Why we need free college education for all

[nota bene]

Some teachers don't do the student competition thing.
Some think it's not fair.

That's right. And these days teachers are discouraged from ever using the word "failure." No, no, it's "delayed success." :roll:

 

[Ray410]

We are making professional soldiers redundant..and yet if you go into a market..there will be an army stand trying to recruit kids..

Neither of those two statements is true in the United States.

What country are you in that has recruiters at "stands" in the "market" and "professional soldiers" are redundant?

Just curious.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

That does happen, and it is ashamed. Those people should have gone to college because a college degree is often what proves to the employer that the applicant has merit.

I do believe that we should have more alternatives to traditional college. Like a system where we can just take comprehensive examinations on different subjects, and if we pass the tests, then we would be awarded a "college equivilency degree".

So do you think that you could pass a comprehensive multivariable calculous exam? Or a language skills test in a foreign language? Or what about a test in the "fundamentals of management"?

Until we have such a system, please go back to college - for your own good.

We do have skills tests, an example is the Work Keys test.
It shows the base skills needed to perform certain jobs.

They're starting to give these tests to high school and some college grads.
I'm starting classes on Jan 13.

 

[Peter Grimm]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/e...er-role-in-success.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp&

Each showed the ability to do college work, even excel at it. But the need to earn money brought one set of strains, campus alienation brought others, and ties to boyfriends not in school added complications. With little guidance from family or school officials, college became a leap that they braved without a safety net.

The story of their lost footing is also the story of something larger — the growing role that education plays in preserving class divisions. Poor students have long trailed affluent peers in school performance, but from grade-school tests to college completion, the gaps are growing. With school success and earning prospects ever more entwined, the consequences carry far: education, a force meant to erode class barriers, appears to be fortifying them.

“Everyone wants to think of education as an equalizer — the place where upward mobility gets started,” said Greg J. Duncan, an economist at the University of California, Irvine. “But on virtually every measure we have, the gaps between high- and low-income kids are widening. It’s very disheartening.”

The growing role of class in academic success has taken experts by surprise since it follows decades of equal opportunity efforts and counters racial trends, where differences have narrowed. It adds to fears over recent evidence suggesting that low-income Americans have lower chances of upward mobility than counterparts in Canada and Western Europe.

Somebody has to shovel the coals, right? Seriously.

Everybody can't be a chief. You need some indians too.

 

[imagep]

As others have alluded to, our problem is not that we have sent too few kids to college. It is that we have too heavily subsidized the initial purchase of collegiate education, and not impressed upon our youngsters that at the end of all this they need to have a higher paying job to justify the years and thousands spent educating them. Learning to read Chaucer in the original Middle English is wonderful.... if you are actually intending to become a literature professor, or enter into some other profession that requires it. If your hope is to "go into, like, I don't know, some kind of business I guess", then your time could be better spent.

I got a liberal arts degree. I'm a huge fan of the well-roundedness of the liberal arts concept. But we have too many people with useless degrees who are now overburdened by college debt because we sold them the huge giant shiny lie that any college degree means a great job.

Just depends on what your definition of "overburdened" is. I paid $33.10 a month on my student loan debt for about 25 years before I paid it off. I never felt overburdened.

A lot of people are overburdened by their car payment, or by their electricity bill, or by the cost of clothing. I don't know why education should be any different.

I also have a liberal arts degree, yet fresh out of college I had no problem finding a job paying about what I expected to make as a new college graduate. At the peak of the recession I was very concerned if my business was going to survive the recession so over the course of several months I applied to nearly 100 jobs that I was fully qualified to do - I didn't get one single call from all of those applications.

Our problem today has a lot less to do with education, and a lot more to do with a lack of jobs.

 

[imagep]

Another excellent point. I work in a field dominated by those with no college degree. I have a Masters. I run into people who are better and smarter than me all the time - but employers would look at my resume and assume that somehow I'm three steps ahead of them. That's mistaking a credential for a capability.

