Americans Losing Faith in College Degrees, Poll Finds(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Americans Losing Faith in College Degrees, Poll Finds
https://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-losing-faith-in-college-degrees-poll-finds-1504776601?mod=e2fb
111 comments
Degree != education, though. In the US system a bunch of introductory lecture-only courses could potentially be pushed down to high schools or outfits like Coursera/edX without the requirement of paying $35,000 to be physically present in the room.
Online delivery doesn't work well for seminars or labs, but basic proficiency with lecture material before enrolling and taking out a student loan would boost the graduation rate. Currently only 59% of students enrolled in a college program in the US complete their four-year degree six years down the road https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40
Online delivery doesn't work well for seminars or labs, but basic proficiency with lecture material before enrolling and taking out a student loan would boost the graduation rate. Currently only 59% of students enrolled in a college program in the US complete their four-year degree six years down the road https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40
I wish there were a way to do th labs as an outsourced thing, sort of like hacker spaces. Doing a few weeks or months of lab work together with a group of people would be great fun and a useful adjunct to other education -- I've done this for various technical skills (firearms, armorer, machining, medical, diving) and expanding it to more academic topics would be awesome.
Is there a business opportunity in this idea? Coworking and Maker spaces are all the rage now days. How about tailoring those kind of spaces in collaboration with a MOOC to bring labs to the students. It obviously doesn't scale like a MOOC. But it might work in population centers that have a lot of MOOC students.
For a lot of physical skills, Techshop is the model I'd use. They run amazing classes, plus have a credentialing system in place to access certain kinds of equipment.
They recently opened a TechShop in Arlington. I did not realize how spoiled I was with NoVaLabs. It seems like techshop is all-or-nothing pricing. There is no plan that allows for light to moderate use. For $400 less than techshop yearly bill I can get 24h access to NoVaLabs.
It is dangerous when college becomes, instead of education, indoctrination + a piece of paper + high debt. This is not always the case, but many people evaluate their own situation and rightfully don't think a college degree is right for them. Since almost everyone in high school is constantly pushing for the students to go to college, anyone that figures that it is not right for them is likely correct. In the US one can always go back to school later, if you decide you want to.
What "indoctrination" is present at the college level in the US?
I can certainly think of examples at earlier stages of US education, like the (effectively) compulsory daily pledge of allegiance.
I can certainly think of examples at earlier stages of US education, like the (effectively) compulsory daily pledge of allegiance.
Indoctrination in to the consumerist-materialist-debt-burdened-over-worked-under-paid dream of the current era.
I'm not sure anyone is actually convinced by it, but it sure does seem we are convinced we can't implement an alternative.
I'm not sure anyone is actually convinced by it, but it sure does seem we are convinced we can't implement an alternative.
What made me a materialist was not the wonderland of college but seeing close friends of the family slip up and see their lives spiral out of control because they didn't have enough money.
Money doesn't matter when you're 21, and rich in health, family and friends. Money matters soo much when you're 56, tired, boring, and have a bad back.
Money doesn't matter when you're 21, and rich in health, family and friends. Money matters soo much when you're 56, tired, boring, and have a bad back.
I'm picking up what you're putting down.
Pretty much the same thing happened to me. I wish I wasn't so late to the party, I could have had my house paid off my now.
Still, I dream there was a less stressful way of going about it all.
Pretty much the same thing happened to me. I wish I wasn't so late to the party, I could have had my house paid off my now.
Still, I dream there was a less stressful way of going about it all.
[deleted]
> What "indoctrination" is present at the college level in the US?
There is a disturbing trend of mob rule where student activists become increasingly obsessed with the silliest things they perceive as "opression" and try to silence every voice at university campuses that doesn't toe the line with their worldview of intersectional feminism, cultural marxism and postmodern power games.
Points in case:
The idea that Yale students are smart enough to choose their own Halloween costumes made a mob of activists feel "unsafe" and they threw a fit, bullying two professors (who voiced this idea) for days until they resigned. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new...
A transgender candidate (masculine-of-center genderqueer) for the position of "multicultural affairs coordinator" at Wellesley college had to pull out of the race because his opponents accused him of having become a white male and that's not "diverse" enough. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/magazine/when-women-becom...
Then there's Evergreen College. I'm at a loss of words to describe the level of crazy that went on there, but here's Jonathan Haidt's take on it: https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/05/27/this-weeks-witch-hun...
There is a disturbing trend of mob rule where student activists become increasingly obsessed with the silliest things they perceive as "opression" and try to silence every voice at university campuses that doesn't toe the line with their worldview of intersectional feminism, cultural marxism and postmodern power games.
Points in case:
The idea that Yale students are smart enough to choose their own Halloween costumes made a mob of activists feel "unsafe" and they threw a fit, bullying two professors (who voiced this idea) for days until they resigned. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new...
A transgender candidate (masculine-of-center genderqueer) for the position of "multicultural affairs coordinator" at Wellesley college had to pull out of the race because his opponents accused him of having become a white male and that's not "diverse" enough. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/magazine/when-women-becom...
Then there's Evergreen College. I'm at a loss of words to describe the level of crazy that went on there, but here's Jonathan Haidt's take on it: https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/05/27/this-weeks-witch-hun...
I'm pretty sure this is only a small bit of the college experience, though I can see how this can actually affect one's perception of the value of college, especially among those in families with few college graduates.
Where I went to high school the pledge was optional.
I think you're missing the point. I don't think that Americans are losing faith in the value of education. Most Americans I know envy the low cost of education in Europe exactly because they would like the same conditions of access. Simply put, we want to go to school. But we don't want to sink ourselves into decades of debt to do so. Would anyone?
You'll have to agree to pay a lot more taxes though. I got a Bachelor's degree in Germany where it was cheap (we had some tuition at the time, but nothing compared to the US). Let's say it costs 15k a year (not what they charge, but the actual cost, which counts in a state sponsored system). That is 52.5k over the 3.5 years I studied. I've since paid at least that amount extra taxes as compared to the US. But I still have quite a few years of work ahead of me, so I'll be paying off this "debt" for a long time.
