5 ms·

Just about anyone has the ability to go to a top tier school provided they have the ability to manage there. Most have transfer programs with local schools with

Just about anyone has the ability to go to a top tier school provided they have the ability to manage there. Most have transfer programs with local schools with a few stipulations. For instance, you can go to a community college and transfer into the UC system. My wife and I both came from impoverished backgrounds and went to community college/low-quality state schools and graduated from a top 10 computer science school. RE: downvotes -- please tell me how I'm wrong? I'll happily give you a 3 year plan to get into a top tier engineering school given that you have a willingness to move. The problem with a lot of these places isn't getting in (if you have enough perseverance or desire). The problem is getting through the work after you've gotten there.

raxxorrax 8y ago
How do you explain the cost of education in the modern world where the logistics of information are as cheap as never before? Any kid on the world could access material from the best teachers on the planet. So why keep this legacy system for education that is more and more based solely on prestige? Sure, there is a chance for everybody. But why make it a chance that will certainly remain unfulfilled for a significant majority?
- izacus 8y ago
  > How do you explain the cost of education in the modern world where the logistics of information are as cheap as never before? Any kid on the world could access material from the best teachers on the planet. So why keep this legacy system for education that is more and more based solely on prestige? That's probably because reading/watching materials isn't everything what education is or what brings its value. Just the fact that the system manages to get 8-18 year olds to read those materials and learn them makes a start difference, not to mention allows access to mentors and peers doing the same thing.
  - toper-centage 8y ago
    You could have automated gamification of education without the overpriced manuals and professors. There's just a strong monetary pressure to not have that.
- nostrebored 8y ago
  That's fairly irrelevant to my comment. The cost of achieving a 4 year education doesn't have to be high, either. Let's assume we're talking about Georgia, a place with a low cost of living and access to a high quality engineering school. Year 1: Work in the state, securing in-state tuition costs Year 2+3: Go to Georgia Perimeter College (2 year tuition cost: $4600) Year 4+5: Attend Georgia Institute of Technology on the transfer program (2 year tuition + fee cost: $12,400) Total cost of tuition is now $17,000 over 4 years. To get at your point about information logistics: nothing has ever been more useful in my life than being surrounded by intelligent people going through the same grueling process that you are, supporting each other and working together for the single point of trying to learn material and complete assignments under unreasonable deadlines. There's also difference between access to the best instruction on the planet and having direct communication to some of the best instructors doing some of the most interesting work on the planet.
  - raxxorrax 8y ago
    > trying to learn material and complete assignments under unreasonable deadlines. Oh, come on, people tend to survive university. I am thinking of models for educational institutions here, not golf clubs. Of course the environment is important but that is not an argument for artificial exclusivity and if only in context of the material given. Pay for the direct line if you wish to do so since information is more widely available today, the difference between formal and "guerilla" education will get smaller. And there should be a vast economic interest to decrease this distance. With the exception of business interests of universities of course.
    - nostrebored 8y ago
      I work for a big 4 tech company and I've never had tasks as unreasonably paced as the ones I had in school. Admittedly I went to the school reported to have the worst work life balance in the country while I was there. The environment isn't important, it's the deciding factor in the quality of your education. A good environment with the right curriculum is the single most effective way to learn a difficult subject, develop the habits that help you learn, and have the conversations that lead to retention. There is a vast economic interest to decrease the distance here. You have a ton of eLearning resources at your disposal. They just don't work as well for most people.
- QML 8y ago
