7 ms·

There's a more trivial alternative to "equally credible alternatives to university" - just ban education based discrimination. Same way US so nicely enforces re

• jdminhbg 11y ago
  > 100% guaranteed positive outcome I really, really, really doubt that.
• scottshepard 11y ago
  Make it illegal to ask what level of education you have received or just where you went to school?
  • 0xffff2 11y ago
    No one really cares where you went to school anyway unless it's literally a top three school for your field.
• joepvd 11y ago
  Wow, this is such a simple, practical, and subversive idea that my mind has been too boxed up for coming up with that. Whether I agree with this genius, devious and trivial idea... not sure yet.
• firloop 11y ago
  I disagree. While college is becoming less of an important step for many careers, education, especially post-graduate, is vital for many others. For example, if I were a large tech company hiring physicists for R&D, I really don't think it's unfair to expect some sort of post-grad education, nor do I think these instances really contribute to any sort of problem right now.
  • BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    I think the parent is saying that if someone can demonstrate they can handle a physicist position for R&D, does education even matter? It would really depend on the criteria used to determine the ability to perform at the job. If the criteria is good enough I see no reason why someone without a PhD could take the job.
    • deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    • CWuestefeld 11y ago
      Can you devise a filter that's as rigorous as all the tests and projects that a student would have successfully completed over the X years it took to earn the degree? Seeing the degree is a shortcut to verifying that the basic level of knowledge in the applicant's major has been satisfied. The testing necessary to verify that independently (and redundantly - one for each company being applied to) seems prohibitive.
      • tptacek 11y ago
        For physics? Probably not. But physics grads don't make up a particularly big part of the economy; it's actually not an especially great degree to get if your primary concern is a STEM-y career. For HR directors, purchasing managers, corporate controllers, practice managers, financial advisors, and jobs like that? Yes, I think you can devise filters for anything colleges filter for that would be both more effective and far cheaper than college.
      • avip 11y ago
        For our profession? Yes. For example your github repos, SO profile, the app you've built or your projecteuler stats may prove better filters. But I don't need to - smarter people already did the work for me. This approach is already practiced (mini scale I believe) in our industry.
      • BinaryIdiot 11y ago
        > Can you devise a filter that's as rigorous as all the tests and projects that a student would have successfully completed over the X years it took to earn the degree? Eventually I don't see why not but I don't think it's an easy thing to do nor do I know how to do it for a physics R&D type of position. Obviously education isn't the only criteria people use today anyway (I can't tell you how many CS grads I've interviewed who really struggled or flat out didn't know a lot about CS). It's an age-old problem: how do tell if someone can do what you need them to do without wasting your time and money? As the skill and knowledge requirements go up this becomes harder and harder to do, with or without the degree shortcut.
  • taurath 11y ago
    Physics is a field that is almost entirely taught within the traditional college system and probably would get less of a benefit than other fields. The problem is the college system is so expensive that those who COULD become physicists aren't because of economic reasons, and those who want to more than anything are being saddled with debt and a lot more burden which probably doesn't help them advance the field.
  • cookiecaper 11y ago
    What's important is that the skillset exists, not that a university has been given a considerable sum of money to provide certification that it exists. University was not the normal way to establish credibility until very recently. University is too expensive to sustain in its current form -- the whole thing has to be reworked to be affordable. So don't ask yourself "What degree does this guy have?", but "How much physics research has this guy done? Can I see his body of work? Is it high-quality stuff?" The latter is performed anytime a competent person performs a hire anyway. It's fine to skip/ignore the education when someone can demonstrate competence. The problem really comes in "soft" degrees like business, marketing, communications, etc., where it's not really possible for a body of work to be presented as evidence that the individual knows what he/she is doing.
• vijayr 11y ago
  just ban education based discrimination I am not sure I understand this. If you are going to a doctor, you would want to make sure she is qualified, isn't it? And the only way (currently at least) to make sure is that degree that proves she knows what she is doing. Of course this doesn't apply to all professions.
  • Zigurd 11y ago
    Qualifying tests and apprenticeships can make that work for almost all cases. Some of that is already in place for professions that need practical experience.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • bryanlarsen 11y ago
    Great example. To be a doctor you need to pass the medical board exams.
  • BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    I think that's true to some degree but most types of doctors still require going through an internship (sometimes), rigorous and lengthy residency program and passing their specialty boards. It's true if someone can do those 3 things without going to medical school they may be missing a great deal of knowledge passed from medical school that maybe they were not explicitly tested on or experienced in the field. I'm not sure what to do about that. If you could find a solution for that then banning from asking or considering education could actually work, I think...but that's a hard problem to solve.
  • digitalneal 11y ago
    Guess what the person who graduated last in medical school gets called? Doctor.
  • Retric 11y ago
    There is still a path to become a practicing lawyer without going to law school. You need to pass a test and become certified, but going to school is only necessary for the pedigree. Arguably the simplest solution is to remove undergrad degree requirements from med / law school. In terms of education there are two options. Ban mentioning degrees only credentials, or ban mentioning school names which deflates the ivy name recognition. In both cases schools would need to focus on education not name recognition.
• theseatoms 11y ago
  Let's also ban previous-employer based discrimination. ;)
  • pcmaffey 11y ago
    And skill-based discrimination.
    • Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      Interview based discrimination is really where it is at. Also, since it is almost impossible to remove indicators of protected statuses such as gender or race, it will help ensure no such discrimination occurs. Best we couple it with a ban on performance based discrimination once hired.
• tptacek 11y ago
  Whether I agree or not with this (mostly, I don't), it fails my test of "being something a startup can do". Whereas a startup that had a really good solution for inculcating the kinds of skills and values white-collar employers are looking for could outcompete universities instead of legislating them out of the picture. When people discuss the value signaling provided by elite universities, their first example is usually "the diligence and hard work it takes to get into the university". That strikes me as the kind of value you can find ways to signal just effectively without asking for $150k.
  • staunch 11y ago
    > When people discuss the value signaling provided by elite universities, their first example is usually "the diligence and hard work it takes to get into the university"... Graduation rates at universities for the elite are nearly 100%. Getting into the club is the only hard part and everyone involved knows that. Empirically, what's required to get into the club is being wealthy enough to afford the private schooling, tutoring, and extra circular activities necessary to help your child game the admissions process. As long as people value these prestigious brands, the elite will continue to buy them for their children. It's got nothing to do with education itself, which could be obtained any number of ways already.
    • tptacek 11y ago
      I agree, and because that's a rather obvious market inefficiency, I see it as an opportunity for a startup to make money while improving the world.
      • staunch 11y ago
        YC may be closest to being this startup. If their process was an "Empirical, blinded, skills-assessment", and they funded anyone who met their predefined requirements, we'd have a real alternative to class-based universities. At least for anyone willing to create their own business. YC is already more fair (less gameable) than the elite universities, but it's still far from being fair enough or big enough to really change things.