What's new

2020 Presidential election

It’d also be helpful if we taught people the difference between correlation and causation. Of course, to teach that would require understanding it. There are certainly more lucrative pathways that require college, but that’s not what the majority of people completing college are doing. People ambitious enough to stick through college are more ambitious in other avenues of life and thus make more money. That’s one variable that accounts for at least a large part of the variance. However, as college has been more and more sold as a cultural expectation, even those less ambitious are sticking through, especially when it’s much easier now to just take out loans and not have to work as hard, so the numbers saying it’s an advantage are going to reduce.

My generation was always told “go get a college degree,” as if there was some pot of gold at the end of that rainbow, but we never clarified why people attending college made more money. Part of it is correlation, but the other part is that college put people on paths to specific careers. Now it’s about “learning” with the expectation that employability comes after all of said learning.

No doubt. I teach a special class for College Prep/Honors kids and I just started them on their career research papers. I know, I know...but I talk about certain jobs about which they ask me and how little they pay and why and so forth.

One girl wants to be a Cultural Anthropologist. She’s a frosh and scored 1,040 on her psat’s in the fall. Great freakin’ girl.
 
A couple more thoughts:

I think it’s interesting that we’ve oversold this so much that many people view it as a life goal. People feel guilty or feel like they’ve sold themselves short if they didn’t go to/complete college, and people return after many years to finally check that box. Now, I think people should have whatever personal goals they want and if this is their goal, then more power to them. But this system has been set up where they put up all these hoops and say “jump, MFer,” and then people feel their life purpose has been compromised because they didn’t meet that particular challenge, never mind all the other countless things they can do in life that could have more impact and personal meaning, not to mention being a lot less expensive.

On the other hand, though, you’ve got a lot of people who complain about higher education in a way that just seems like they’re trying to rationalize their feelings of guilt for not going to/completing college. So they make some poor arguments against it. I think if people are avoiding college because they’re lazy or not wanting to work, that they’re not a good example when talking about how you can be successful without college.
 
What caused regulation?
The belief that they were making things better by guaranteeing students to be able to take out enough money in loans to pay the cost of attendance. Tuition skyrocketed as they wrote blank checks to the universities.

Now it’s “OMG this didn’t work and we need to do something!!!!1”
 
Allow kids to come out of high school with welding training, radiology technician certificates, medical assisting, automechanics. So stupid that we want to delay this and make it more expensive by paying for both.

How many 16-year-old kids know exactly what they want to do for the next 40 years of their life? I agree that we should allow for some job skills training, but not at the expense of general education skills.
 
Ya, as it turns there isnt much of a market for gender studies and liberal arts. Kind of hard to pay back loans when you cant make a decent income off your "education"

College graduates, even with degrees in liberal arts and gender studies, still make higher lifetime incomes than those with no college.
 
How many 16-year-old kids know exactly what they want to do for the next 40 years of their life? I agree that we should allow for some job skills training, but not at the expense of general education skills.
How many 18 year olds do? Hell, people are going to college for things they have no idea if they want to do them — at least in this scenario they’re employable after high school.
College graduates, even with degrees in liberal arts and gender studies, still make higher lifetime incomes than those with no college.
Correlation or causation?
 
An 18-year-old with good general skill can still find apprenticeships and training programs.
Absolutely. But what we’re talking about is whether or not it’s more efficient to fund college, or to beef up high school — where do you get more bang for your buck? For one usually advancing progressive notions, you seem tied to traditional perspectives.
 
Absolutely. But what we’re talking about is whether or not it’s more efficient to fund college, or to beef up high school — where do you get more bang for your buck? For one usually advancing progressive notions, you seem tied to traditional perspectives.

It's interesting to see a preference for general education classes (by which I mean English/literature, math, science, civics, history, etc.) being described non-progressive. I think that may be the wrong axis to describe it.

Perhaps I was not clear above, but I have no problem with offering more job-specific curricula in high school, as long as the gerneral classes do not suffer as a result. However, in one of the examples you mention, I think a radiation tech who has not mastered English, math through college algebra, and basic biology and chemistry courses would be in a poor job position compared to a radiation tech who had taken the general education classes in high school, and then went on to certification classes. I don't know as much about welding, but would guess some basic knowledge of English, math, and the appropriate sciences would help there as well.

As fast as the world is changing, I think the best training we can offer in public schools is the basic skills that will give a foundation for student to lay additional training on top of, as opposed to narrowly constricted training in a couple of job skills.
 
The belief that they were making things better by guaranteeing students to be able to take out enough money in loans to pay the cost of attendance. Tuition skyrocketed as they wrote blank checks to the universities.

Now it’s “OMG this didn’t work and we need to do something!!!!1”

Try starting with the belief that there was a problem. Which there was and is. A problem that wasn't being even identified, let alone solved by letting the market correct itself.

I'm not saying it was the best thought out idea, but failing to acknowledge that they acted on a existing problem that wasn't getting fixed is asking for further failure.
 
Heard Klobuchar did herself good at a town hall recently. She wasn’t afraid to say no and not buy into pipe dreams.

She’ll get a closer look from me
 
Back
Top