  Like it or not, the main cost of university is not from education or from helping graduates find jobs. It's true that anyone with an internet connection can access course material from top universities and from top professors. But only a university can get you a community, a network, a signal: you may call that prestige; society doesn't care. I would also like to mention that the UC system is one of the more open, impactful universities when compared to the privates.
  - jahaja 8y ago
    > But only a university can get you a community, a network, a signal: you may call that prestige; society doesn't care. So more or less access to a country club. Isn't it?
- dexen 8y ago
  >How do you explain the cost of education 1. Value of a service is how much the market is willing to pay. 2. In the times of abundant, easy access to service X, a high price tag is indicator of quality and rarity. I.e., it's a feature, not a bug.
  - raxxorrax 8y ago
    True under a business administrative view. But maybe not the best economical approach to education? So ... > How do you explain the cost of education ... was more of a rhetorical question.
- C1sc0cat 8y ago
  Education is not just about information.
TrackerFF 8y ago
Well, some thoughts: 1) Kids from poor / lower-working class families - compared to their peers "higher up" in the socioeconomic chain - simply do not know the importance of a good school. Further, they do not even know the jobs that will follow, or even require such an education. Even regular college is a long-shot for many, and to them, college == college. If you're a upper-middle class kid, with parents working as bankers and consultants, then I can promise you that they'll push you to aim high (academically). Hell, they'll probably plan your (academic) life long before you can walk or talk. In fact, having educated parents seems to play an important role on the chances of your success. If you're poor, chances are that your parents don't even have a HS diploma. 2) Getting into a prestigious school isn't just about getting good grades - you need to show skills and drive far outside that scope. Lots of poor kids can not afford that luxury, like volunteering, getting GOOD at extracurricular activities (sports, instruments, etc.), etc. Some families _depend_ on their kids working after school. When I grew up, I thought bankers where the people/tellers you actually saw behind the counter. I had never heard of consultant. Silicon Valley SW devs? Had no idea. None of my parents went to college - they worked menial factory jobs, and we lived out in rural nowhere. 10% of my HS class went to college, and in that case, a no-name rural state college. No big companies _ever_ came to career fairs, so we had zero exposure to them. If by chance you were exposed to the world of Silicon Valley tech, New York banking, etc., you were told it was too late - that train had left the station before you even enrolled college. For many of us, the absolute pinnacle of (professional) life was to become a local gov. worker, engineer at the local utility company, a store owner, farmer, or similar. Maybe a doctor if you were deemed very, very smart. So even if you see some success stories here and there, they are so incredibly rare. Show me one poor (minority or not) kid on scholarship at HYPS, and I'll show you hundred others going absolutely nowhere.
- wastedhours 8y ago
  > If you're a upper-middle class kid, with parents working as bankers and consultants, then I can promise you that they'll push you to aim high (academically). Hell, they'll probably plan your (academic) life long before you can walk or talk. Can't upvote you enough for taking on this point, and wanted to specifically call this one out. There will be lots of anecdata from people out there who have pushed entirely by themselves, but the data across the world shows that social mobility is limited as much by aspiration as it is by solely grades. It isn't solely parental (although most of the time it is), but also driven by the school environment. If you're unlucky enough to be in a shit school, with shit teachers from primary to 6th form, and lack of support or knowledge of education and career paths at home, you're essentially fucked unless some stroke of luck comes out of somewhere.
mac01021 8y ago
Idk what your three year plan is. Are you supposed to be in highschool to enact it? I think you'll agree that, if everyone followed your plan, only I tiny fraction would get into the top ten. Given that, how do you know that tons of people are not trying your approach and failing right now?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
akhilcacharya 8y ago
I don't know about that. I had pretty OK grades in high school (2nd in my class, got a community college degree while I was doing it..but so did everyone else) but only managed a SAT (1500/1600) that could only get me into local schools in-state. Without having a compelling personal narrative I think getting into the elite schools is difficult.

