4 ms·

>This doesn't sound like a higher education problem - it sounds like an education problem. The story isn't really about "higher education" in the traditional m

by jasode 10y ago

>This doesn't sound like a higher education problem - it sounds like an education problem. The story isn't really about "higher education" in the traditional meaning. It's about taking the blue-collar apprenticeship & training model and calling _that_ a "college degree". Since blue collar schooling (apprenticeships) and blue collar careers (e.g. factory workers) have a social stigma, some folks in the article are saying "degree required" should be expanded to mean "apprenticeship required". The last sentence of the article highlights this re-labeling: >“And whatever you do with training, you need to call it college. You want to make people feel good about the path they choose.” Other sentences in that article on that same theme: > But the college-for-all movement, [...], is often conflated with earning a bachelor’s degree. > “Higher ed,” he said, “needs to respect the dignity of labor.” E.g. the prospective factory worker attends training at a community college for 2 years and gets a credential that's not a traditional bachelor's degree -- maybe a Completion Certificate and call _that_ the "college degree required". That's the idiosyncratic meaning of "Degree Required" specific to the NYT article's title.

bilbo0s 10y ago
I don't know??? A lot of the examples they give, whether it is in a factory or in some sort of repair tech capacity, make it seem as if FLEXIBILITY is the issue. I think they are testing to make sure that the candidates have some requisite base level understanding of the principles underlying the technology to be able to adapt to any changes in higher level essentials that may need to be made in the field or on the floor. (My reading could be wrong, but I doubt it.) If what Seimens et al want is the ability to be flexible, I can certainly understand why they skew towards candidates with college degrees. Frankly I've found that college grads absorb new technological principles far more easily that tech school grads. If your tech won't change, the tech school grad is fine. But if you think things may shift in the future, you're going to need some college grads. (Just my experience, YMMV.) Maybe we should be thinking about how to "teach" more "flexibility", (if that's even possible?), at the high school and college level. We would need to have a better understanding of it though. I know companies are calling it "flexibility"... but consider... is it more "adaptability" companies are looking for? Or is it actually "creativity" that they are seeking? Is it both? I don't know if we have a good understanding of that right now??? Whatever college is doing to confer that flexibility to its graduates is what we need more of. If we want to change high school or tech school in the future to confer that ability, that would be fine. But you have to keep in mind that Seimens needs workers today, not in the future. So the only solution they have TODAY is to mandate college degrees.
- jasode 10y ago
  >If what Seimens et al want is flexibility, I can certainly understand why they skew towards candidates with college degrees. The story isn't really about Siemens. It's about trying to convince readers of what a "college degree" can mean in the future. If you look at the background of the author Jeffrey J. Selingo[1], you'll see he previously wrote about traditional college coursework not serving the needs of blue-collar workers that don't need 4-year degrees. He echoes many of the same sentiments by Mike Rowe ("Dirty Jobs")[2] about giving apprenticeships and factory jobs more respect. To go back to Siemens as one example, the article states: >, Siemens in 2011 created an apprenticeship program for seniors at local high schools that combines four years of on-the-job training with an associate degree in mechatronics from nearby Central Piedmont Community College. Today, that type of 2-year training is not as prestigious as a traditional 4-year degree. The writer is simply using Siemens as a case study of changing the public's attitude about "higher education". [1] http://jeffselingo.com/book/college-un-bound/ http://jeffselingo.com/book/college-un-bound/ [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzKzu86Agg0&feature=youtu.be&t=3m18s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzKzu86Agg0&feature=youtu.be...
  - bilbo0s 10y ago
    My comment wasn't about Seimens either. It's about the central problem. Which is that companies, and society, want "flexible" employees, but we currently turn out "trained" employees. So there is an impedance mismatch there. And that is what puts society in the bind. For instance, in the Seimens program you mentioned, what happens if Seimens closes up shop and moves to Brazil? Is the vo-tech grad with years of Seimens specific training and experience going to be flexible enough to take a job at another tech firm? I'm honestly unsure that would be the case. Whereas, if he had a math, science or engineering degree from Georgia Tech, Nebraska or Arkansas... I would be a COMPLETELY comfortable hiring him. So we're getting into this unemployment situation because factories or other jobs move, and leave behind workers who are not flexible enough to thrive in a different industry. (By we, I meant society.)
    - tedmiston 10y ago
      I'm not so sure it's about flexibility. If these roles are changing to involve more computers (software is eating the world) and require more computer skills, it's something many traditional apprentices lack while they are good with their hands. I wish the author had given more concrete examples of what these real world requirements are.
guitarbill 10y ago
As you've said terminology is important. And yes, I read the article :) . I disagree with it slightly, what I'm arguing for is not to dilute the meaning of degree, because that playing field is always going to be uneven in favour of academia. I don't think calling it a degree is helping anybody. If anything it will just cause people to look at the reputation of the institution. (Obviously that already happens a bit, but it's not too bad.) In the UK, they allowed polytechnics (roughly the same as institutes of technology I think) to become universities and award degrees. So while more people were awarded degrees, the reputations did not translate so well. (I think - I welcome rebuttals though.) A consequence of this is that employers put screening tests in place or made them more difficult. These tests favour academic skills. To be fair, a quick screening test will never reflect practical skill well - so it's important the "degrees" or whatever we're calling them called do! Personally, I think there is something lost when you stop using terminology with practical connotations and start using terminology that has academic connotations. People then except roughly the same, so the practical aspect is in danger of being deemphasised. This differentiation is inherently valuable. But I will admit that this rebranding might be a quick, practical fix. I'm just not convinced it's right in the long run. There's a real opportunity to create programs that aren't degrees, but of equal high repute and quality, and are proud of that. Although there are problems I can see with that. One being that college lifestyle is attractive to students, and therefore lucrative. Edit: Or maybe not, what do I know. Maybe the ones we have are good enough, and it is just an image problem? I find that hard to believe, as that would be a costly misconception for businesses. There's also the possibility that college degrees are too ubiquitous, and the labour market will provide enough people fitting that criteria. If we've made it too easy and too common to obtain a degree, then the education system needs rethinking. At the end of the day, I think we agree that improving education is a good thing, and the earlier the better (in both senses).
- walshemj 10y ago
  Polytechnics only really served the "higher " qualifications for associate professionals i.e. those who had done an Apprenticeship and then went on to an ONC HNC. You could also join direct from school with O / A levels
- UK-AL 10y ago
phkahler 10y ago
>> The story isn't really about "higher education" in the traditional meaning. It's about taking the blue-collar apprenticeship & training model and calling _that_ a "college degree". When I was in high school, we had vocational classes. I took electronics, others took small engine repair, welding, or drafting. Hands on classes that in some cases require applied math. I think these are mostly gone in the US today with everyone demanding higher achievement is pure STEM classes. I'm not sure what the "T" for technology is in high school, but I fear people may thing it means the ability to use Word and PowerPoint.
- AtheistOfFail 10y ago
  > people may thing it means the ability to use Word and PowerPoint. That's what it means these days... as someone who went through the "Advanced Technology" courses in high school... I learned Pivot Tables in Excel... as opposed to programming or something else.
- HeyLaughingBoy 10y ago
  The loss of those classes bothers me. My 10th grader just finished a class in Sheet Metal Fabrication and loved it. He's now taking Welding and plans to do Electronics next year. He signed up for sewing, but it was cancelled due to lack of interest. I can't remember the last time he was that interested in anything at school What's his motivation? He wanted to make costumes for ComicCon and accidentally found something he really enjoys doing. These classes are increasingly rare. Our school district is primarily rural kids, and skills like the above are obviously useful on farms. But the reality is that pushing everyone to college ignores that there are many very smart kids out there who have no interest in college-level academics, or will simply not thrive in that environment. However, they may be fantastic machinists, CAD technicians, electricians, etc.
  - granos 10y ago
    Buy him a sewing machine (assuming you don't have one) and some supplies. There are tons of videos online to teach technique, and it isn't terribly expensive.
  - 10y ago
gowld 10y ago
This is not new. https://www.google.com/?#q=technical+college https://www.google.com/?#q=technical+college