Basically you're trading the freedom to choose to go in debt for a personal decision, for going in debt for the average decision in your country. I'm ok with it, but I think it's a very different philosophy. A similar thing when I see single payer health care proposals in the US where they say it's too costly. Well d'uh. You gotta charge health care tax. It's not free, it's just that everyone is paying into the same pool. I'm paying almost 700€ a month for my socialized health insurance. Mostly because it's adapted to your income. But it's really not low cost or free. Just that everyone is paying together.
Basically you're trading the freedom to choose to go in debt for a personal decision, for going in debt for the average decision in your country. I'm ok with it, but I think it's a very different philosophy. A similar thing when I see single payer health care proposals in the US where they say it's too costly. Well d'uh. You gotta charge health care tax. It's not free, it's just that everyone is paying into the same pool. I'm paying almost 700€ a month for my socialized health insurance. Mostly because it's adapted to your income. But it's really not low cost or free. Just that everyone is paying together.
700€ is dramatically lower than what my employer pays for my healthcare with my family and that still has deductibles and Co-Pays. I'm not sure what your amount includes so I don't know if it's a fair comparison, but if it is then that's not a bad price at all.
What did you learn from your management courses? Genuinely curious, as I've always found that people with degrees in management were no better (and probably slightly worse) than people that just figured it out. My evidence is anecdotal and limited, so I'd be interested to hear what you found useful about your program.
My anecdata from working quite a few years at big tech companies where most of the staff began as technical and then some went off to get business degrees to advance into management, is that the biggest change was they started using a lot of business school buzz words and attached much more importance to spreadsheets and presentations than they used to.
"2/3 of HBS is BS" -Ben Rich, former Director of Lockheed Skunkworks
Coming from a technical background a lot of the softer sciences were quite new to me personally. Things like social constructivism and the mangement methoods based on it werent completely unfamiliar to me, but learning how to use analysis, understanding and argumentation to steer strategic decision as well as employees in the direction I want, has been immensely useful.
Perhaps this is a disconnect: "academia not only teaches you tested methods it also teaches you why you use them and how to determine which ones are best suited for a given situation."
In the US, I can't 100% defend our universities (of which I am a product...both engineering and MBA) of achieving this (which would be a fine) goal.
In fact, in the US, it's proabably easier to be skeptical of "The Ivory Tower", where one hears what will work and should be done, only to go into the field, and find out it's a bunch of non-practical garbage from a textbook some prof wanted to sell.
In the US, I can't 100% defend our universities (of which I am a product...both engineering and MBA) of achieving this (which would be a fine) goal.
In fact, in the US, it's proabably easier to be skeptical of "The Ivory Tower", where one hears what will work and should be done, only to go into the field, and find out it's a bunch of non-practical garbage from a textbook some prof wanted to sell.
But in Denmark are you paying $100,000 + interest for your shiny paper? Because that's what we charge in the states.
But in Denmark, one pays high taxes which, among other things, go towards subsidising higher education:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Denmark Under the Danish tax system, it is possible for a high-wage earner to pay up to 51.5% of their total income after gross tax, giving a total of 57% of total income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Denmark Under the Danish tax system, it is possible for a high-wage earner to pay up to 51.5% of their total income after gross tax, giving a total of 57% of total income.
Does that include property tax, sales tax, and smaller (but still impactful) taxes like alcohol tax?
The actual number, as a percentage of your income, that you pay in the US is very likely around - if not higher - than 50%.
The actual number, as a percentage of your income, that you pay in the US is very likely around - if not higher - than 50%.
If you are paying 50% of your income as taxes in the US, you are making enough money that you shouldn't be complaining about college being expensive.
And... there's a weird hump, because capital gains are taxed at a much lower rate. in that bracket, you have the very top end of those who work as employees, and small business owners who end up having to pay income tax on their profits. Much above that and most of your income is usually in the form of capital gains, and thus taxed less.
And... there's a weird hump, because capital gains are taxed at a much lower rate. in that bracket, you have the very top end of those who work as employees, and small business owners who end up having to pay income tax on their profits. Much above that and most of your income is usually in the form of capital gains, and thus taxed less.
I take @rubicon33's point that even if you make $40,000 a year, and your income tax works out to be 20-25%, you still pay 8.875% in NY for sales tax, and the other taxes. Looking at it that way, you pay over 35% or more when all is said and done. You are taxed on previously taxed income.
Do their taxes go towards paying college presidents a median salary of $438,000 http://blog.credit.com/2015/12/10-u-s-college-presidents-wit... or are the Danish administrative officials willing to accept lower rates?
> A large part of the reason my country (Denmark) is as rich as it is because of education
No, it is because they have marketable (in demand) skill(s).
If the whole country received a degree in history, would Denmark be as rich as it is today? They have an "education" right?
No, it is because they have marketable (in demand) skill(s).
If the whole country received a degree in history, would Denmark be as rich as it is today? They have an "education" right?
I understand your point but without a diversity of degrees I think there will also be a loss. Perhaps not an obvious, quantifiable loss. If everyone got a STEM degree in Denmark (include economics and finance) I think the consequences would be as bad if everyone got a degree in history. Having a society in which people care about others and want to live in requires more than quantifiable utility.
I think focusing on "marketable" is not a good governmental policy. It seems to me that education is the correct level of focus in terms of governmental policy.
I think focusing on "marketable" is not a good governmental policy. It seems to me that education is the correct level of focus in terms of governmental policy.
> But academia not only teaches you tested methods it also teaches you why you use them and how to determine which ones are best suited for a given situation.
IME academia absolutely does not teach that, most academics wouldn't know how to determine that. What tool to apply for a given situation is something I'd say is only learned with and can only be learned from industry experience.