But obviously you ARE smarter than they are, because you did what it took to be considered a better candidate for the job.

 

[Ray410]

If you had gone to college, maybe you would know how to property use the correct version of to/too/two.

Hopefully.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

But obviously you ARE smarter than they are, because you did what it took to be considered a better candidate for the job.

That's debatable.
Spending 4 or 6 years getting pieces of paper confirming what you already know, that you're qualified, is generally a waste of time.
Of course, now that they're required, it is and is not a waste of time.

If someone is already well versed, they shouldn't have to go through the motions to confirm it to another.
At least, not 4 years of "the motions."

 

[imagep]

Bingo. All "Free" college education does is turn a college degree into the new HS Diploma, while wasting potentially productive years and trillions of dollars. In the meantime, those who won't do well at college but can develop marketable skills get shafted by getting squeezed out at the bottom. This idea doubles down on stupid.

Unless we had a labor shortage, those years spent in college in no way wasted any aggregate productivity. there are zillions of reasons that people go to college. Some people just want to learn. it's reallly no different than purchasing a back scratcher or a fancy set of wheels for their car, sometimes people purchase stuff not because they need it, but just because they want it. it's not my role to pass judgement on how others spend their money or time. It's a personal decision.

That said, I do agree that college should not be free, but I highly object to those of you who are suggesting that college is somehow a bad thing, regardless of it's relationship to income or employment.

During the olden days, almost no one went to college to qualify themselves for a job. College was about becoming educated for the sake of personal satisfaction or social standing. I could care less why someone goes to college, and as long as they are paying the financial cost (even in the form of a student loan), time, and effort, it's none of my business.

Most people who graduated from college found value of some kind in college, or else they wouldn't have gone or would have dropped out.

 

[imagep]

I am not a university graduate...but it seems to me that these people churned out from uni have no idea what is going on in the real world..they are fine with their targets and statistics but don't seem to have any common sense...

Maybe 6 months Uni and 6 months practical experience would solve this...

The average college grad makes more than the average non-college grad, and has a lower unemployment rate. There must be some merit to college or else this wouldn't be true. I suspect that you are either jealous of college grads, or are incapable of understanding what they do because you are too ignorant to understand what they do.

 

[nota bene]

The average college grad makes more than the average non-college grad, and has a lower unemployment rate. There must be some merit to college or else this wouldn't be true. I suspect that you are either jealous of college grads, or are incapable of understanding what they do because you are too ignorant to understand what they do.

I really don't understand why you're insulting others or stooping to grammar smack either. I'm also not confident that you yourself understand what college grads "do." There actually isn't a one-size-fits-all.

 

[imagep]

In today's society, there is pressure for specialization, which is important. The "general education" curriculum, for lack of a better description, which is comprised of liberal arts courses ranging from literature to philosophy, has been shrinking. One argument for fewer such credits is that students will 'never use them.'

That thinking is short-sighted. It is precisely those course that contribute to helping students develop a "big picture" view. Literature exposes students to the expression of ideas. Senior managers need to be good communicators if they are to align support for change, restructuring, etc. Philosophy helps one learn to organize one's thoughts. Clarity of thought and logical progression of thought help one make better pitches to prospective customers, in negotiations with suppliers, or with one's employees. History gives one a starting point for a range of scenarios in a changing business environment. Having some reference points for examining the impact of evolving markets or managing risk is better than starting from point zero each time.

Numerous senior business leaders have argued that new employees typically don't grasp the big picture so to speak. Without exposure to ideas or concepts that force them to look beyond their field of study, that is not a surprising outcome.

I totally agree, and so do employers.

On average, generalist make more than specialist, in most every field except for law and medicine. Who makes more, the CEO (generalist) or the CFO (specialist)? Who makes more, the department supervisor (generalist), or the machine operator (specialist)?