raxxorrax 8y ago

How do you explain the cost of education in the modern world where the logistics of information are as cheap as never before? Any kid on the world could access material from the best teachers on the planet. So why keep this legacy system for education that is more and more based solely on prestige? Sure, there is a chance for everybody. But why make it a chance that will certainly remain unfulfilled for a significant majority?

izacus 8y ago
> How do you explain the cost of education in the modern world where the logistics of information are as cheap as never before? Any kid on the world could access material from the best teachers on the planet. So why keep this legacy system for education that is more and more based solely on prestige? That's probably because reading/watching materials isn't everything what education is or what brings its value. Just the fact that the system manages to get 8-18 year olds to read those materials and learn them makes a start difference, not to mention allows access to mentors and peers doing the same thing.
- toper-centage 8y ago
  You could have automated gamification of education without the overpriced manuals and professors. There's just a strong monetary pressure to not have that.
nostrebored 8y ago
That's fairly irrelevant to my comment. The cost of achieving a 4 year education doesn't have to be high, either. Let's assume we're talking about Georgia, a place with a low cost of living and access to a high quality engineering school. Year 1: Work in the state, securing in-state tuition costs Year 2+3: Go to Georgia Perimeter College (2 year tuition cost: $4600) Year 4+5: Attend Georgia Institute of Technology on the transfer program (2 year tuition + fee cost: $12,400) Total cost of tuition is now $17,000 over 4 years. To get at your point about information logistics: nothing has ever been more useful in my life than being surrounded by intelligent people going through the same grueling process that you are, supporting each other and working together for the single point of trying to learn material and complete assignments under unreasonable deadlines. There's also difference between access to the best instruction on the planet and having direct communication to some of the best instructors doing some of the most interesting work on the planet.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  > trying to learn material and complete assignments under unreasonable deadlines. Oh, come on, people tend to survive university. I am thinking of models for educational institutions here, not golf clubs. Of course the environment is important but that is not an argument for artificial exclusivity and if only in context of the material given. Pay for the direct line if you wish to do so since information is more widely available today, the difference between formal and "guerilla" education will get smaller. And there should be a vast economic interest to decrease this distance. With the exception of business interests of universities of course.
  - nostrebored 8y ago
    I work for a big 4 tech company and I've never had tasks as unreasonably paced as the ones I had in school. Admittedly I went to the school reported to have the worst work life balance in the country while I was there. The environment isn't important, it's the deciding factor in the quality of your education. A good environment with the right curriculum is the single most effective way to learn a difficult subject, develop the habits that help you learn, and have the conversations that lead to retention. There is a vast economic interest to decrease the distance here. You have a ton of eLearning resources at your disposal. They just don't work as well for most people.
QML 8y ago
Like it or not, the main cost of university is not from education or from helping graduates find jobs. It's true that anyone with an internet connection can access course material from top universities and from top professors. But only a university can get you a community, a network, a signal: you may call that prestige; society doesn't care. I would also like to mention that the UC system is one of the more open, impactful universities when compared to the privates.
- jahaja 8y ago
  > But only a university can get you a community, a network, a signal: you may call that prestige; society doesn't care. So more or less access to a country club. Isn't it?
dexen 8y ago
>How do you explain the cost of education 1. Value of a service is how much the market is willing to pay. 2. In the times of abundant, easy access to service X, a high price tag is indicator of quality and rarity. I.e., it's a feature, not a bug.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  True under a business administrative view. But maybe not the best economical approach to education? So ... > How do you explain the cost of education ... was more of a rhetorical question.
C1sc0cat 8y ago
Education is not just about information.

TrackerFF 8y ago

Well, some thoughts: 1) Kids from poor / lower-working class families - compared to their peers "higher up" in the socioeconomic chain - simply do not know the importance of a good school. Further, they do not even know the jobs that will follow, or even require such an education. Even regular college is a long-shot for many, and to them, college == college. If you're a upper-middle class kid, with parents working as bankers and consultants, then I can promise you that they'll push you to aim high (academically). Hell, they'll probably plan your (academic) life long before you can walk or talk. In fact, having educated parents seems to play an important role on the chances of your success. If you're poor, chances are that your parents don't even have a HS diploma. 2) Getting into a prestigious school isn't just about getting good grades - you need to show skills and drive far outside that scope. Lots of poor kids can not afford that luxury, like volunteering, getting GOOD at extracurricular activities (sports, instruments, etc.), etc. Some families _depend_ on their kids working after school. When I grew up, I thought bankers where the people/tellers you actually saw behind the counter. I had never heard of consultant. Silicon Valley SW devs? Had no idea. None of my parents went to college - they worked menial factory jobs, and we lived out in rural nowhere. 10% of my HS class went to college, and in that case, a no-name rural state college. No big companies _ever_ came to career fairs, so we had zero exposure to them. If by chance you were exposed to the world of Silicon Valley tech, New York banking, etc., you were told it was too late - that train had left the station before you even enrolled college. For many of us, the absolute pinnacle of (professional) life was to become a local gov. worker, engineer at the local utility company, a store owner, farmer, or similar. Maybe a doctor if you were deemed very, very smart. So even if you see some success stories here and there, they are so incredibly rare. Show me one poor (minority or not) kid on scholarship at HYPS, and I'll show you hundred others going absolutely nowhere.

wastedhours 8y ago
> If you're a upper-middle class kid, with parents working as bankers and consultants, then I can promise you that they'll push you to aim high (academically). Hell, they'll probably plan your (academic) life long before you can walk or talk. Can't upvote you enough for taking on this point, and wanted to specifically call this one out. There will be lots of anecdata from people out there who have pushed entirely by themselves, but the data across the world shows that social mobility is limited as much by aspiration as it is by solely grades. It isn't solely parental (although most of the time it is), but also driven by the school environment. If you're unlucky enough to be in a shit school, with shit teachers from primary to 6th form, and lack of support or knowledge of education and career paths at home, you're essentially fucked unless some stroke of luck comes out of somewhere.

mac01021 8y ago

Idk what your three year plan is. Are you supposed to be in highschool to enact it? I think you'll agree that, if everyone followed your plan, only I tiny fraction would get into the top ten. Given that, how do you know that tons of people are not trying your approach and failing right now?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

akhilcacharya 8y ago

I don't know about that. I had pretty OK grades in high school (2nd in my class, got a community college degree while I was doing it..but so did everyone else) but only managed a SAT (1500/1600) that could only get me into local schools in-state. Without having a compelling personal narrative I think getting into the elite schools is difficult.