For example, my day to day work would be much more pleasant of academia didn't go overboard making students create OO hierarchies for everything.
IME academia absolutely does not teach that, most academics wouldn't know how to determine that. What tool to apply for a given situation is something I'd say is only learned with and can only be learned from industry experience.
For example, my day to day work would be much more pleasant of academia didn't go overboard making students create OO hierarchies for everything.
Also surprisingly with academic experience.
Of course use of tools in academia is vastly different from one outside.
Academia has less of a time pressure and less of a budget often (at least in Europe).
Cannot speak for non-STEM though.
Cannot speak for non-STEM though.
I'm just going to point out that Elon musk says he doesn't care if somebody has a college degree. He says the attitude is more important.
I also highly doubt that he "had to hire" swedes. And if he did that would be an indication that something besides education was the reason. Education is in many countries if swedes are special, it must be something else.
I also highly doubt that he "had to hire" swedes. And if he did that would be an indication that something besides education was the reason. Education is in many countries if swedes are special, it must be something else.
>Elon musk says he doesn't care if somebody has a college degree.
So he says, but I have yet to see roles in Tesla's core business units that don't require post-secondary education.
So he says, but I have yet to see roles in Tesla's core business units that don't require post-secondary education.
I see a lot of people talking about the increasing cost of college being part of the reason people are losing faith in degreees. I too, agree that this is a large part.
However, did nobody else experience the dumbing down of colleges like I have? I was told growing up that college courses were taught by educated, experienced professors. Yet every year I was there though I got more and more adjunct professors who were working second jobs at supermarkets to make ends meet and TAs who were required to teach a course for their graduate degree but should have never passed the course they were teaching in the first place. The absolute worst I had was an economics course where some TA spent _every_, _single_ class at the whiteboard muttering to herself and trying to draw the charts in our textbook from memory but failing utterly to do so.
The entire class complained to the university and they didn't even respond. We all just stopped caring because we given decent grades anyway and pushed through in our degrees.
It is no wonder that people lose faith in the colleges when they let that happen and still award you with a degree like you learned something
However, did nobody else experience the dumbing down of colleges like I have? I was told growing up that college courses were taught by educated, experienced professors. Yet every year I was there though I got more and more adjunct professors who were working second jobs at supermarkets to make ends meet and TAs who were required to teach a course for their graduate degree but should have never passed the course they were teaching in the first place. The absolute worst I had was an economics course where some TA spent _every_, _single_ class at the whiteboard muttering to herself and trying to draw the charts in our textbook from memory but failing utterly to do so.
The entire class complained to the university and they didn't even respond. We all just stopped caring because we given decent grades anyway and pushed through in our degrees.
It is no wonder that people lose faith in the colleges when they let that happen and still award you with a degree like you learned something
Yes it's been progressively dumbed down for decades, and 2017 has been a particularly bad year. I summarized some findings here: https://medium.com/@simon.sarris/higher-education-erodes-a7c... (And the HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15174815)
Dropping algebra requirements (something that should be required to graduate from high school), including remedial classes as college credit in the largest state school systems is total insanity. It's crafting High School 2.0.
Dropping algebra requirements (something that should be required to graduate from high school), including remedial classes as college credit in the largest state school systems is total insanity. It's crafting High School 2.0.
I read your article and wasn't even halfway through it before I came to same conclusion about graduation rates that you did. They are no longer a measure of a goal, but the goal itself. It's quite easy to keep getting graduation rates up if you make everything comically easy
do you see the conflict inherent in arguing both that you want to spend less money on a good and that you want the people providing that good to be more skilled?
I mean, it's natural to want both of those things, and sometimes, there's some inefficiency that can be fixed that makes things both better and less expensive, but... not usually. Usually, if you want better workers to do a task, you have to pay more, and that costs money.
My own impression is that instructor quality varies a lot by institution, though I have never met a college professor who wasn't dramatically better than what you'd expect based on pay.
I mean, it's natural to want both of those things, and sometimes, there's some inefficiency that can be fixed that makes things both better and less expensive, but... not usually. Usually, if you want better workers to do a task, you have to pay more, and that costs money.
My own impression is that instructor quality varies a lot by institution, though I have never met a college professor who wasn't dramatically better than what you'd expect based on pay.
Of course I can see the conflict. The problem is that universities have no problem with such conflict. From their perspective they are charging more each year per average student while spending less each year per average teacher.
Some of these schools are teaching things on the cutting edge, but how much of that applies to undergraduate degrees? Most of what you get taught there has been the same for decades if not centuries.
Universities have had rising costs, but much of that is due to things tangential to actually teaching their students. My own college for instance would completely rip out all of the flowers every few months and replace them so that the campus looked nice to prospective students .
Some of these schools are teaching things on the cutting edge, but how much of that applies to undergraduate degrees? Most of what you get taught there has been the same for decades if not centuries.
Universities have had rising costs, but much of that is due to things tangential to actually teaching their students. My own college for instance would completely rip out all of the flowers every few months and replace them so that the campus looked nice to prospective students .
>Some of these schools are teaching things on the cutting edge, but how much of that applies to undergraduate degrees? Most of what you get taught there has been the same for decades if not centuries.
eh, I think there's a lot to be said for rubbing shoulders with industry notables when you are learning the basics. It can be inspiring.
But then, there's also a lot to be said for teachers who are good teachers; that can be inspiring too, in a different way.
>Universities have had rising costs, but much of that is due to things tangential to actually teaching their students. My own college for instance would completely rip out all of the flowers every few months and replace them so that the campus looked nice to prospective students .
I went to a high school that... looked like a prison. I mean, how it looked was certainly not the first thing I'd change, but it's certainly something I would change. Look at any of the silicon valley tech companies... all of them spend a lot of effort making their campus nice, and personally, I think education is a lot more important to society than advertising.
eh, I think there's a lot to be said for rubbing shoulders with industry notables when you are learning the basics. It can be inspiring.
