4 ms·

This is the wrong way to think about education. Learning is learning, regardless of job placement, and while I recognize the need for stronger STEM education i

by jmduke 15y ago

This is the wrong way to think about education. Learning is learning, regardless of job placement, and while I recognize the need for stronger STEM education it shouldn't come at the expense of equally important topics.

yummyfajitas 15y ago
Learning is good only if it either enables you do to something useful or you enjoy it. If you don't enjoy it (many people don't), focus on learning that lets you do something useful. High job placement gives an indication that a field is useful. As for learning you do because you enjoy it, treat it as consumption (i.e., the same way you treat an X-Box).
- ericd 15y ago
  You cannot know what you will find useful in the future. A broad education helps inform your decisions on a huge variety of subjects, even without realizing it. Learning only what you think you'll need for your future profession is a really terrible idea.
  - yummyfajitas 15y ago
    With certainty, no. So what? The right question to ask is this: Is P(need subject X) x (cost of not knowing X) < (cost of learning X)? Since the cost of learning X tends to be high (at least if you learn it in school), and the cost of not knowing it is very often nothing but the cost of learning it + cost of delays, this inequality is very often not satisfied.
    - ericd 15y ago
      I'm not talking about certainty. I'm saying that humans are impossibly bad at figuring out the first two variables in that equation, and only slightly better at figuring out the cost of learning. And the opportunity cost of not knowing things can be staggering. If you just want to maximize your wealth, maybe that approach is workable, since there are more tangible numbers involved, but if you're optimizing for happiness, it's much, much harder.
- jmduke 15y ago
  "Learning is good only if it either enables you do to something useful or you enjoy it." I completely agree. But something is not only 'useful' if you can use it in your career.

by jmduke 15y ago

yummyfajitas 15y ago

Learning is good only if it either enables you do to something useful or you enjoy it. If you don't enjoy it (many people don't), focus on learning that lets you do something useful. High job placement gives an indication that a field is useful. As for learning you do because you enjoy it, treat it as consumption (i.e., the same way you treat an X-Box).

ericd 15y ago
You cannot know what you will find useful in the future. A broad education helps inform your decisions on a huge variety of subjects, even without realizing it. Learning only what you think you'll need for your future profession is a really terrible idea.
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  With certainty, no. So what? The right question to ask is this: Is P(need subject X) x (cost of not knowing X) < (cost of learning X)? Since the cost of learning X tends to be high (at least if you learn it in school), and the cost of not knowing it is very often nothing but the cost of learning it + cost of delays, this inequality is very often not satisfied.
  - ericd 15y ago
    I'm not talking about certainty. I'm saying that humans are impossibly bad at figuring out the first two variables in that equation, and only slightly better at figuring out the cost of learning. And the opportunity cost of not knowing things can be staggering. If you just want to maximize your wealth, maybe that approach is workable, since there are more tangible numbers involved, but if you're optimizing for happiness, it's much, much harder.
jmduke 15y ago
"Learning is good only if it either enables you do to something useful or you enjoy it." I completely agree. But something is not only 'useful' if you can use it in your career.