4 ms·

It's a luxury, and a remnant of outdated conceptions of what the purpose of university education is. As much as some hate reality, and wish for some never-exis

It's a luxury, and a remnant of outdated conceptions of what the purpose of university education is. As much as some hate reality, and wish for some never-existent golden age of well-rounded liberal arts education, people engage in higher education because it is the gateway to a career, and as such, what they really want is relevant vocational training, which, outside of a few rare disciplines (engineering, namely) they rarely get, and instead faff around with trivialities for most of four years, at a toll of 35-60k per year.

eesmith 9y ago
Outdated, out-shmated. The concept of a university has changed enough times that whatever "new" view is in vogue now is a repeat of what came before. Once upon a time universities were a place to get relevant vocational training as a cleric, doctor, administrator, and a handful of other fields. The advice you give - "it is the gateway to a career" - has rather large built-in flaw. The student loan industry, and the increasingly profit-oriented universities, have basically looked at the overall earnings difference of getting a degree and exclaimed "I want me some of that!" Young adults who start life $30,000 in debt, for that is the current average outstanding student loan balance per borrower, make for a more compliant wage slave. Your complaint does not seem to be about universities, but rather concerns the lack of a respected vocational training path. Since you appear to understand the historical context of what 'well-rounded' is supposed to mean, I think your use of 'bizarre' was facetious. Moreover, you have changed what you are talking about. In your previous comment you were focused on students who "take less-demanding courseloads, in order to boost your GPA for graduate school admissions, and expend most of your efforts training for the MCATs or LSATs." Most people who attend a 4-year college as 'a gateway to a career' do not plan on additional post-college education. As such, they do not have the perverse inventive you described.

eesmith 9y ago

Outdated, out-shmated. The concept of a university has changed enough times that whatever "new" view is in vogue now is a repeat of what came before. Once upon a time universities were a place to get relevant vocational training as a cleric, doctor, administrator, and a handful of other fields. The advice you give - "it is the gateway to a career" - has rather large built-in flaw. The student loan industry, and the increasingly profit-oriented universities, have basically looked at the overall earnings difference of getting a degree and exclaimed "I want me some of that!" Young adults who start life $30,000 in debt, for that is the current average outstanding student loan balance per borrower, make for a more compliant wage slave. Your complaint does not seem to be about universities, but rather concerns the lack of a respected vocational training path. Since you appear to understand the historical context of what 'well-rounded' is supposed to mean, I think your use of 'bizarre' was facetious. Moreover, you have changed what you are talking about. In your previous comment you were focused on students who "take less-demanding courseloads, in order to boost your GPA for graduate school admissions, and expend most of your efforts training for the MCATs or LSATs." Most people who attend a 4-year college as 'a gateway to a career' do not plan on additional post-college education. As such, they do not have the perverse inventive you described.