But then, there's also a lot to be said for teachers who are good teachers; that can be inspiring too, in a different way.
>Universities have had rising costs, but much of that is due to things tangential to actually teaching their students. My own college for instance would completely rip out all of the flowers every few months and replace them so that the campus looked nice to prospective students .
I went to a high school that... looked like a prison. I mean, how it looked was certainly not the first thing I'd change, but it's certainly something I would change. Look at any of the silicon valley tech companies... all of them spend a lot of effort making their campus nice, and personally, I think education is a lot more important to society than advertising.
My comment might have implied that these grounds were nice on the outside. The grounds keeping was done anywhere that prospective students could see. On the inside, the school was converting the study rooms in the dorms or pushing them towards a local hotel because they accepted more students than there were rooms for on campus.
I had to live on campus for one year and the room was 182 square feet for 2 people to live in with their bed, desks, clothes, and everything else for the year. With this little space they would also kick you out during summer and holidays so you got 8 months of the year there where they currently charge 6,838. It is not much better than a prison in terms of space or looks on the inside. Even the mattresses were the same as the ones you'd find at a prison or summer camp.
I still agree with you that education is important. Schools are no longer selling an education though. They are selling an overpriced "college experience" and giving you the same amount of knowledge that you could get with wikipedia and some text books, and they charge extra for the textbooks
I had to live on campus for one year and the room was 182 square feet for 2 people to live in with their bed, desks, clothes, and everything else for the year. With this little space they would also kick you out during summer and holidays so you got 8 months of the year there where they currently charge 6,838. It is not much better than a prison in terms of space or looks on the inside. Even the mattresses were the same as the ones you'd find at a prison or summer camp.
I still agree with you that education is important. Schools are no longer selling an education though. They are selling an overpriced "college experience" and giving you the same amount of knowledge that you could get with wikipedia and some text books, and they charge extra for the textbooks
This boils down to the added masses of administration staff at the schools. American schools are doing more marketing, recruiting, student finance. I have noticed schools buying huge chunks of real estate in American cities lately too, but not sure why.
I only did 2 years of college because I couldn't decide on a major that I was committed enough to justify the mountain of debt at the time. I was starting to work in the film industry and knew film school be a waste. I'm a habitual self-learner so not too sour.
I only did 2 years of college because I couldn't decide on a major that I was committed enough to justify the mountain of debt at the time. I was starting to work in the film industry and knew film school be a waste. I'm a habitual self-learner so not too sour.
maybe? Like I said, sometimes there are inefficiencies. Still, if you want good teachers, you are gonna have a hard time achieving that goal if you don't pay them enough that they don't need another job.
Compared to a silicon valley tech company, everyone at just about any college works for peanuts - and education, if you ask me, is way more important than advertising.
Personally, I'd compare education to defense; as I wrote on another comment, I want the other people who get to vote on the laws on my country to have an education, just like I don't want other countries to be able to invade mine. Both of these things, I think, effect my safety.
The military also might not be particularly efficient, but we've prioritized effectiveness over efficiency. I think that a strong argument can be made that we should do the same with education.
I personally have no formal education to speak of. I'm working on changing that, though, and not for financial reasons.
Compared to a silicon valley tech company, everyone at just about any college works for peanuts - and education, if you ask me, is way more important than advertising.
Personally, I'd compare education to defense; as I wrote on another comment, I want the other people who get to vote on the laws on my country to have an education, just like I don't want other countries to be able to invade mine. Both of these things, I think, effect my safety.
The military also might not be particularly efficient, but we've prioritized effectiveness over efficiency. I think that a strong argument can be made that we should do the same with education.
I personally have no formal education to speak of. I'm working on changing that, though, and not for financial reasons.
I don't believe we are in disagreement. I would be surprised if there more than a small population of people who were against others getting education. Thelack of faith is coming from colleges, on average, providing a more and more mediocre education that could be replaced by the internet and some decication, while also increasing their costs drastically.
When charted by price increase tuition outstrips housing and healthcare which ,I at least would, have considered to have skyrocketed in the past few decades[1]
This is all for static information. Math doesn't change, basic comp sci algorithms don't change, classical mechanics don't change, and basic chemistry doesn't change.
These arguments might not hold for graduate degrees or higher but most Americans are experiencing the undergraduate programs
[1http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4d77553fcadcbb551d2...
When charted by price increase tuition outstrips housing and healthcare which ,I at least would, have considered to have skyrocketed in the past few decades[1]
This is all for static information. Math doesn't change, basic comp sci algorithms don't change, classical mechanics don't change, and basic chemistry doesn't change.
These arguments might not hold for graduate degrees or higher but most Americans are experiencing the undergraduate programs
[1http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4d77553fcadcbb551d2...
eh, I think the fundamental bit is that teaching is still skilled labor done by humans; we try to automate and scale it, but then it... kind of becomes a different thing. MOOCs are great; I love Khan Academy; but it's not college. it is a different thing that has advantages and disadvantages.
In the end, if you want a good teacher, you need someone who is both inspiring and who understands the edges of the particular field to teach, and those people have other options when it comes to the job market.
My impression is that wages for skilled in-demand labor have been going up with housing, healthcare and education... in fact, my impression is that the wages in-demand labor can demand drives the first two of those things. I thought the third was driven by lack of government investment; colleges are a lot less subsidized than they used to be.
In the end, if you want a good teacher, you need someone who is both inspiring and who understands the edges of the particular field to teach, and those people have other options when it comes to the job market.
My impression is that wages for skilled in-demand labor have been going up with housing, healthcare and education... in fact, my impression is that the wages in-demand labor can demand drives the first two of those things. I thought the third was driven by lack of government investment; colleges are a lot less subsidized than they used to be.
> some inefficiency that can be fixed
Such as tuition and administrative budgets and endowments ballooning while teacher salaries stay flat?