by jasode 10y ago

bilbo0s 10y ago

I don't know??? A lot of the examples they give, whether it is in a factory or in some sort of repair tech capacity, make it seem as if FLEXIBILITY is the issue. I think they are testing to make sure that the candidates have some requisite base level understanding of the principles underlying the technology to be able to adapt to any changes in higher level essentials that may need to be made in the field or on the floor. (My reading could be wrong, but I doubt it.) If what Seimens et al want is the ability to be flexible, I can certainly understand why they skew towards candidates with college degrees. Frankly I've found that college grads absorb new technological principles far more easily that tech school grads. If your tech won't change, the tech school grad is fine. But if you think things may shift in the future, you're going to need some college grads. (Just my experience, YMMV.) Maybe we should be thinking about how to "teach" more "flexibility", (if that's even possible?), at the high school and college level. We would need to have a better understanding of it though. I know companies are calling it "flexibility"... but consider... is it more "adaptability" companies are looking for? Or is it actually "creativity" that they are seeking? Is it both? I don't know if we have a good understanding of that right now??? Whatever college is doing to confer that flexibility to its graduates is what we need more of. If we want to change high school or tech school in the future to confer that ability, that would be fine. But you have to keep in mind that Seimens needs workers today, not in the future. So the only solution they have TODAY is to mandate college degrees.

