7 ms·

> It's important to keep in mind that college is meant to enrich people as individuals, not explicitly prepare them for jobs. Technical/vocational schools are f

> It's important to keep in mind that college is meant to enrich people as individuals, not explicitly prepare them for jobs. Technical/vocational schools are for job prep. The more college is shown to be failing the job market, the more I hear this argument. Are people who don't go to college less enriched individuals? Lately, academics seem to be shifting their value proposition to the instillation of this undetectable unmeasurable X-factor. We can't see it, we can't prove that it exists, but it's there, and its value is absolutely incalculable. How convenient for the sales pitch is this. And I don't blame them. As knowledge and skills become accessible to everyone, that's the last defense they'll be left with. What else are they going to say? Our institution is completely out of touch with the job market and the economic realities of our nation, and this was all a complete waste of time? Also, a lot of arguments in favor of college make the mistake of comparing it to nothing, and I think this argument is guilty of that. I'll admit that college compares favorably to doing nothing, but people who skip college aren't just sitting alone in a room staring at a white wall while you're in your lectures. They have 1 year of life experiences for every 1 year of yours. Whatever it means to be an enriched individual, people who don't go to college can be just as enriched. They can go live on their own too. They can take on responsibility, take on challenging work, have relationships, and most of them do. College was your path there and it worked well for you, and that's great. But I also agree with you that it's not ideal for everybody (or even for most people).

leetcrew 9y ago
the idea that literally everyone should go / would benefit from going to college is definitely wrong and harmful, but there are some special things about college for those who take advantage. college is probably the only time in your life that an entire team of domain experts will be obligated to take time out of their day to meet with you and answer your questions, however silly or low-level they may be. as a professor, college is one of the only places where you can get paid to work on things that not only have no near-term value, but likely will never have any practical value at all! (I guess this could also be an argument against college...) I do think there is a problem with the way people understand college. outside of a couple majors (ie computer science), college should really be considered something like a luxury good. it isn't economic in the sense of dollars, cents, and balance sheets, but something that has it's own intrinsic value for those who take advantage of it (a distinct minority of undergrad students). disclaimer: I think I am one of these people who college is mostly wasted on. I don't go to office hours, participate in clubs, or really do anything other than really good work on programming assignments and cramming for exams. I'm mostly in it for the piece of paper.
- jacobolus 9y ago
  > not only have no near-term value, but likely will never have any practical value at all! Not coincidentally, most of the most powerful world-altering ideas (the type that spawn trillions of dollars of new previously unconsidered industries, lead to new communication mediums, cause or prevent wars, topple governments, or set the terms of future laws) come out of work done at colleges or other publicly funded research institutions, often considered at the time to be of no practical value. There are whole fields of study which serve as society-wide multipliers but each individual tiny advance is not worth it to any particular company to hire someone to spend their whole career studying.
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  A lot of the value of college comes from signalling rather than what you actually learn in college. The problem is that, at least on an individual basis, signalling is economically rational, so it is going to be very hard to get people to stop doing it.
zamfi 9y ago
> Lately, academics seem to be shifting their value proposition to the instillation of this undetectable unmeasurable X-factor. We can't see it, we can't prove that it exists, but it's there, and its value is absolutely incalculable. Historically, college was a finishing school for the wealthy. This is not a new argument. The new argument is that colleges should provide job training. Previously, this was the role of vocational or training schools.
- justin66 9y ago
  > The new argument is that colleges should provide job training. Previously, this was the role of vocational or training schools. And employers.
  - thanksgiving 9y ago
    My economics professor used to insist that colleges don't prepare you for a job because if they did, then McDonald's University wouldn't exist.
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      I don't necessarily disagree with the claim but that seems like a bizarre choice of evidence considering McDonald's is an employer hiring many people who did not attend college.
- raverbashing 9y ago
  Vocational or training schools don't graduate physicians, engineers, architects, lawyers, etc
  - abakker 9y ago
    Neither do undergraduate colleges. Graduate programs are almost by definition vocational.
justin66 9y ago
Did you graduate from college? No judgments from me if you didn't (my family tree is richly populated with smart and successful people who didn't) but the way you're talking about college reminds me, perhaps wrongly, of the way I might have talked about sex in high school. With enthusiasm and a reliance on theory rather than experience. OTOH, if you attended college I'm pretty curious what that was like for you.
fsloth 9y ago
Maybe the X-factor is simply that having more stimulating experiences and environments makes us more enriched as individuals? I.e, instead of life experiences consisting of three parts - toddler, school , work for 50 years, one gets to add a fourth component and another identity building phaze between school and work. I could believe that. Although, with this argumentation, one could simply change university with some other novel experience, like military service.
bjelkeman-again 9y ago
I switched sector I work in, from generic IT/web to working in applying these tool in a specific sector; water/agriculture in international development. I don’t think I could have started the organisation I now run without going back to university. It was hugely beneficial to me to have the right terminology and understanding of the subject matter I am now working with.
- kelnos 9y ago
  I don't think that's a refutation of the parent's point; if anything, I think it supports it. It sounds like you had some very specific needs that I don't think apply to the average person.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    I got a degree with no relevancy to my job at all but the approach to learning I picked up in college really served me well when I wanted to do it. I don't think there are many people who would not benefit from being able to educate themselves in a new topic.
hrktb 9y ago
> Lately, academics seem to be shifting their value proposition to the instillation of this undetectable unmeasurable X-factor. We can't see it, we can't prove that it exists, but it's there, and its value is absolutely incalculable. How convenient for the sales pitch is this. The cost of college forces some people to also argument for better revenue opportunities and better fit for future jobs, because otherwise burning through ungodly amounts of money just to be a better rounded person would be a hard sell. In countries where university are cheaper nobody bats an eye at someone going through the cycles just for the sake of it, purely to learn interesting things.
- arkh 9y ago
  > In countries where university are cheaper nobody bats an eye at someone going through the cycles just for the sake of it, purely to learn interesting things. We do. Every year discovering yourself is a year you're not productive. Those cheaper university fees come from taxes which you need employed people to pay. I'd argue the US system is fairer: people who enjoy university education pay for it. In Europe, people who got in trade and never thought about getting a university degree are paying for those for get them.
  - cinquemb 9y ago
    >I'd argue the US system is fairer: people who enjoy university education pay for it. Stateside, as NPL rates increases with the nominal prices of attending, this becomes less true on top of that it is assumed that future taxes will support these increases well into the future.
  - philg_jr 9y ago
    Are there no free vocational schools in Europe?
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    What about the societal good of having educated, informed citizens? People attending college are not just "discovering themselves." The unfairness in the US system comes largely from the fact that, depending on what kind of family you come from, college may be very easy for you to attend or very difficult.
emodendroket 9y ago
You have it backwards. The obsessive focus on the vocational benefits of college is a recent phenomenon.
heedlessly2 9y ago
while not necessary, college provides a social framework for many people. if i visit, NYC, SF, Seattle, Chicago, Boston, or DC, then i have alumni friends i can hit up and hang out with. I'm not sure how you could do the same without going to college
- emodendroket 9y ago
  That seems like a pretty weak argument. Join a large church and you can probably meet people in every city too, and you won't need to take out huge loans to do it.
  - heedlessly2 9y ago
    you completely missed the part where i said "while not necessary" > Join a large church and you can probably meet people in every city too, and you won't need to take out huge loans to do it. most people only go to their local church. Many people from my uni were from out of state
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      I went to school in Massachusetts and I made a lot of friends who live in Massachusetts but I didn't exactly meet a world-wide network of friends. I was thinking you were talking about something like an alumni association, where your connection isn't really any less tenuous than with people belonging to your same denomination.
      - heedlessly2 9y ago
        some of my friends were already from those big cities. others were from the suburbs and moved to a big city after college. I don't contact random alumni, unless we already have several mutual friends in common. Or were part of the same student associations.