Such as tuition and administrative budgets and endowments ballooning while teacher salaries stay flat?
>Such as tuition and administrative budgets and endowments ballooning while teacher salaries stay flat?
Is that what is happening? I honestly don't know, but I thought increased tuition was mostly a matter of government cutting subsidies.
Is that what is happening? I honestly don't know, but I thought increased tuition was mostly a matter of government cutting subsidies.
Yup. A bachelor's degree from most US colleges is about 3 years of "can you read and learn from reading, at least well enough for the tests?" and maybe a year or so of actual college-level education. I enjoyed my college education and felt I got a lot out of it, but it certainly is possible to get through college without actually gaining much education. Partly that's the fault of the student, but getting a degree from an accredited college or university should actually mean something.
If I had the choice of loans for a college degree or skipping the degree, I'd personally skip the degree. My "hack" when I knew I couldn't pay for MIT was to get accepted and then just not pay -- I got to take the classes up then got retroactively deregistered around finals time. I kept that up for about 2y until I found a great startup opportunity. If I had been saddled with $100-200k of debt, I would have been pushed into taking a high cash comp/high stability job rather than doing crazy startups. Ironically unpaid tuition directly to the bursar vs a loan is just regular debt, and would be discharged through bankruptcy (although MIT just forgave mine).
For the very rich (for whom tuition is still insignificant) or the poor and minorities (who win from various forms of non loan financial aid), it seems like college is a rational choice. Otherwise, unless you really need the degree for a specific credentialed career (government, law, or medicine), I would probably discourage college.
I do wish I could do a phd in infosec+economics somewhere today, but that is really the only thing I can't readily do without an undergrad degree.
For the very rich (for whom tuition is still insignificant) or the poor and minorities (who win from various forms of non loan financial aid), it seems like college is a rational choice. Otherwise, unless you really need the degree for a specific credentialed career (government, law, or medicine), I would probably discourage college.
I do wish I could do a phd in infosec+economics somewhere today, but that is really the only thing I can't readily do without an undergrad degree.
Between the rising cost of a college degree, anti-free speech movements on campuses, and the declining employability of non-STEM degrees it's not surprising. Hopefully, this will work to reduce the overall cost of colleges.
Non-STEM seeking students really are not a majority in colleges. Per the National Center for Education Statistics on conferred degrees, the number of liberal arts degrees has been on a decline for quite a few decades while STEM and more vocational degrees have been steadily increasing [1].
Slam universities for many reasons, but the students going aren't graduating in arts; they're doing what employers say they want and still not getting jobs.
Universities have many problems, but they still are useful. We have all these STEM graduates but no one seems to be hiring them.
[1] - https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_322.10.a...
Slam universities for many reasons, but the students going aren't graduating in arts; they're doing what employers say they want and still not getting jobs.
Universities have many problems, but they still are useful. We have all these STEM graduates but no one seems to be hiring them.
[1] - https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_322.10.a...
Big difference between, say, a MIT Physics grad (essentially qualified for anything not requiring psychiatric stability) and a third tier or for profit "Information Systems Management" grad.
Note where I work and where my wife works. She works at a public university and I work at a private liberal arts university. We see resistence to skills and competency being taught. Teach them critical thinking and history and they will be fine we hear. We witness lack of critical thinking in some senior administrators which does not give comfort.
Students are encouraged to study what their hearts tell them and not consider outcomes. That is employability. I personally know recent grads that are dramatically under employed. They could earn more, much more if they were trades people.
Students are encouraged to study what their hearts tell them and not consider outcomes. That is employability. I personally know recent grads that are dramatically under employed. They could earn more, much more if they were trades people.
Unemployment is at record lows. Where are you getting that people aren't getting jobs?
Unemployment isn't the metric to look at. Just because someone is employed doesn't mean the job is at all related to the degree. Our office cleaner is a recent IT graduate.
Not to mention under employment and people that have just givin up.
Not to mention under employment and people that have just givin up.
People giving up is a different problem. If you have looked for work and determined there is nothing for you out there, it's rational to re-evaluate this periodically, no?
If you can't get on the computer once a month, spend some time on dice and send a few resumes, the problem is not the economy; the problem is your mental health.
I mean, I'm not saying those people shouldn't be helped; but having more jobs available won't help them if they aren't looking. They need a psychologist or social worker or something. Depression is way more treatable than it used to be.
If you can't get on the computer once a month, spend some time on dice and send a few resumes, the problem is not the economy; the problem is your mental health.
I mean, I'm not saying those people shouldn't be helped; but having more jobs available won't help them if they aren't looking. They need a psychologist or social worker or something. Depression is way more treatable than it used to be.
>Our office cleaner is a recent IT graduate.
Dirty secret about the "IT" degrees. I know managers with MIS, CIS, CIT, and similar degrees, but I don't know anyone who got such a degree before they had a solid IT job, who went on to get a solid IT job.
Yes, the guidance councilor will imply that it's like a CS degree without the math, but as far as I can tell, it's the "management addon" to your existing IT skills.
As far as individual contributor jobs, at least in my experience? you are better off with a philosophy degree.
Dirty secret about the "IT" degrees. I know managers with MIS, CIS, CIT, and similar degrees, but I don't know anyone who got such a degree before they had a solid IT job, who went on to get a solid IT job.
Yes, the guidance councilor will imply that it's like a CS degree without the math, but as far as I can tell, it's the "management addon" to your existing IT skills.
As far as individual contributor jobs, at least in my experience? you are better off with a philosophy degree.
[deleted]
I really doubt the (mostly overblown)"anti-free speech movements on campuses" are playing much of a role. The rising cost and declining employability you mention, particularly in juxtaposition with the rising prominence of the vocational trades, probably has a lot more to do with this trend.
