3 ms·

I'm not saying people shouldn't learn abstract thinking. I'm just saying "get it over with".

bilbo0s 7y ago
And I'm saying you can't just "get it over with" sometimes because you can't really know what "it" is? A kid is in middle school or high school or whatever and then 20 years later they are on an employer's doorstep. The tools and technologies that employer uses were not even invented when that kid was in middle or high school. Well, unless that kid's had some additional training in those intervening years, they're probably not going to know how to use the tools that the employer wants them to use. So it's appropriate for the employer to hire, instead, the kid who has had the training during those intervening years. We currently call most of that training "college". If you want to call it "university", or "post high school", or "adult campus learning", or whatever, then do that if it makes it a bit more palatable. Call it whatever you like, but employers kind of need these kids to have it. And they'll only need them to have it more in the future. That's just the nature of our ever advancing society. That's actually a good thing believe it or not.
- Amezarak 7y ago
  Alternatively, schools assume responsibility for giving students a broad, general background and teaching them to think abstractly, with higher education involved in teaching students theoretical aspects of their concentration. At the same time, employers will just have to train employees on the specific technologies and tools they need them to use in practice, rather than offloading the burden to society at large. This also ameliorates the 'retraining' problem for older workers.
- jeffdavis 7y ago
  Your central assumption is that four more years without a job is the only way to learn whatever you need (abstract, practical, whatever). I just disagree. Efficient processes measure outputs/results, like what people actually learn or accomplish after all that time. But many people in this thread are measuring inputs, like, just put in four more years of time and money and that must be good for everyone, right?

And I'm saying you can't just "get it over with" sometimes because you can't really know what "it" is? A kid is in middle school or high school or whatever and then 20 years later they are on an employer's doorstep. The tools and technologies that employer uses were not even invented when that kid was in middle or high school. Well, unless that kid's had some additional training in those intervening years, they're probably not going to know how to use the tools that the employer wants them to use. So it's appropriate for the employer to hire, instead, the kid who has had the training during those intervening years. We currently call most of that training "college". If you want to call it "university", or "post high school", or "adult campus learning", or whatever, then do that if it makes it a bit more palatable. Call it whatever you like, but employers kind of need these kids to have it. And they'll only need them to have it more in the future. That's just the nature of our ever advancing society. That's actually a good thing believe it or not.

Amezarak 7y ago
Alternatively, schools assume responsibility for giving students a broad, general background and teaching them to think abstractly, with higher education involved in teaching students theoretical aspects of their concentration. At the same time, employers will just have to train employees on the specific technologies and tools they need them to use in practice, rather than offloading the burden to society at large. This also ameliorates the 'retraining' problem for older workers.
jeffdavis 7y ago
Your central assumption is that four more years without a job is the only way to learn whatever you need (abstract, practical, whatever). I just disagree. Efficient processes measure outputs/results, like what people actually learn or accomplish after all that time. But many people in this thread are measuring inputs, like, just put in four more years of time and money and that must be good for everyone, right?