Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But Republicans keep telling us higher education isn't worth it and the only real Americans are the high school drop outs who vote for them. You see their anti-intellectual, anti-science position every day on this very forum.
Actually the high school dropout demographic votes overwhelmingly for democrats. 70% for Obama.
This is why I roll my eyes at the idiot posts here about "worthless" degrees that should be banned at universities, because I promise you--those liberal arts majors are still finding decent jobs a heck of a lot faster, and making much more money over time, than someone with a High School Diploma ever will. A college degree is always a good investment.
They should drill down by major but I wonder if college is simply a self selecting mechanism for IQ? Basically if you can conplete college whatever the major you are deemed smart enough to be trained to do whatever tasks a potential employer needs done.
Actually the high school dropout demographic votes overwhelmingly for democrats. 70% for Obama.
Real educated knowledgeable guy you are.
Source? Got numbers controlling for race and income? Didn't think so.
Among white high school dropouts, only those with low incomes voted Democrat; those with higher incomes voted Republican. Which makes sense simply considering taxes.
What proportion of high school dropouts are nonwhite? If it's half, Obama gets 70% off the bat.
This is foolish. A college degree often provides many very useful bits of knowledge. As I recall, I learned about European history, psychology, art history, calculus, physics, chemistry, genetics, plant and animal physiology, political science, technical writing, research skills and the scientific method, and a whole lot more in college. I have a fairly high IQ, but I would never have just "figured it out" on my own. The Good Will hunting story is pretty good, but unless you are a true genius, chances are a college degree will give you a tremendous boost in understanding of the history, structure, and behavior of the world. It will also help to immunize you from the first sign of a fool, that you don't know how much they don't know, and will make listening to asses like Rush Limbaugh pure torture, as it should be for anyone with the ability to think independently.
I just....disagree....
I opine that....
- More kids than not, don't retain half of the info they receive going through the false barrier of education, this is because plenty of students cheat, just do enough to squeak by...This lazy work is also rubber stamped by plenty of equally lazy professors at these institutions.
You CAN learn and become well rounded with a better worldly view...but so many kids are indifferent that this just doesn't hold true when making umbrella statements like that. Besides it was anecdotal anyway so it has all right to be disregarded as it doesn't do anything to dispel the logic you directly quoted and contested.
In addition, I would tend to agree with you if all of the institutions of higher learning in America were acclaimed and highly accredited. They are not...so in turn you get hundreds of thousands of indoctrinated kids getting churned into debt butter by diploma mills.
I wonder if college is simply a self selecting mechanism for IQ?
I think you've scratched the surface here of a statistical bias. Right off the bat, the sample groups are different since the college grad group includes only those who were smart enough and driven enough to get into and finish college. The other group is more diverse, including some who were capable of getting a degree but chose not to for whatever reason but is largely comprised of others who simply lacked either the smarts or the drive. Unfortunately its impossible to isolate the "capable" group from the others in the non-grads sample set. I suspect if you could, you would see a dramatic difference in the success between the two and very little difference in success between the grads and the capable non-grads.
Is it the degree that made the grads more successful, or the fact that the cultural norm for success-oriented people is to attend college? Impossible to measure, but I suspect more of the latter.
I'd put my view closer to wutitiz than mb1547 on this one (surprisingly). I think education is generally a good deal, but like anything else, good and bad deals abound. A well-priced degree program is a great investment for sure, but borrowing $100k for a music history degree at a private school is not going to cash flow. I am a big fan of the community colleges. A steal for the first couple years. Get all that high brow life of the mind stuff as an upper division or graduate student.
You are correct here. I have seen many college grads get degrees in gender studies, philosophy and etc...only to work at places like Panera Bread or Starbucks as a barista. It is hard for them to pay their college loans and they are often quite angry with the way things are.
Some degrees are easier to find jobs than others.
Some colleges and community colleges may help you land the same job with a lot less cost.
Even during the height of the great recession, the unemployment rate among college grads was only about 4%. Still I think a lot of it may be more correlation than causation It takes a lot of persistence to make it through the 3rd & 4th year of undergrad, and those who can push through to success there are likely to push through to success in employment too.
It doesn't mean that there is not a lot of fluff and waste in the higher ed system.
Fluff is in the eye of the beholder, and it depends on what your career goals are. If you want a career in higher education, you plan on entering a doctoral program, and you're passionate about fields like music history or women's studies, then that degree makes sense if that's what you want to do and you have the intellect and ability to get there. If you are a C or even a B student, you have no plans for grad school, and an undergrad is as high as you're going to go, then it's a dumb idea. Under those circumstances, most academic advisers would steer less capable students into a major with broader appeal, and encourage them to pursue a minor in a more narrow field instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
This is foolish. A college degree often provides many very useful bits of knowledge. As I recall, I learned about European history, psychology, art history, calculus, physics, chemistry, genetics, plant and animal physiology, political science, technical writing, research skills and the scientific method, and a whole lot more in college. I have a fairly high IQ, but I would never have just "figured it out" on my own. The Good Will hunting story is pretty good, but unless you are a true genius, chances are a college degree will give you a tremendous boost in understanding of the history, structure, and behavior of the world. It will also help to immunize you from the first sign of a fool, that you don't know how much they don't know, and will make listening to asses like Rush Limbaugh pure torture, as it should be for anyone with the ability to think independently.