I disagree... I think that the current wave of Anti-intellectualism is entirely political. the current unemployment rate is under 5%
See, while I can see how college could be unaffordable for the poor, I don't think it is particularly expensive, for what you get. Hell, paying full freight at Stanford is only two teslas for your undergrad, and that degree is going to impress a lot more people for a lot longer than having a fancy car for ten years, and I understand you only pay full freight if you are loaded.
Berkeley is even cheaper, and at least by what you are likely to learn, if not who you will learn with, better. You can go to Berkeley for four years for less than the cost of one of those giant trucks that are often paired with artistically applied recreational mud and confederate battle flags, if you've got housing covered elsewhere.
As far as luxury goods go, College is an excellent value, and that is only one of the ways you can derive value from college.
But yes, college, I think, is a good deal, an excellent value. But it's not affordable for the poor, even state and community colleges, which in California are pretty close to free, well, you need to be able to afford not to work for that time.
But... my point is that if you want to make college more affordable, you should focus on subsidizing it, not on cost-cutting. Education, I think, is that last thing a society wants to make worse.
Berkeley is even cheaper, and at least by what you are likely to learn, if not who you will learn with, better. You can go to Berkeley for four years for less than the cost of one of those giant trucks that are often paired with artistically applied recreational mud and confederate battle flags, if you've got housing covered elsewhere.
As far as luxury goods go, College is an excellent value, and that is only one of the ways you can derive value from college.
But yes, college, I think, is a good deal, an excellent value. But it's not affordable for the poor, even state and community colleges, which in California are pretty close to free, well, you need to be able to afford not to work for that time.
But... my point is that if you want to make college more affordable, you should focus on subsidizing it, not on cost-cutting. Education, I think, is that last thing a society wants to make worse.
Sure, college is a worthwhile investment if you are allowed to attend Stanford or Berkeley-caliber institutions. The vast majority of Americans do not have that opportunity.
And in light of America's student loan crisis, what politician in his right mind is going to propose subsidizing college education even more? It would be nice, but it is unrealistic.
That is why MOOCs are so important -- a Stanford and Berkeley-caliber education can be made available on a massive scale, for much less than the standard tuition nowadays. People do not recognize it, or do not want to recognize it, but we are in an Industrial Revolution-like period for higher education.
And in light of America's student loan crisis, what politician in his right mind is going to propose subsidizing college education even more? It would be nice, but it is unrealistic.
That is why MOOCs are so important -- a Stanford and Berkeley-caliber education can be made available on a massive scale, for much less than the standard tuition nowadays. People do not recognize it, or do not want to recognize it, but we are in an Industrial Revolution-like period for higher education.
>Sure, college is a worthwhile investment if you are allowed to attend Stanford or Berkeley-caliber institutions. The vast majority of Americans do not have that opportunity.
Don't I know it. I'm trying to get in now, and even though the fees seem cheap to me, I'm still at least a year of intensive test prep, study, and a lot of luck away from admissions.
Note, I think there's a reasonably large chance that if I take 4 years off for school that I'll have to take a pay cut when I get back (at least relative to industry norms; pay is going up hard) That's not why I want to go, and I don't think that's really what college is for. It's not a trade school.
>And in light of America's student loan crisis, what politician in his right mind is going to propose subsidizing college education even more? It would be nice, but it is unrealistic.
Because loans on dystopian-fiction terms are a bad idea, and a terrible way to subsidize education.
Education should be subsidized directly, like farming and defense. I like having access to fresh food, no matter what is going on in the world. I like not worrying about being invaded. The government spends my tax money on those things, which is fine. I also like people who have the right to vote in my government to have some rudiments of an education. I mean, if this also means they can earn more money, that's great, but for me? It's mostly the voting thing. The government should directly subsidize schools. Make community college free. why not? the existing payments are mere tokens compared to the real cost. Do something about books for community college, too. Books are cheap in the scheme of things, but expensive for the very poor. They are also something that scales.
I think MOOCs are great for people who like to learn from video, but they aren't college any more than buying and reading books and doing exercises like I've been doing is college. I mean, these activities are great, and are education, but they lack the socialization aspects, and, I guess what the conservatives would call indoctrination. "conventional wisdom" or "common sense" - Honestly, this Einstein guy sounds pretty nuts. should I read him? What about Bohr? he sounds even more nuts.
I mean, I'm several years out, if I keep up my studies, from really having the math to really understand quantum physics. But there are a lot of people who try to apply the concepts therein to philosophy and other things, people who have even less grasp than I do on math.
You could spend lifetimes reading all the crank science out there. A reputable university, and the academic system in general provides you a reasonable framework for deciding if something is worth learning about. I mean, it's not 100%, but if I spent 3 years learning the prerequisites to every crank theory out there, I'd never do anything else.
I suppose a MOOC with sufficient credibility could do that, too, but I think we're a long way from a MOOC having the academic weight of an established university.
Don't I know it. I'm trying to get in now, and even though the fees seem cheap to me, I'm still at least a year of intensive test prep, study, and a lot of luck away from admissions.
Note, I think there's a reasonably large chance that if I take 4 years off for school that I'll have to take a pay cut when I get back (at least relative to industry norms; pay is going up hard) That's not why I want to go, and I don't think that's really what college is for. It's not a trade school.
>And in light of America's student loan crisis, what politician in his right mind is going to propose subsidizing college education even more? It would be nice, but it is unrealistic.
Because loans on dystopian-fiction terms are a bad idea, and a terrible way to subsidize education.
Education should be subsidized directly, like farming and defense. I like having access to fresh food, no matter what is going on in the world. I like not worrying about being invaded. The government spends my tax money on those things, which is fine. I also like people who have the right to vote in my government to have some rudiments of an education. I mean, if this also means they can earn more money, that's great, but for me? It's mostly the voting thing. The government should directly subsidize schools. Make community college free. why not? the existing payments are mere tokens compared to the real cost. Do something about books for community college, too. Books are cheap in the scheme of things, but expensive for the very poor. They are also something that scales.