leetcrew 9y ago

the idea that literally everyone should go / would benefit from going to college is definitely wrong and harmful, but there are some special things about college for those who take advantage. college is probably the only time in your life that an entire team of domain experts will be obligated to take time out of their day to meet with you and answer your questions, however silly or low-level they may be. as a professor, college is one of the only places where you can get paid to work on things that not only have no near-term value, but likely will never have any practical value at all! (I guess this could also be an argument against college...) I do think there is a problem with the way people understand college. outside of a couple majors (ie computer science), college should really be considered something like a luxury good. it isn't economic in the sense of dollars, cents, and balance sheets, but something that has it's own intrinsic value for those who take advantage of it (a distinct minority of undergrad students). disclaimer: I think I am one of these people who college is mostly wasted on. I don't go to office hours, participate in clubs, or really do anything other than really good work on programming assignments and cramming for exams. I'm mostly in it for the piece of paper.

jacobolus 9y ago
> not only have no near-term value, but likely will never have any practical value at all! Not coincidentally, most of the most powerful world-altering ideas (the type that spawn trillions of dollars of new previously unconsidered industries, lead to new communication mediums, cause or prevent wars, topple governments, or set the terms of future laws) come out of work done at colleges or other publicly funded research institutions, often considered at the time to be of no practical value. There are whole fields of study which serve as society-wide multipliers but each individual tiny advance is not worth it to any particular company to hire someone to spend their whole career studying.
TheCoelacanth 9y ago
A lot of the value of college comes from signalling rather than what you actually learn in college. The problem is that, at least on an individual basis, signalling is economically rational, so it is going to be very hard to get people to stop doing it.

