3 ms·

The narrative for decades has been "if you don't graduate from college you might be destined to be a loser." I think that's part of what needs to change. But I

by bumby 5y ago

The narrative for decades has been "if you don't graduate from college you might be destined to be a loser." I think that's part of what needs to change. But I also think the student debt problem is more nuanced than just "terrible majors". Tuition has increased faster than just about anything (sans healthcare, I believe) while wages were mostly stagnant. Previous generations could largely get through college debt-free working part-time at minimum wage, regardless of major. So I don't think the student debt crisis can be chalked up to "terrible major" selection. The level of student debt is, in part, driven by the way universities spend money to attract "customers" err...I mean students. I think we need to find a way to mitigate colleges being run like businesses in that respect.

asow92 5y ago
Yep, agreed, and that's why they're terrible majors if you account for the ROI on them.
- asow92 5y ago
  We don't need hundreds of English and Humanities majors—we need them, yes, but not as many as are enrolled. There is a supply and demand imbalance.
  - bumby 5y ago
    This is only if you view college as a vocational endeavor. I know that's the current prevalent thought, but it hasn't always been the case, and I'm not sure it should be a given. Just the nature of this thread (cost, ROI, supply & demand) shows how much of college is thought of in a business mindset which is a departure from how it used to be viewed. I would also argue that while the economy may not need humanities majors, society probably does. E.g., An engineer can tell you how to do something (e.g., develop facial recognition for public cameras or develop attention maximizing social media algorithms) but an engineer with a grounded understanding of philosophy can help determine if that's the right thing to deploy as policy and whether they, at the individual level, wants to support that with their career choice.
    - asow92 5y ago
      I think we totally agree, and I can say that as an engineer who attended a liberal arts school. What I'm saying is that we have too many people giving all of their attention to these majors (without a way to pay for it) and not that people in other majors shouldn't pursue these electives, as they are still valuable.
      - bumby 5y ago
        I think we largely agree too, but I actually think the talk about majors in public discourse is a at best a digression and at worst a red herring. IMO, the real problem that should be addressed is why something that is considered a public good (and supported by public funds) has had insane cost inflation over the last 3+ decades. I'm not saying you're doing this, but you often hear a chortled reply about "underwater basket weaving majors" in these discussions being blamed. Certainly, people are accountable for their college choices, but the whole discussion is based on the idea that college is a business transaction that requires some ROI and ignores the systemic effects that have driven costs to a ridiculous level.
- bumby 5y ago
  And my point is the ROI would be moot if there wasn't a massive inflation of tuition to pay for things like water parks and sports arenas. If the tuition was in-line with previous generations, the ROI would mainly only be calculated with the labor opportunity lost while in college.
  - asow92 5y ago
    Definitely agreed +1

by bumby 5y ago

asow92 5y ago

Yep, agreed, and that's why they're terrible majors if you account for the ROI on them.

asow92 5y ago
We don't need hundreds of English and Humanities majors—we need them, yes, but not as many as are enrolled. There is a supply and demand imbalance.
- bumby 5y ago
  This is only if you view college as a vocational endeavor. I know that's the current prevalent thought, but it hasn't always been the case, and I'm not sure it should be a given. Just the nature of this thread (cost, ROI, supply & demand) shows how much of college is thought of in a business mindset which is a departure from how it used to be viewed. I would also argue that while the economy may not need humanities majors, society probably does. E.g., An engineer can tell you how to do something (e.g., develop facial recognition for public cameras or develop attention maximizing social media algorithms) but an engineer with a grounded understanding of philosophy can help determine if that's the right thing to deploy as policy and whether they, at the individual level, wants to support that with their career choice.
  - asow92 5y ago
    I think we totally agree, and I can say that as an engineer who attended a liberal arts school. What I'm saying is that we have too many people giving all of their attention to these majors (without a way to pay for it) and not that people in other majors shouldn't pursue these electives, as they are still valuable.
    - bumby 5y ago
      I think we largely agree too, but I actually think the talk about majors in public discourse is a at best a digression and at worst a red herring. IMO, the real problem that should be addressed is why something that is considered a public good (and supported by public funds) has had insane cost inflation over the last 3+ decades. I'm not saying you're doing this, but you often hear a chortled reply about "underwater basket weaving majors" in these discussions being blamed. Certainly, people are accountable for their college choices, but the whole discussion is based on the idea that college is a business transaction that requires some ROI and ignores the systemic effects that have driven costs to a ridiculous level.
bumby 5y ago
And my point is the ROI would be moot if there wasn't a massive inflation of tuition to pay for things like water parks and sports arenas. If the tuition was in-line with previous generations, the ROI would mainly only be calculated with the labor opportunity lost while in college.
- asow92 5y ago
  Definitely agreed +1