5 ms·

A major benefit of college is a baseline of domain knowledge that will serve you in your professional career, but indeed, that’s also a major benefit of a techn

A major benefit of college is a baseline of domain knowledge that will serve you in your professional career, but indeed, that’s also a major benefit of a technical program. The real disconnect is that college is also (or at least is supposed to be, or has traditionally been) a schooling in the liberal arts. Four years spent learning to think critically about society and culture as well as one's area of specialization, and to express oneself in the marketplace of ideas. Which is just something many people don’t really care to do. And that’s fine. The problem is trying to get everyone interested in it, denying the fact that many lack interest and aptitude, and then diluting the experience for everyone while saddling the next generation with decades’ worth of debt.

sounds 13y ago
Yup. Where the grandparent said "employers think college degrees are more valuable than they probably are," you've highlighted the disconnect between what employers think they're getting from a college grad (certain skills) and what colleges actually do (teach students to think, to learn, to read). That's not High School 2.0. In fact, High School seems to be the right place for vocational training. It's the pinnacle of state-mandated schooling, and in fact includes vocational requirements. Some schools implement that as wood shop. Others focus so completely on teaching computer skills they become a "magnet school" for that one thing only. Unskilled work is disappearing and simultaneously employers are demanding more unskilled laborers. The work is disappearing because it's cheaper to have a machine do it flawlessly. The employers don't want skilled labor...labor versus capital all over again. For a while yet, it may be possible to become really skilled in computing and successfully straddle the divide: make enough money to be comfortable as a skilled laborer. But I think it would be wise for _colleges_ to cross-train all their Science/Engineering students in business. Colleges (traditionally) focus on the whole person. A person with business skills, connections, and potential funding becomes the new bar for entry. I'm always thankful my professors took the time to do that last part: take us (a team of students) into the real world.
- WalterBright 13y ago
  While I took mostly STEM classes in college, I did also take a couple accounting classes. If you don't know the basics of double entry bookkeeping and the jargon that goes with it, you're a bit crippled when working in any sort of business.
- ahomescu1 13y ago
  > Where the grandparent said "employers think college degrees are more valuable than they probably are," you've highlighted the disconnect between what employers think they're getting from a college grad (certain skills) and what colleges actually do (teach students to think, to learn, to read). That's not High School 2.0. In fact, High School seems to be the right place for vocational training. It's the pinnacle of state-mandated schooling, and in fact includes vocational requirements. Some schools implement that as wood shop. Others focus so completely on teaching computer skills they become a "magnet school" for that one thing only. I'd like to argue for the opposite. Since everyone goes to high school, it should be a place to teach people to think, learn and read (that's how it used to be in some European countries). This is where students could explore and find out what they like, as well as read as many books as they can. After that, college should be for white-collar training. You really do need several years of focused learning on certain topics before jumping in (I don't think you can ever jump straight into medicine, building bridges or designing microprocessors without a few years of reading in advance).
WalterBright 13y ago
I've always wondered about the reputed benefit of learning to think critically from a liberal arts education. For example, with engineering, an airplane built from your design flies or does not. There's no pretending it flies when it doesn't. Reality cannot be fooled, so one is forced to learn to think critically. But with liberal arts, the same person can argue both points of view with equal facility - how does one tell which is correct? What good is being able to criticize without a mechanism for determining the correct way? Or even a better way?
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Learning the engineering variety of critical thinking does not automatically translate to politics, social policy, or fiscal policy.
- arebop 13y ago
  The liberal arts mechanism for ordering arguments is democracy! The idea of liberal arts is that their study enables one to participate as a full-fledged member of society. Thinking critically about arguments that concern society requires not just checking the validity but also the soundness of an argument. I suppose you really need some understanding of culture and history to make up your mind about many issues of importance to the society in which you live.
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    Re: validity of the argument. In engineering, you learn to discern logical fallacies rather quickly. Insulting your computer (ad hom) won't fix bugs in your programs. Insults in issues of importance to society are the norm, even going to the highest levels. As a lawyer friend told me once: 1. if justice is on your side, argue justice 2. if the law is on your side, argue the law 3. if neither the law nor justice is on your side, insult the other side
    - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
      "When the facts are with you, pound the facts. When the law is with you, pound the law. When neither are with you, pound the table and scream like hell."