That's just it--the majority of what you will learn professionally will be on the job and through self education based on interest and need, but an undergrad degree teaches you the tools--critical thinking, discipline, research skills, writing skills and broad background in a variety of issues--that make people effective problem solvers. Problem solving is what makes you successful on the job. If you have the degree, an employer sees that as proof that you were able to wade through an undergraduate to prove that you've gained those skills--that's why they hire college grads over HS diplomas. Once you have your first job, the skills and ability that you bring to the job matters a whole lot more than what your degree is in. I have a political science undergrad (considered worthless by some) but I transferred that into a career into running nonprofits and lobbying, and later marketing, based on the marketing skills I learned on the job in the first phase of my career. Although I question the data that says that the average person completely changes careers 7 times in their lifetime, I think it's fair to say that many people DO change a couple of times. Having a broad education and the skills that go with it help you transition through those changes, and translate what you've learned in one field to a new one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
I'd put my view closer to wutitiz than mb1547 on this one (surprisingly). I think education is generally a good deal, but like anything else, good and bad deals abound. A well-priced degree program is a great investment for sure, but borrowing $100k for a music history degree at a private school is not going to cash flow. I am a big fan of the community colleges. A steal for the first couple years. Get all that high brow life of the mind stuff as an upper division or graduate student.
I actually partially agree with you on this--I do agree that education has to be looked on as a financial investment. It all depends on your individual financial situation, ability and career goals. If you don't have to borrow the money for school, or only have to borrow a small amount (academic scholarship or wealthy parents where paying for your education isn't a sacrifice, etc.), then there's less pressure to move into a field with a higher immediate financial payoff. If you have to borrow every dime of your educational and housing costs, then student loans become a whole lot bigger consideration. If your career goals are to become a professor at a top notch school, and you have the intellectual ability and discipline to make that happen, then then a $240K undergrad in music history from Harvard may be worth it--the same is true if you want to go to Harvard law and be one of the select few picked up by top law firms for a premium price. If money is tight, a smarter strategy would be to go to a second tier school that offers you a big financial package, and shoot top tier for grad school with a position as a teaching assistant in exchange for tuition. If you're an average student, and you just want a job when you graduate, then a state school, majoring in a more mainstream field, makes a whole lot more sense. Under those circumstances, two years of community college and academic transfer your junior year to a university would be smart financially. I think minors in more narrow fields, like music history, are really valuable though, because studying a field that you're passionate about helps you build the skills you get out of a degree (the goal) in a field that really interests you and motivates you to research, learn and do the work in a disciplined way.
I like smart kids to make my coffee - it just tastes better.
"But just because college graduates have jobs does not mean they all have good jobs.
There is ample evidence that employers are hiring college-educated workers for jobs that do not actually require college-level skills - positions like receptionists, file clerks, waitresses, car rental agents and so on."
They may start at the bottom like everyone else, but over the course of their career they'll average $20K a year more than noncollege grads, translating into a half million more over the lifetime of their career.
Your first job is a foot in the door, and a degree helps you wedge that foot in. Even if you start out in a job that you are vastly overqualified for, your ability to move up is often directly related to your having the degree. It also makes you less tied to a single employer. I personally know someone who worked his way up into middle management for a local company without a degree, but when the company was bought out the new management fired him because he didn't have one. He's never been able to find a comparable position, and he had to start completely over at the near bottom again, because other companies wouldn't hire him for more responsible positions without the degree. I don't think that's an uncommon scenario. He would have been smart to take night classes while he was working to get the education to go along with the title, but he didn't think it was necessary. Now he's borrowing the money and in school as a full time student--he doesn't have any other options unless he wants to spend another 10 years trying to move up again.
They should drill down by major but I wonder if college is simply a self selecting mechanism for IQ? Basically if you can conplete college whatever the major you are deemed smart enough to be trained to do whatever tasks a potential employer needs done.
An employer trains you in your first job. After that you're expected to be able to work independently and figure it out. I think employers are more likely to hire college grads because they waste less time sorting the wheat from the chaff--the expectation is that you will be able to work and think independently if you have a degree. They take a much bigger risk hiring employees without degrees. Since staff turnover is super expensive, it makes good financial sense to set hiring criteria based on education.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
