3 ms·

We've built a unversity system in the United States for the past few decades that is not at all serving society's interests. Unfortunately, unless born to weal

We've built a unversity system in the United States for the past few decades that is not at all serving society's interests. Unfortunately, unless born to wealth, we all require a supporting job. Jobs that don't pay the bills are hobbies. Attending university to broaden one's education is not a sound basis for borrowing money and encouraging students to do otherwise is shamefully wrong.

autarch 7y ago
Fortunately I got a merit scholarship for my undergrad and I was a TA in grad school. Between those two things my six years of education cost just around $60k, and my parents were able to foot that bill, so I didn't have any loans to deal with (again, another privilege). While I do regret getting my masters because I didn't enjoy it much, I can't even imagine the level of regret I'd have if this all came with a giant loan to pay off as well.
bscphil 7y ago
Frankly I would put it the other way around. We have a system of work that doesn't serve society's interests. Created scarcity forces people to do undesirable labor instead of things that would be genuinely worthwhile. Universities are already training too many middle managers, even though the market is demanding more middle managers. There's a difference between what the market demands and what free people would choose for themselves. Disclaimer: I work at a university.
- solidsnack9000 7y ago
  Universities do a poor job of training technical workers -- engineers, programmers, technicians. For every middle manager there are ten workers, who need technical schools. One way to see this is in programming. So many people come out of CS programs with little practical programming ability -- even programs like Stanford. The kids who learn the most in school are, often enough, people with backgrounds in computational biology or physics where they have to work on real software engineering problems -- like maintaining legacy code -- from the first day that they type code in a text editor. Where is the Embry-Riddle for software engineering?

autarch 7y ago

Fortunately I got a merit scholarship for my undergrad and I was a TA in grad school. Between those two things my six years of education cost just around $60k, and my parents were able to foot that bill, so I didn't have any loans to deal with (again, another privilege). While I do regret getting my masters because I didn't enjoy it much, I can't even imagine the level of regret I'd have if this all came with a giant loan to pay off as well.

bscphil 7y ago

Frankly I would put it the other way around. We have a system of work that doesn't serve society's interests. Created scarcity forces people to do undesirable labor instead of things that would be genuinely worthwhile. Universities are already training too many middle managers, even though the market is demanding more middle managers. There's a difference between what the market demands and what free people would choose for themselves. Disclaimer: I work at a university.

solidsnack9000 7y ago
Universities do a poor job of training technical workers -- engineers, programmers, technicians. For every middle manager there are ten workers, who need technical schools. One way to see this is in programming. So many people come out of CS programs with little practical programming ability -- even programs like Stanford. The kids who learn the most in school are, often enough, people with backgrounds in computational biology or physics where they have to work on real software engineering problems -- like maintaining legacy code -- from the first day that they type code in a text editor. Where is the Embry-Riddle for software engineering?