I think MOOCs are great for people who like to learn from video, but they aren't college any more than buying and reading books and doing exercises like I've been doing is college. I mean, these activities are great, and are education, but they lack the socialization aspects, and, I guess what the conservatives would call indoctrination. "conventional wisdom" or "common sense" - Honestly, this Einstein guy sounds pretty nuts. should I read him? What about Bohr? he sounds even more nuts.
I mean, I'm several years out, if I keep up my studies, from really having the math to really understand quantum physics. But there are a lot of people who try to apply the concepts therein to philosophy and other things, people who have even less grasp than I do on math.
You could spend lifetimes reading all the crank science out there. A reputable university, and the academic system in general provides you a reasonable framework for deciding if something is worth learning about. I mean, it's not 100%, but if I spent 3 years learning the prerequisites to every crank theory out there, I'd never do anything else.
I suppose a MOOC with sufficient credibility could do that, too, but I think we're a long way from a MOOC having the academic weight of an established university.
The American Education System is nothing but a slave factory for the bank system. I mean whats the percentage of students in debt? Pretty sure above 50%.
Want to be a MD to save lives? Sure here is your 250,000$ student debt oh and don't forget malpractice insurance etc.
That's fine, that's how it should ideally be. Market seems to have reached equilibrium now, with collages getting as much money as they possibly can.
It's interesting how this forum seems to react so robotically to things that adversely affect the lower class. Yes, it is good that it looks like people will spend less money on something that might have a very poor roi depending on your circumstances. No it is not okay, that the lower class was duped into believing they needed a piece of paper to be financially secure in life and that many went so far as to get literal pieces of paper from diploma mills that only shows that they were duped. It is not okay that they are in debt for substantial amounts of money they can't get out of.
Or let me put it another way. It's like a massive hurricane just ended and you said: "That's fine, that's how it should ideally be. The hurricane lost its energy for some reason that is intrinsic to hurricanes losing their energy."
I hope that this doesn't sound too emotionally charged as I have some very close friends that act robotically to just about everything.
Or let me put it another way. It's like a massive hurricane just ended and you said: "That's fine, that's how it should ideally be. The hurricane lost its energy for some reason that is intrinsic to hurricanes losing their energy."
I hope that this doesn't sound too emotionally charged as I have some very close friends that act robotically to just about everything.
Empathy breeds terrible policy.
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to HN?
If you don't have empathy then the best course of action for policy makers is whatever gets them the most power without getting kicked out of office. While current politics around the globe look more and more like they are following that path, let's not confuse what's actually happening with what is actually good
Is it consistent to want the best public policy for everyone, but also blame empathy for the creation of terrible policy?
[deleted]
Empathy and compassion are mandatory for sound policy.
Edit because of HN throttling: I haven't seen unsavory elected folks generate sound policy yet, so I'm sticking to my statement.
Edit because of HN throttling: I haven't seen unsavory elected folks generate sound policy yet, so I'm sticking to my statement.
Maybe just compassion: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/02/paul_bloom_on_e.htm...
The politics of being outright evil assholes has gained a lot of traction lately.
It's not that 'the poors were duped'. It's that until very recently, a piece of paper was a very effective salary multiplier.
Define very recently and effective for whom. University of Phoenix has been around since 1976 and has been popular with people who didn't have the resources to get into traditional colleges since at least the late 90s. I think with nearly 17 years of success and probably millions of for profit alumni can safely be defined as duped.
I'm not saying anyone should go to the university of phoenix; there are better publicly subsidized options out today, but I do know a handful of people who were partly educated there, who did just fine.
Well in stable market conditions, the tail of the group of people who get diplomas, ranged by their ROI, will get somewhat negative overall ROI. That's how it should be - i.e. most people - the smarter ones for who education makes sense, get positive ROI, and some relatively small group of people who can't really benefit from education but have fooled themselves into thinking they can, get zero or slightly negative ones. Then comes a group of people who clearly can't benefit and know it. The system reached a stable state - colleges get maximum number of clients they possibly can and get max revenue, it doesn't make sense for many more people to join in, and it doesn't make sense for many existing to stay if prices go further up.
As with oil production for example (see 'marginal barrel') people at the end of this tail don't really benefit, but the system in general is still good, most people benefit.
As with oil production for example (see 'marginal barrel') people at the end of this tail don't really benefit, but the system in general is still good, most people benefit.
I appreciate your comment. I've a few questions to help me understand your perspective.
Is the crux of the issue the fact that lower socioeconomic groups are less able to rebound from a financial impact? Or something more specific about targeting lower s.e. groups?
Is the crux of the issue the fact that lower socioeconomic groups are less able to rebound from a financial impact? Or something more specific about targeting lower s.e. groups?
> with collages getting as much money as they possibly can
Let me tell you, my craft business is booming.
Let me tell you, my craft business is booming.
except it's not, it's as natural as a market bubble or a monopoly, look at higher education literally anywhere else, it isn't that expensive. The problem with the market of college is similar to that of medicine, people will pay anything for it because they believe they need it no matter what.
I'm surprised it took this long. The value is opaque. Education is just selection bias. College should be free up front and cost commensurate with your first few years of income. Incentives would then be aligned properly
Only if you accept that college value == first few years comp, and that second order effects wouldn't outweigh this economic coercion.
Finally the obsession with white collar careers is ending. I much prefer the German system of presenting trades and office jobs as equally valid. This is the first step to revitalizing skilled trades in the US.
At least in the US the path that will most likely lead to a decent career is still through college. As long as there aren't good vocational programs then people losing faith in college is not a good thing. It's more that people are losing faith in the whole system and just check out.
