3 ms·

Advocates of this general position, whether it's Peter Thiel and "hey don't go to college I'll just pay you" or this author's "hey your job isn't that complicat

by camgunz 10y ago

Advocates of this general position, whether it's Peter Thiel and "hey don't go to college I'll just pay you" or this author's "hey your job isn't that complicated, you can figure it out in less time for less money", all miss the point of college. The best purpose of college is to make you a reasonable citizen in a democracy. Most Americans voting in elections can't even name the Vice President, let alone articulate what plenary powers are, what the 4th and 5th amendments say (or seriously any amendment), name more than 3 executive branch departments (Defense, State and... uh...), point out where Iraq is on a map, etc. It's really no surprise we get the elected officials we get. Sure, professional training is important and I think our education system is not particularly efficient about it. But education is more than just "here's how you work for the man". It's supposed to make you a well-rounded, well-educated citizen so you can participate effectively in a democratic government. Which is why things like public education, state colleges and universities, a separation of religion and education, and state subsidized college tuition are so important, and why religious schools, charter schools, and for-profit colleges/universities are so antithetical to democracy: their agenda is entirely separate from "be a well-educated democratic citizen".

akuma73 10y ago
I had a different college experience. A degree in computer engineering required very little coursework outside of engineering. Due to human nature, I ended up hanging out with primarily other engineering students. All of the non-academic socializing, in retrospect, was very limited to a narrow college bubble. It was only after I graduated and lived in the real world for a few years that I felt more 'well rounded'. The tools to become a 'well informed citizen' should be taught at the high school level since not everyone goes to college.
- camgunz 10y ago
  Yeah I don't have a strong preference about when they're taught. I think college is probably best because the 17-23 age is probably the earliest that most people are equipped to start learning stuff like this, but then again if you can vote when you're 18 maybe it should start a lot earlier. I think there's too much siloing between, say, STEM majors and Liberal Arts majors. You get Philosophy majors who are pretty good with concepts like confirmation bias (just for example), but super bad when it comes to things like "why is the sky blue" and "just what is the Internet, anyway". Conversely you get engineers who are pretty good programmers or EEs, but really don't understand things like "Affirmative Action isn't racist" or "taxation isn't government theft or class warfare". I... mostly think high school is useless? I guess it's more accurate to say I think middle school (6-8th grade) should be more like high school, and high school should be a lot more practical, applied learning. If you're interested in cars, do that. If you're interested in chemistry, do that. Do them both at the same time, and do some music too, whatever.
  - literallycancer 10y ago
    >Conversely you get engineers who are pretty good programmers or EEs, but really don't understand things like "Affirmative Action isn't racist" or "taxation isn't government theft or class warfare". You can't teach opinions. What you can teach is how to talk to people with a differing opinion. Let's take this statement: "Affirmative Action isn't racist" The disagreement probably wouldn't be about affirmative action at all, but rather about the definition of racism and whether both parties define it the same way.
    - camgunz 10y ago
      > You can't teach opinions. I mean, you can. Basically every parent does this. > The disagreement probably wouldn't be about affirmative action at all, but rather about the definition of racism and whether both parties define it the same way. Yeah classes about race in the US define the difference between isolated cases of discrimination and institutional discrimination against a racial minority. They go over the history of racial discrimination in colleges and universities and other public institutions as a method to disenfranchise and disempower minorities. They illustrate that college admissions or job positions aren't zero-sum quantities, and that the state goes to great lengths to increase the capacity of universities and add jobs every day so that there are enough for everyone. Finally, they point out that failing to enact policies to level the playing field entrenches privilege: without something to break the cycle of institutionalized racism (and other institutional discrimination), minority groups remain trapped in a cycle of lower opportunity and higher risk.
- literallycancer 10y ago
  >I had a different college experience. A degree in computer engineering required very little coursework outside of engineering. This has been my experience at an engineering uni in Europe as well. The place that tried (somewhat successfully) to make people just better, rather than better at some narrow marketable skill, was (an elite) high-school. I'd estimate the likelihood of a regular high-school being as good at about 10%.

by camgunz 10y ago

akuma73 10y ago

I had a different college experience. A degree in computer engineering required very little coursework outside of engineering. Due to human nature, I ended up hanging out with primarily other engineering students. All of the non-academic socializing, in retrospect, was very limited to a narrow college bubble. It was only after I graduated and lived in the real world for a few years that I felt more 'well rounded'. The tools to become a 'well informed citizen' should be taught at the high school level since not everyone goes to college.

camgunz 10y ago
Yeah I don't have a strong preference about when they're taught. I think college is probably best because the 17-23 age is probably the earliest that most people are equipped to start learning stuff like this, but then again if you can vote when you're 18 maybe it should start a lot earlier. I think there's too much siloing between, say, STEM majors and Liberal Arts majors. You get Philosophy majors who are pretty good with concepts like confirmation bias (just for example), but super bad when it comes to things like "why is the sky blue" and "just what is the Internet, anyway". Conversely you get engineers who are pretty good programmers or EEs, but really don't understand things like "Affirmative Action isn't racist" or "taxation isn't government theft or class warfare". I... mostly think high school is useless? I guess it's more accurate to say I think middle school (6-8th grade) should be more like high school, and high school should be a lot more practical, applied learning. If you're interested in cars, do that. If you're interested in chemistry, do that. Do them both at the same time, and do some music too, whatever.
- literallycancer 10y ago
  >Conversely you get engineers who are pretty good programmers or EEs, but really don't understand things like "Affirmative Action isn't racist" or "taxation isn't government theft or class warfare". You can't teach opinions. What you can teach is how to talk to people with a differing opinion. Let's take this statement: "Affirmative Action isn't racist" The disagreement probably wouldn't be about affirmative action at all, but rather about the definition of racism and whether both parties define it the same way.
  - camgunz 10y ago
    > You can't teach opinions. I mean, you can. Basically every parent does this. > The disagreement probably wouldn't be about affirmative action at all, but rather about the definition of racism and whether both parties define it the same way. Yeah classes about race in the US define the difference between isolated cases of discrimination and institutional discrimination against a racial minority. They go over the history of racial discrimination in colleges and universities and other public institutions as a method to disenfranchise and disempower minorities. They illustrate that college admissions or job positions aren't zero-sum quantities, and that the state goes to great lengths to increase the capacity of universities and add jobs every day so that there are enough for everyone. Finally, they point out that failing to enact policies to level the playing field entrenches privilege: without something to break the cycle of institutionalized racism (and other institutional discrimination), minority groups remain trapped in a cycle of lower opportunity and higher risk.
literallycancer 10y ago
>I had a different college experience. A degree in computer engineering required very little coursework outside of engineering. This has been my experience at an engineering uni in Europe as well. The place that tried (somewhat successfully) to make people just better, rather than better at some narrow marketable skill, was (an elite) high-school. I'd estimate the likelihood of a regular high-school being as good at about 10%.