sounds 13y ago

Yup. Where the grandparent said "employers think college degrees are more valuable than they probably are," you've highlighted the disconnect between what employers think they're getting from a college grad (certain skills) and what colleges actually do (teach students to think, to learn, to read). That's not High School 2.0. In fact, High School seems to be the right place for vocational training. It's the pinnacle of state-mandated schooling, and in fact includes vocational requirements. Some schools implement that as wood shop. Others focus so completely on teaching computer skills they become a "magnet school" for that one thing only. Unskilled work is disappearing and simultaneously employers are demanding more unskilled laborers. The work is disappearing because it's cheaper to have a machine do it flawlessly. The employers don't want skilled labor...labor versus capital all over again. For a while yet, it may be possible to become really skilled in computing and successfully straddle the divide: make enough money to be comfortable as a skilled laborer. But I think it would be wise for _colleges_ to cross-train all their Science/Engineering students in business. Colleges (traditionally) focus on the whole person. A person with business skills, connections, and potential funding becomes the new bar for entry. I'm always thankful my professors took the time to do that last part: take us (a team of students) into the real world.

WalterBright 13y ago
While I took mostly STEM classes in college, I did also take a couple accounting classes. If you don't know the basics of double entry bookkeeping and the jargon that goes with it, you're a bit crippled when working in any sort of business.
ahomescu1 13y ago
> Where the grandparent said "employers think college degrees are more valuable than they probably are," you've highlighted the disconnect between what employers think they're getting from a college grad (certain skills) and what colleges actually do (teach students to think, to learn, to read). That's not High School 2.0. In fact, High School seems to be the right place for vocational training. It's the pinnacle of state-mandated schooling, and in fact includes vocational requirements. Some schools implement that as wood shop. Others focus so completely on teaching computer skills they become a "magnet school" for that one thing only. I'd like to argue for the opposite. Since everyone goes to high school, it should be a place to teach people to think, learn and read (that's how it used to be in some European countries). This is where students could explore and find out what they like, as well as read as many books as they can. After that, college should be for white-collar training. You really do need several years of focused learning on certain topics before jumping in (I don't think you can ever jump straight into medicine, building bridges or designing microprocessors without a few years of reading in advance).

WalterBright 13y ago

I've always wondered about the reputed benefit of learning to think critically from a liberal arts education. For example, with engineering, an airplane built from your design flies or does not. There's no pretending it flies when it doesn't. Reality cannot be fooled, so one is forced to learn to think critically. But with liberal arts, the same person can argue both points of view with equal facility - how does one tell which is correct? What good is being able to criticize without a mechanism for determining the correct way? Or even a better way?

sliverstorm 13y ago
Learning the engineering variety of critical thinking does not automatically translate to politics, social policy, or fiscal policy.
arebop 13y ago
The liberal arts mechanism for ordering arguments is democracy! The idea of liberal arts is that their study enables one to participate as a full-fledged member of society. Thinking critically about arguments that concern society requires not just checking the validity but also the soundness of an argument. I suppose you really need some understanding of culture and history to make up your mind about many issues of importance to the society in which you live.
- WalterBright 13y ago
  Re: validity of the argument. In engineering, you learn to discern logical fallacies rather quickly. Insulting your computer (ad hom) won't fix bugs in your programs. Insults in issues of importance to society are the norm, even going to the highest levels. As a lawyer friend told me once: 1. if justice is on your side, argue justice 2. if the law is on your side, argue the law 3. if neither the law nor justice is on your side, insult the other side
  - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
    "When the facts are with you, pound the facts. When the law is with you, pound the law. When neither are with you, pound the table and scream like hell."