

I bought a PhD off the interwebs.

My Ph.D. is the real thing. Until eight years ago, I was a college professor (yes, tenured and everything. I got so burned out I was crispy. Time to do something else.). I am from an academic family and I am married to a newly-retired professor and former chair.

I'm happy to try to answer any questions about the issues brought up in the article.

[€uroMeinke]

As this story is anecdotal, I'd like to see what stats there are on the subject - back when I got a degree there where studies that showed a correlation between level of education and earnings - I wonder how that's changes over time, i.e. how much have the value of a BA been devalued.

If I think to my own anecdotal experience, I work with plenty of people who have gotten their degrees later in life, and have been quite successful in that endeavor. If anything, it seems they have an advantage over their classmate who are there becasue that's what their friends were doing after high school, in that they are more focused and see more value in what they are doing.

I know a while back our system of continuing education was unique in the world where front loading education placed you into your place in life almost permanently. The fact that we can return and learn something completely different is something, I think we should appreciate even if some who want it can't archive it.

On the other hand, I almost think that the real problem here is that higher education has become too vocational - but I'm a philosophy major so I never really though my degree would ever land me that Philosopher King position that Plato lobbied for oh so many years ago. for my my education was a goal in itself, not a means to a higher paid job.

[Prudence]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

The question becomes: how MUCH less worthy is the degree? I would like to think that the decrease is minimal, but I am not dealing with people fresh out of college. Yes, there will be people who manage to get out of college without an education/skill set that reflects the degree. But I truly do hope the number is negligible.

Depends on the job, I guess. But where I work, a BA/BS is generally a requirement. And they don't care which BA/BS, or from which school. All resumes are reviewed by computer. So, someone with amazing experience won't even be seen by human eyes, but someone with a UoP degree will. Even if they are complete idiots.

And yes, I really do need my staff to have some critical thinking skills. And a degree - a "real" degree - would have one indicator. So would relevant experience. But because the powers that be have decided that any BA/BS will do, it's basically a useless evaluator for me.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

As this story is anecdotal, I'd like to see what stats there are on the subject - back when I got a degree there where studies that showed a correlation between level of education and earnings - I wonder how that's changes over time, i.e. how much have the value of a BA been devalued.

I've been flipflopping about posting this because I'm really irritated - but it's relevant to this discussion.

I have an AA, going after my BA. The pres of my company thinks education is everything and implemented a no degree no hire policy. I slid in just under, and because I was working on my degree. I'll have 2.5 years at my current job when I graduate. And you can guess what I won't be getting when I graduate.

[3894]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

Unless talking about history or renaissance literature is a skill, A graduate with a BA is really only trained for one thing.

The B.A. says you can prioritize, deal with a certain amount of stress, finish tasks in a timely manner, and write coherently - all good job skills.

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I almost think that the real problem here is that higher education has become too vocational

Very few can afford an education purely for education's sake. I did have a colleague in Comparative Literature who taught "Cocktail Party Lit". The basic - and stated - goal of this survey course was to give students conversational gambits at the corporate parties they'd be attending after graduation. To my constant amazement, this course always filled.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

True, but that kind of presumes that the parent is involved.

A whole other topic (I believe that too many parents are not parenting, but that is another thread on another day). But there are some parents who will quickly be involved if they think that little Johnny is being shortchanged (and it is usually a very misguided reaction by said parent).

Originally Posted by tracilicious

I'm not sure this is true. Students have to take a bunch of classes within their major, but other than that the classes are academic, not practical. Unless talking about history or renaissance literature is a skill, A graduate with a BA is really only trained for one thing.

I disagree. Assuming that the Bachelor's, Master's, et.al education is a good one, one is educated in a broad spectrum of subjects beyond the requirements for the major. Whereas with a technical certificate, one is only educated in the targeted area.

I felt like the biggest thing that I gained out of my college education (besides being able to live in San Luis Obispo for three years) was an education on how to learn. It broadened my knowledge base in areas that while not directly in my area of what would become my career, I was also enlightened to other subjects that I previously had no interest in or knowledge of. Some (Geology) bored me to tears. I learned more in a 100 level Philosophy course than I did in many of my 300 and 400 level major courses (but that was because I happened to have a GREAT professor for that class that really inspired me). I gained a lot of valuable tools in extra-curricular activities that definitely helped me in my career. Finally, I made great contacts with visiting professionals and by going to trade shows and conferences.

Originally Posted by Prudence

Depends on the job, I guess. But where I work, a BA/BS is generally a requirement. And they don't care which BA/BS, or from which school. All resumes are reviewed by computer. So, someone with amazing experience won't even be seen by human eyes, but someone with a UoP degree will. Even if they are complete idiots.

And yes, I really do need my staff to have some critical thinking skills. And a degree - a "real" degree - would have one indicator. So would relevant experience. But because the powers that be have decided that any BA/BS will do, it's basically a useless evaluator for me.

While I agree that having a "real" degree is a plus in my eyes (from a potential employer standpoint), I would have a hard time being in a field where all resumes are reviewed by a computer.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by 3894

I did have a colleague in Comparative Literature who taught "Cocktail Party Lit". The basic - and stated - goal of this survey course was to give students conversational gambits at the corporate parties they'd be attending after graduation. To my constant amazement, this course always filled.

I actually find this strangely encouraging...