zamfi 9y ago

> Lately, academics seem to be shifting their value proposition to the instillation of this undetectable unmeasurable X-factor. We can't see it, we can't prove that it exists, but it's there, and its value is absolutely incalculable. Historically, college was a finishing school for the wealthy. This is not a new argument. The new argument is that colleges should provide job training. Previously, this was the role of vocational or training schools.

justin66 9y ago
> The new argument is that colleges should provide job training. Previously, this was the role of vocational or training schools. And employers.
- thanksgiving 9y ago
  My economics professor used to insist that colleges don't prepare you for a job because if they did, then McDonald's University wouldn't exist.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    I don't necessarily disagree with the claim but that seems like a bizarre choice of evidence considering McDonald's is an employer hiring many people who did not attend college.
raverbashing 9y ago
Vocational or training schools don't graduate physicians, engineers, architects, lawyers, etc
- abakker 9y ago
  Neither do undergraduate colleges. Graduate programs are almost by definition vocational.

justin66 9y ago

Did you graduate from college? No judgments from me if you didn't (my family tree is richly populated with smart and successful people who didn't) but the way you're talking about college reminds me, perhaps wrongly, of the way I might have talked about sex in high school. With enthusiasm and a reliance on theory rather than experience. OTOH, if you attended college I'm pretty curious what that was like for you.

fsloth 9y ago

Maybe the X-factor is simply that having more stimulating experiences and environments makes us more enriched as individuals? I.e, instead of life experiences consisting of three parts - toddler, school , work for 50 years, one gets to add a fourth component and another identity building phaze between school and work. I could believe that. Although, with this argumentation, one could simply change university with some other novel experience, like military service.

bjelkeman-again 9y ago

I switched sector I work in, from generic IT/web to working in applying these tool in a specific sector; water/agriculture in international development. I don’t think I could have started the organisation I now run without going back to university. It was hugely beneficial to me to have the right terminology and understanding of the subject matter I am now working with.

kelnos 9y ago
I don't think that's a refutation of the parent's point; if anything, I think it supports it. It sounds like you had some very specific needs that I don't think apply to the average person.
- emodendroket 9y ago
  I got a degree with no relevancy to my job at all but the approach to learning I picked up in college really served me well when I wanted to do it. I don't think there are many people who would not benefit from being able to educate themselves in a new topic.

hrktb 9y ago

> Lately, academics seem to be shifting their value proposition to the instillation of this undetectable unmeasurable X-factor. We can't see it, we can't prove that it exists, but it's there, and its value is absolutely incalculable. How convenient for the sales pitch is this. The cost of college forces some people to also argument for better revenue opportunities and better fit for future jobs, because otherwise burning through ungodly amounts of money just to be a better rounded person would be a hard sell. In countries where university are cheaper nobody bats an eye at someone going through the cycles just for the sake of it, purely to learn interesting things.

arkh 9y ago
> In countries where university are cheaper nobody bats an eye at someone going through the cycles just for the sake of it, purely to learn interesting things. We do. Every year discovering yourself is a year you're not productive. Those cheaper university fees come from taxes which you need employed people to pay. I'd argue the US system is fairer: people who enjoy university education pay for it. In Europe, people who got in trade and never thought about getting a university degree are paying for those for get them.
- cinquemb 9y ago
  >I'd argue the US system is fairer: people who enjoy university education pay for it. Stateside, as NPL rates increases with the nominal prices of attending, this becomes less true on top of that it is assumed that future taxes will support these increases well into the future.
- philg_jr 9y ago
  Are there no free vocational schools in Europe?
- emodendroket 9y ago
  What about the societal good of having educated, informed citizens? People attending college are not just "discovering themselves." The unfairness in the US system comes largely from the fact that, depending on what kind of family you come from, college may be very easy for you to attend or very difficult.

emodendroket 9y ago

You have it backwards. The obsessive focus on the vocational benefits of college is a recent phenomenon.

heedlessly2 9y ago

while not necessary, college provides a social framework for many people. if i visit, NYC, SF, Seattle, Chicago, Boston, or DC, then i have alumni friends i can hit up and hang out with. I'm not sure how you could do the same without going to college

emodendroket 9y ago
That seems like a pretty weak argument. Join a large church and you can probably meet people in every city too, and you won't need to take out huge loans to do it.
- heedlessly2 9y ago
  you completely missed the part where i said "while not necessary" > Join a large church and you can probably meet people in every city too, and you won't need to take out huge loans to do it. most people only go to their local church. Many people from my uni were from out of state
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    I went to school in Massachusetts and I made a lot of friends who live in Massachusetts but I didn't exactly meet a world-wide network of friends. I was thinking you were talking about something like an alumni association, where your connection isn't really any less tenuous than with people belonging to your same denomination.
    - heedlessly2 9y ago
      some of my friends were already from those big cities. others were from the suburbs and moved to a big city after college. I don't contact random alumni, unless we already have several mutual friends in common. Or were part of the same student associations.