jasode 10y ago
>If what Seimens et al want is flexibility, I can certainly understand why they skew towards candidates with college degrees. The story isn't really about Siemens. It's about trying to convince readers of what a "college degree" can mean in the future. If you look at the background of the author Jeffrey J. Selingo[1], you'll see he previously wrote about traditional college coursework not serving the needs of blue-collar workers that don't need 4-year degrees. He echoes many of the same sentiments by Mike Rowe ("Dirty Jobs")[2] about giving apprenticeships and factory jobs more respect. To go back to Siemens as one example, the article states: >, Siemens in 2011 created an apprenticeship program for seniors at local high schools that combines four years of on-the-job training with an associate degree in mechatronics from nearby Central Piedmont Community College. Today, that type of 2-year training is not as prestigious as a traditional 4-year degree. The writer is simply using Siemens as a case study of changing the public's attitude about "higher education". [1] http://jeffselingo.com/book/college-un-bound/ http://jeffselingo.com/book/college-un-bound/ [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzKzu86Agg0&feature=youtu.be&t=3m18s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzKzu86Agg0&feature=youtu.be...
- bilbo0s 10y ago
  My comment wasn't about Seimens either. It's about the central problem. Which is that companies, and society, want "flexible" employees, but we currently turn out "trained" employees. So there is an impedance mismatch there. And that is what puts society in the bind. For instance, in the Seimens program you mentioned, what happens if Seimens closes up shop and moves to Brazil? Is the vo-tech grad with years of Seimens specific training and experience going to be flexible enough to take a job at another tech firm? I'm honestly unsure that would be the case. Whereas, if he had a math, science or engineering degree from Georgia Tech, Nebraska or Arkansas... I would be a COMPLETELY comfortable hiring him. So we're getting into this unemployment situation because factories or other jobs move, and leave behind workers who are not flexible enough to thrive in a different industry. (By we, I meant society.)
  - tedmiston 10y ago
    I'm not so sure it's about flexibility. If these roles are changing to involve more computers (software is eating the world) and require more computer skills, it's something many traditional apprentices lack while they are good with their hands. I wish the author had given more concrete examples of what these real world requirements are.

guitarbill 10y ago

As you've said terminology is important. And yes, I read the article :) . I disagree with it slightly, what I'm arguing for is not to dilute the meaning of degree, because that playing field is always going to be uneven in favour of academia. I don't think calling it a degree is helping anybody. If anything it will just cause people to look at the reputation of the institution. (Obviously that already happens a bit, but it's not too bad.) In the UK, they allowed polytechnics (roughly the same as institutes of technology I think) to become universities and award degrees. So while more people were awarded degrees, the reputations did not translate so well. (I think - I welcome rebuttals though.) A consequence of this is that employers put screening tests in place or made them more difficult. These tests favour academic skills. To be fair, a quick screening test will never reflect practical skill well - so it's important the "degrees" or whatever we're calling them called do! Personally, I think there is something lost when you stop using terminology with practical connotations and start using terminology that has academic connotations. People then except roughly the same, so the practical aspect is in danger of being deemphasised. This differentiation is inherently valuable. But I will admit that this rebranding might be a quick, practical fix. I'm just not convinced it's right in the long run. There's a real opportunity to create programs that aren't degrees, but of equal high repute and quality, and are proud of that. Although there are problems I can see with that. One being that college lifestyle is attractive to students, and therefore lucrative. Edit: Or maybe not, what do I know. Maybe the ones we have are good enough, and it is just an image problem? I find that hard to believe, as that would be a costly misconception for businesses. There's also the possibility that college degrees are too ubiquitous, and the labour market will provide enough people fitting that criteria. If we've made it too easy and too common to obtain a degree, then the education system needs rethinking. At the end of the day, I think we agree that improving education is a good thing, and the earlier the better (in both senses).

walshemj 10y ago
Polytechnics only really served the "higher " qualifications for associate professionals i.e. those who had done an Apprenticeship and then went on to an ONC HNC. You could also join direct from school with O / A levels
UK-AL 10y ago

phkahler 10y ago

>> The story isn't really about "higher education" in the traditional meaning. It's about taking the blue-collar apprenticeship & training model and calling _that_ a "college degree". When I was in high school, we had vocational classes. I took electronics, others took small engine repair, welding, or drafting. Hands on classes that in some cases require applied math. I think these are mostly gone in the US today with everyone demanding higher achievement is pure STEM classes. I'm not sure what the "T" for technology is in high school, but I fear people may thing it means the ability to use Word and PowerPoint.

AtheistOfFail 10y ago
> people may thing it means the ability to use Word and PowerPoint. That's what it means these days... as someone who went through the "Advanced Technology" courses in high school... I learned Pivot Tables in Excel... as opposed to programming or something else.
HeyLaughingBoy 10y ago
The loss of those classes bothers me. My 10th grader just finished a class in Sheet Metal Fabrication and loved it. He's now taking Welding and plans to do Electronics next year. He signed up for sewing, but it was cancelled due to lack of interest. I can't remember the last time he was that interested in anything at school What's his motivation? He wanted to make costumes for ComicCon and accidentally found something he really enjoys doing. These classes are increasingly rare. Our school district is primarily rural kids, and skills like the above are obviously useful on farms. But the reality is that pushing everyone to college ignores that there are many very smart kids out there who have no interest in college-level academics, or will simply not thrive in that environment. However, they may be fantastic machinists, CAD technicians, electricians, etc.
- granos 10y ago
  Buy him a sewing machine (assuming you don't have one) and some supplies. There are tons of videos online to teach technique, and it isn't terribly expensive.
- 10y ago

gowld 10y ago

This is not new. https://www.google.com/?#q=technical+college https://www.google.com/?#q=technical+college