Also, people who are highly skilled in communications and interpersonal relationships almost always make more than those with more technical skills. The salesperson for a machinery company will almost always make more than the engineer who designs the equipment. The movie star will almost always make more than the lighting technition or sound engineer. An author will almost always make more than a printing equipment operator.

 

[imagep]

What makes the US have more "college required" jobs? There are many jobs that cannot be "outsourced" effectively that do not require college; the trades, service and agricultural jobs. A degree in underwater basket weaving, or penguin migration routes, while granting a very prestigious shingle, does little to prepare one for an "in demand" carreer field in the USA. A lower average education is not a factor in many jobs, in fact, it may be seen as a plus, since I have been denied work for being "overqualified"; the rationale being that my initial training costs would exceed my value in time working for them - I would likely find "better" employment ASAP.

You missed the point. I didn't suggest that the US has more college required jobs, I was suggesting that in an age of unemployment, the problem isn't too many college educated folk, the problem is not enough jobs period.

 

[imagep]

Don,
Typically a bachelors degree will require some sort of basic intro to a few classes that would fall into these liberal arts categories, usually offering students a choice as to what may interest them. Some two year degrees will also require some sort of elective course that falls into a humanities category. What many people feel is wasted time in academia is the large class sizes and offerings of liberal arts degrees for which there is not a large market for such specialized areas of study. Having a bachelors degree in Philosophy doesn't offer a large market outside of teaching. It leads to an oversaturation of the market, which you could argue hampers the earning potential of those teachers with such a surplus of supply.

Yet at mid career, philosophy majors (regardless of job title) are among the highest paid college majors. A lot of times the value in college isn't the direct technical workplace skills learned, it's the fact that the ability to think and reason are expanded (assumably).

 

[ttwtt78640]

You missed the point. I didn't suggest that the US has more college required jobs, I was suggesting that in an age of unemployment, the problem isn't too many college educated folk, the problem is not enough jobs period.

The cost of efficiency (progress?) is that it now takes less people to do more work. Things still need to be done, and many people have need of handyman/carpenter work for home repair/improvements. That can not be outsourced since it is on site work. I find plenty of jobs, off the books, for cash and mostly through referals from prior customers.

 

[Fisher]

Yet at mid career, philosophy majors (regardless of job title) are among the highest paid college majors. A lot of times the value in college isn't the direct technical workplace skills learned, it's the fact that the ability to think and reason are expanded (assumably).

While your point is well taken, at the same time, if someone cannot find a job worthy of their education to pay their debt, shifting that debt onto the public does not help them find a good job so much as it just makes them more content with underemployment. I have known college grads who started at the bottom with degree in hand and quickly jumped ahead, but I am not convinced that everybody who has a degree needs one. It is more a requirement to weed out some of the 1,000 applicants for openings at the newest Cellphone store or whatever.

 

[imagep]

The percentage of graduation requirements comprised by general education courses had been falling. One study into the 1990s could be found here: Decline in General Education Programs: 1914-1993 | Intellectual Takeout (ITO)

I haven't seen any literature indicating much of a rebound since then.

Some of that decline has likely contributed to the problem I cited.

On the other point, I strongly agree with you. How to better align areas of study with market opportunities is a challenge. Today, there are pronounced shortages of graduates in some fields and a glut in others. Even as colleges/universities probably wouldn't like to assume such a role, I believe adequate academic advising should present students with labor market realities for the fields students are interested in studying. If a college is committed to the success of its graduates, seeking to give students their best chance of success once they graduate should be an important consideration. Providing reliable information about labor market realities (much of this information is in the public domain e.g., BLS) is consistent with such a role.

There is no way to exactly match the proportion of specific majors to the needs of the marketplace. the marketplace changes much faster than students graduate from college. During the 1970's architecture was considered a high paying and highly needed major, currently it is considered among the lowest paying STEM majors and has the highest unempoyment rate. During the 1990's companies were hollering that they needed people with good communication skills, by the time that colleges started graduating their first batch of students with communication degrees, companies were complaining that there were not enough highly qualified web designers.

