3 ms·

This is definitely a problem. But we still need higher education as a society. I think there must be some third way between just throwing money into the pockets

This is definitely a problem. But we still need higher education as a society. I think there must be some third way between just throwing money into the pockets of university presidents and defunding it and creating an anti-intellectual society at a crisis point for America.

NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
> But we still need higher education as a society. This is always claimed, and quite enthusiastically. I don't ask this rhetorically: what do we need it for? No one can seem to decide. When graduates can't get decent jobs that let them live, let alone pay back the student loans, there's a chorus of "it's not vocational school". Yet, that's what many are seeking, what they need. If college doesn't serve that purpose, then we should at least reduce capacity by that much, shouldn't we? Others say that it would be wrong to try to send everyone to vocational training, that the world's so much better when they get some sort of liberal arts education. That they're "better people" and "better citizens". Ignoring how politically fraught that is, and just assuming that it's true, no one can afford that. Only the rich were able to afford that for their children a century ago. We can't afford it as a country, because we're sending x100 more kids to do that, and it costs much more than x100 to send x100 to college. The government can't afford that. And if it tried, it would water down that liberal arts education to make it as cheap as possible, until it's worthless even for what you wanted it to be. It ends up being a way to extend keeping those kids out of the job market, so older people don't have quite so much competition. If there ever was a third way, I think we missed the opportunity and that it no longer exists.
- twelfthnight 3y ago
  > why do we need higher education For me it's not about getting folks better jobs, it's about increasing access to general education. For those motivated, getting broad education makes them much more productive. Someone had to invent the computer, software, etc. It's so much faster to do that if there is a density of people around you with broad knowledge bases. > It would be wrong to send everyone to vocational school Agree with you here. Vocational schools are a better fit for many people and we should encourage them. In my experience, college classes are better when everyone is engaged. Likewise, vocational jobs like electricians are necessary and not lesser than college type jobs.. Would love if both paths were equally accessible and people could choose what fits their life. > We can't afford it as a country In the 90s we spent more on schools and had governmental budget surpluses. We also had higher taxes, but they werent so high that things were bad. Many people would agree the 90s were better than now. > If there ever was a third way, I think we missed the opportunity and that it no longer exists. Change is slow, but I think it's possible (especially on smaller local scales). We don't have to fix stuff 100% but just move in the right direction.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
    > For those motivated, getting broad education makes them much more productive. That seems unlikely. It's unclear how the sorts of "broad education" that you mean could make them more productive pouring coffee, or running the cash register at the grocery store. Because that's where a great many of them end up. Of course, working their barely-more-than-minimum wage jobs, with $40k, $80k, and sometimes far greater sums of student debt... it would have to be some incredible amount of productivity gains. Even then though, it doesn't seem that they themselves get any slice of those gains. > Vocational schools are a better fit for many people and we should encourage them. I don't think we can encourage those. I think we've spent decades undermining them, short-shrifting them, and in general, downplaying them. If people did start to want to attend them, it's unlikely that they have the capacity to expand. It's not entirely clear that these work either... much of the industry in the United States has evaporated entirely and there is only so much capacity to absorb additional plumbers and diesel mechanics. This is a different sort of problem than I hinted at in the first comment. There is a problem of there being no viable paths to success for the majority of high school graduates, whether or not they go to college. Already set up for failure (to one degree or another), tacking on any sort of educational debt is just chaining the boat anchors to their neck. The natural reaction is to think about it on an individual level... "well, why can't that kid go get a STEM degree, or become an offshore welder, or become an artist and make a living selling sculptures from their bohemian loft apartment?". And for any single youth, for any 100 of them, these answers can make sense. But for all of them in total, these answers fall far short of what is needed. We can't employ 1% or even 12% of them, and call it a day. We need jobs and careers for 98 or 99% of them. It's fucked.

NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago

> But we still need higher education as a society. This is always claimed, and quite enthusiastically. I don't ask this rhetorically: what do we need it for? No one can seem to decide. When graduates can't get decent jobs that let them live, let alone pay back the student loans, there's a chorus of "it's not vocational school". Yet, that's what many are seeking, what they need. If college doesn't serve that purpose, then we should at least reduce capacity by that much, shouldn't we? Others say that it would be wrong to try to send everyone to vocational training, that the world's so much better when they get some sort of liberal arts education. That they're "better people" and "better citizens". Ignoring how politically fraught that is, and just assuming that it's true, no one can afford that. Only the rich were able to afford that for their children a century ago. We can't afford it as a country, because we're sending x100 more kids to do that, and it costs much more than x100 to send x100 to college. The government can't afford that. And if it tried, it would water down that liberal arts education to make it as cheap as possible, until it's worthless even for what you wanted it to be. It ends up being a way to extend keeping those kids out of the job market, so older people don't have quite so much competition. If there ever was a third way, I think we missed the opportunity and that it no longer exists.

twelfthnight 3y ago
> why do we need higher education For me it's not about getting folks better jobs, it's about increasing access to general education. For those motivated, getting broad education makes them much more productive. Someone had to invent the computer, software, etc. It's so much faster to do that if there is a density of people around you with broad knowledge bases. > It would be wrong to send everyone to vocational school Agree with you here. Vocational schools are a better fit for many people and we should encourage them. In my experience, college classes are better when everyone is engaged. Likewise, vocational jobs like electricians are necessary and not lesser than college type jobs.. Would love if both paths were equally accessible and people could choose what fits their life. > We can't afford it as a country In the 90s we spent more on schools and had governmental budget surpluses. We also had higher taxes, but they werent so high that things were bad. Many people would agree the 90s were better than now. > If there ever was a third way, I think we missed the opportunity and that it no longer exists. Change is slow, but I think it's possible (especially on smaller local scales). We don't have to fix stuff 100% but just move in the right direction.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
  > For those motivated, getting broad education makes them much more productive. That seems unlikely. It's unclear how the sorts of "broad education" that you mean could make them more productive pouring coffee, or running the cash register at the grocery store. Because that's where a great many of them end up. Of course, working their barely-more-than-minimum wage jobs, with $40k, $80k, and sometimes far greater sums of student debt... it would have to be some incredible amount of productivity gains. Even then though, it doesn't seem that they themselves get any slice of those gains. > Vocational schools are a better fit for many people and we should encourage them. I don't think we can encourage those. I think we've spent decades undermining them, short-shrifting them, and in general, downplaying them. If people did start to want to attend them, it's unlikely that they have the capacity to expand. It's not entirely clear that these work either... much of the industry in the United States has evaporated entirely and there is only so much capacity to absorb additional plumbers and diesel mechanics. This is a different sort of problem than I hinted at in the first comment. There is a problem of there being no viable paths to success for the majority of high school graduates, whether or not they go to college. Already set up for failure (to one degree or another), tacking on any sort of educational debt is just chaining the boat anchors to their neck. The natural reaction is to think about it on an individual level... "well, why can't that kid go get a STEM degree, or become an offshore welder, or become an artist and make a living selling sculptures from their bohemian loft apartment?". And for any single youth, for any 100 of them, these answers can make sense. But for all of them in total, these answers fall far short of what is needed. We can't employ 1% or even 12% of them, and call it a day. We need jobs and careers for 98 or 99% of them. It's fucked.