I wonder how much money is spent on students playing catch-up after enrolling into colleges because they can barely read, write or do basic math. I've seen plenty of this kind of thing in study groups during my 2 years of community college and it was really fascinating to witness this level of illiteracy especially having lived in Eastern Europe where even the poorest of poor received good public education. It's absolutely awful and there had to be significant money invested to keep that going. Our public schools are an absolute disaster and cutting costs to higher education should start here. I don't know what this entails. Perhaps paying teachers more in order to attract more talent? Replace GEDs with night schools for adults without age restrictions?
There simple needs to be a revolution in this space. I would say, from personal experience, that Galvanize, a software bootcamp/school etc. is the most organized & on point pushing to replace tradition CS programs. But CS is only a micro slice of the job economy. Why can't their (or others) model of short term/extremely focused programs be applied to other in-demand, specialized, fields? Examples? Non-MD Psychiatrists that review specific cases, other mental health specialties, highly technical pharmacist/software/hardware/etc technical jobs (sry lack of clarity) but taught in this new learning style vs 6-8+ traditional college curriculums.
> Why can't their (or others) model of short term/extremely focused programs be applied to other in-demand, specialized, fields? Examples? Non-MD Psychoatrists
We had these. They were called apprenticeships. [1]
[1] https://www.dol.gov/apprenticeship/
Companies became accustomed to making the rules though labor-wise over the last decade (including externalizing the cost of an employee's education). This is slowly changing due to a tight labor market [2] (forcing employers to finally invest in their workforce) but it will take time.
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-06/it-s-boom...
We had these. They were called apprenticeships. [1]
[1] https://www.dol.gov/apprenticeship/
Companies became accustomed to making the rules though labor-wise over the last decade (including externalizing the cost of an employee's education). This is slowly changing due to a tight labor market [2] (forcing employers to finally invest in their workforce) but it will take time.
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-06/it-s-boom...
> We had these. They were called apprenticeships
Apprenticeships tend not to be “short-term”.
Apprenticeships tend not to be “short-term”.
we still have these, and they are often short term. I think in the trades, 2 to 4 years is traditional; 'internships' which is what we call the same thing in the tech industry, tend to be 3 months to a year. I have no college and did an ad-hoc internship doing office IT in high school; it provided an upwards path for me.
There are also a lot of really low paid IT jobs that are not officially called internships but that fill that role and hire those people; Before I reached age of majority, I spent a lot of time doing IT work in the neighborhood of minimum wage.
There are also a lot of really low paid IT jobs that are not officially called internships but that fill that role and hire those people; Before I reached age of majority, I spent a lot of time doing IT work in the neighborhood of minimum wage.
A country cannot bootcamp its way to prosperity. Education takes time.
>A country cannot bootcamp its way to prosperity. Education takes time.
I need this printed as a bumper sticker
I need this printed as a bumper sticker
Completely agree
The traditional college path just isnt scalable enough anymore, at least for undergrad degrees. Undergrad level education needs to be cheap and attainable from anywhere. Moocs are getting us there, hopefully the trend continues.
I'm not saying that MOOCS aren't valuable; they certainly are, but they aren't college. You don't get the socialization, among other things. This is super obvious to me, as someone without an education who works with people who mostly have very high end educations. It's a huge difference, even when I can compete technically, it's really obvious that I am really different and lacking the background the others have.
Yea, I agree - I think the challenge is to figure out how to get some or all of those benefits for MOOC users - or those otherwise pursuing education off-campus or remote settings. Lack of college-type socialization (and network building) in MOOCS is a thing that can be solved.
Forking out 10's of thousands of dollars or more in tuition along with all the other life-altering changes required to attend a university for 4 dedicated years is really a poor value for a bit of socialization/networking, IMHO - unless maybe you are at a really elite university.
Forking out 10's of thousands of dollars or more in tuition along with all the other life-altering changes required to attend a university for 4 dedicated years is really a poor value for a bit of socialization/networking, IMHO - unless maybe you are at a really elite university.
I think the "life altering changes" required to attend a university for four years are... a big part of the point of going.
I think the cost, well, if that is worth it depends largely on what you value and the marginal value of your dollar. I look around my hometown when I visit my parents, not a particularly wealthy place, and I see a lot of those giant trucks, any one of which could have covered four years at a public university.
I think the cost, well, if that is worth it depends largely on what you value and the marginal value of your dollar. I look around my hometown when I visit my parents, not a particularly wealthy place, and I see a lot of those giant trucks, any one of which could have covered four years at a public university.
Good. People shouldn't make decisions about things like whether to go to college on faith, they should make such decisions after earnest deliberation.
Everyone should have access to an education. Period.
Hopefully a renaissance in vocational training will follow. We have plenty of English major burger flippers as it is.
Fair enough. Thanks to the internet, going to college to study is definitely an antiquated idea.
[deleted]
Get a list of jobs. Sort by desc the salaries. Scan for what you could like. Figure out what you need for that particular job and get that. Done.
How many of those jobs will exist in 10 years, let alone 40?
It's not that inaccurate to presume the net present value of the automation required to replace higher salaried jobs is higher than lower salaried jobs, all else being equal...
Which is yet another reason to keep learning and adapting. Going to university should encourage continued intellectual curiosity, not be an end-point.
Which isn't exactly sorting and ranking jobs by salary.
It's all become very cost-benefit, and while the discussion is a reasonable one to have, most of our entrepreneurship comes from educational environments and a lot of the benefits of education can't be directly measured.
I mean, there is a reason Tesla had to hire a Swedish company to do the interior design of their cars and that Scandinavian design is increasingly more influential in to world. We're not born better artists/designers, but we do have a nurturing environment for those sort of things to grow and a way for the designers to form easy partnerships with business degrees to be successful.
I did project management and later general management autodidactic for a while. It worked perfectly fine, but after taking a degree in management I find myself wondering how the hell it ever worked.
Gut feeling, a clever mind and a willingness to learn on your own will get you a long way, and you can absolutely succeed without education. But academia not only teaches you tested methods it also teaches you why you use them and how to determine which ones are best suited for a given situation.