People adapt, and so do employers. Ones major is of far less importance to the employer than ones ability to adapt and to think creatively.

 

[Fisher]

Medicine seems to be the next it field. It is not easy work, but it is there for the taking right now in most places if you are a nurse or tech or something like that.

 

[imagep]

Which sadly is kind of the point. College isn't really college anymore, it's turned into high school 2. Little Jimmy should go to college because that's what he's expected to do, regardless of what Litlte Jimmy wants to do or has the mentality and maturity to do. The reason everyone wants a college degree now is largel ybecause we've made college degree's amazingly irrelevant.

Bull****. Would you hire a non-college grad to perform brainsurgery? Would you want a non-college grad to be teaching your child physics in high school? College grads do have on average higher incomes and lower unemployment rates than non-college grads, which just about totally destroys your theory if you believe that the market recognizes value and rewards success and achievement.

 

[nota bene]

Bull****. Would you hire a non-college grad to perform brainsurgery? Would you want a non-college grad to be teaching your child physics in high school? College grads do have on average higher incomes and lower unemployment rates than non-college grads, which just about totally destroys your theory if you believe that the market recognizes value and rewards success and achievement.

His point is not BS. It was 15+ years ago that academics were joking about how a Bachelor's is the equivalent of a high school diploma and a Master's the equivalent of a Bachelor's.

 

[nota bene]

Medicine seems to be the next it field. It is not easy work, but it is there for the taking right now in most places if you are a nurse or tech or something like that.

A strong number of vets have returned to college now, and many are choosing nursing as a major. That's a double-win for all of us.

 

[imagep]

The percentage of graduation requirements comprised by general education courses had been falling.

I totally agree. I think that a lot of people posting have never actually studied modern college curriculums.

My son's degree program consists of 33 credit hours of "general education" and 115 credit hours directly in his major, a total of 148 credit hours. And of course even some of those 33 credit hours of general ed still have value indirectly to his major.

Earlier in this thread I posted the curriculum for engineer majors at my son's college, classes such as lab sciences and calculous and technical writing were classified as "general ed", despite the fact that they are obviously have value in the major. One art class was required, but it would be easy to make an argument that knowledge of art is important when designing anything.

 

[Fisher]

A strong number of vets have returned to college now, and many are choosing nursing as a major. That's a double-win for all of us.

I've known a couple people to leave law careers to pursue becoming RN's so it definitely has some upside.

 

[nota bene]

I've known a couple people to leave law careers to pursue becoming RN's so it definitely has some upside.

Well, they definitely didn't do it for the money!

 

[imagep]

We do have skills tests, an example is the Work Keys test.
It shows the base skills needed to perform certain jobs.

They're starting to give these tests to high school and some college grads.
I'm starting classes on Jan 13.

I used to LOVE companies that did testing as part of their interview process. it meant that I was almost guaranateed to be offered a job. There is only one think that I am really good at, and that is making a logical choice out of a preselected group of options - even when I didn't actually know the correct answer.

I once took a color matching test when I was applying for a job with a company that made packaging material. I was offered a job the next week. A manufacturing company gave me a test and offered me the job just as soon as the guy ran the test slip through their scantron system.

Even after I graduated from college, I applied for a job as a manager trainee at a large department store, took a test, and was offered the job on the spot. I was referred to the company by an employment agency, decided not to take the job, the agency called me up basically begging me to take the job (so that they could get paid commission), they told me that I was the first person that they referred to that company that was offered a job.

I had one job interview where I litterally spent a week working for the company (no pay), as part of the interview process. I was still in college, attending part time. They also offered me the job, and I took it. I thought that I was big stuff being an assistant manager trainee for McDonalds. I quit that job 3 days after I got my college diploma in the mail (didn't attend the graduation cerimoney, the bastards wouldn't let me off from work).

Anyhow, if I could have taken those years to study on my on, and then taken a test to credentialize what I had learned, I probably could have saved a pile of money and entered the fulltime workforce sooner.