4 ms·

Yeah, the system's fucked up on many facets. Government handing out no-strings-attached-until-it-matters monies by the bucketfuls, your average high school coun

Yeah, the system's fucked up on many facets. Government handing out no-strings-attached-until-it-matters monies by the bucketfuls, your average high school counselor drilling into student's heads to "Apply, apply, apply! You better be applying to colleges and working on those college essays!", colleges more bloated than your uncle after Thanksgiving with bureaucratic puss, disillusioned professors whose wages stagnate while the football and basketball programs get new buckets of cash... We can go on and on with the external reasons. They're all valid. But could we spare some blame for lazy-as-fuck kids who go to class drunk (if at all) and waste their time playing the new Call of Duty? What about their listless parents who barely ever stuck their nose in their kids' high school lives? You know how at every college orientation they rattle off to you everything that goes on there and all the different clubs, all that shit they shove in kid's faces? They want them to become engaged and take advantage of what the school has to offer. Networking. I despise that word but the more connections one gets and the more they get involved in is how the job's are going to be landed. It's not about what one knows anymore. That, and being prudent about your program choice helps too. We know art history is cool...but cmon.

j2kun 13y ago
The article gives plenty of blame to students.
widdershins 13y ago
There was a time when studying at university was about more than simply preparing young people for employment. It was about studying something in depth, at a high level. And actually, I don't happen to think it's a waste of time to study art, or history, or literature. Now that university has become simply about getting a qualification that looks good on your resume, is it any wonder that people don't take it seriously, especially when the jobs market looks mostly hopeless for young people?
- mathgladiator 13y ago
  > And actually, I don't happen to think it's a waste of time to study art, or history, or literature. It's not a waste, but it's a waste on many. Basically, there are two core questions we have a species: how we live and why we live. art, history, and literature help answer the why and the how is very clearly answered by the sciences/engineering. Honestly, people just going to college for a future job is a waste of their time, the professor's time, and college resources. If I had the time, I would enjoy taking a literature or art class these days.
  - hosh 13y ago
    It wasn't a waste on the San Quentin immates: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6953465 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6953465 There was a much earlier article... I forgot where. A long article about the power of the humanities for those living in the poverty line. Granted, the participants were self-selected, were open to this, but they were also hungry for this kind of knowledge and wisdom. Engineering colleges and the modern form of Universities, I think, will split off on its own as what is essential vocational school. And the "good stuff" will be reserved for the elite and the folks who dare step outside the box.
  - colomon 13y ago
    I'd love to take another few semester's of Great Books. But would I love to pay $1800 to take it? Not so much. The current prices for college only make sense if you are preparing for a good career. Very few people would willingly go $50,000 in debt to learn for the sake of pure learning.
    - mathgladiator 13y ago
      This is why I think supply and demand should apply to college classes.
- nicholas73 13y ago
  One of the classes that had impact on me at college was "Sources of Social Order." I was a very socially awkward and defensive kid, and it was a beginning for me to understand people better. Of course, it would have been better for me to learn organically on the playground instead of like an anthropologist watching apes, but then we can blame high school instead of university :)
- j2kun 13y ago
  I think the problem is that students aren't even thinking about the job market (or at least the kind of student the OP refers to in the article). They assume it as a given that they will get a job. All the children are above average, and that sort of thing.
- BrandonMarc 13y ago
  There was a time when studying at university was about more than simply preparing young people for employment. It was about studying something in depth, at a high level. This. When I was in high school, and college, I assumed this was the reason they taught math as heavily as they did. Kids would whine "but I won't ever need to know calculus" (or, worse, algebra) ... but I figured being able to learn something that deeply, consistently, from many different professors over many years is proof (to future employers, for example) that you can learn something you will need.
wonderzombie 13y ago
Did you read the same article I did? There was plenty of blame to heap on the kids, though it's rational (ctrl-F for mini-max). The problem is that the article just isn't particularly useful. It's an editorial, so fine, whatever. But it's long on anecdata and short on anything concrete. I'm hesitant to blame students for a system they didn't invent, don't run, and have approximately zero responsibility for. You just aren't thinking on this level at age 18. Also, if people chose to occupy themselves only with what's "useful" (e.g. not art history), it would impoverish our culture. But I agree that kids need to be realistic about the relationship between their choice and their later prospects-- I agree it is a trade-off.

j2kun 13y ago

The article gives plenty of blame to students.

widdershins 13y ago

There was a time when studying at university was about more than simply preparing young people for employment. It was about studying something in depth, at a high level. And actually, I don't happen to think it's a waste of time to study art, or history, or literature. Now that university has become simply about getting a qualification that looks good on your resume, is it any wonder that people don't take it seriously, especially when the jobs market looks mostly hopeless for young people?

mathgladiator 13y ago
> And actually, I don't happen to think it's a waste of time to study art, or history, or literature. It's not a waste, but it's a waste on many. Basically, there are two core questions we have a species: how we live and why we live. art, history, and literature help answer the why and the how is very clearly answered by the sciences/engineering. Honestly, people just going to college for a future job is a waste of their time, the professor's time, and college resources. If I had the time, I would enjoy taking a literature or art class these days.
- hosh 13y ago
  It wasn't a waste on the San Quentin immates: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6953465 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6953465 There was a much earlier article... I forgot where. A long article about the power of the humanities for those living in the poverty line. Granted, the participants were self-selected, were open to this, but they were also hungry for this kind of knowledge and wisdom. Engineering colleges and the modern form of Universities, I think, will split off on its own as what is essential vocational school. And the "good stuff" will be reserved for the elite and the folks who dare step outside the box.
- colomon 13y ago
  I'd love to take another few semester's of Great Books. But would I love to pay $1800 to take it? Not so much. The current prices for college only make sense if you are preparing for a good career. Very few people would willingly go $50,000 in debt to learn for the sake of pure learning.
  - mathgladiator 13y ago
    This is why I think supply and demand should apply to college classes.
nicholas73 13y ago
One of the classes that had impact on me at college was "Sources of Social Order." I was a very socially awkward and defensive kid, and it was a beginning for me to understand people better. Of course, it would have been better for me to learn organically on the playground instead of like an anthropologist watching apes, but then we can blame high school instead of university :)
j2kun 13y ago
I think the problem is that students aren't even thinking about the job market (or at least the kind of student the OP refers to in the article). They assume it as a given that they will get a job. All the children are above average, and that sort of thing.
BrandonMarc 13y ago
There was a time when studying at university was about more than simply preparing young people for employment. It was about studying something in depth, at a high level. This. When I was in high school, and college, I assumed this was the reason they taught math as heavily as they did. Kids would whine "but I won't ever need to know calculus" (or, worse, algebra) ... but I figured being able to learn something that deeply, consistently, from many different professors over many years is proof (to future employers, for example) that you can learn something you will need.

wonderzombie 13y ago

Did you read the same article I did? There was plenty of blame to heap on the kids, though it's rational (ctrl-F for mini-max). The problem is that the article just isn't particularly useful. It's an editorial, so fine, whatever. But it's long on anecdata and short on anything concrete. I'm hesitant to blame students for a system they didn't invent, don't run, and have approximately zero responsibility for. You just aren't thinking on this level at age 18. Also, if people chose to occupy themselves only with what's "useful" (e.g. not art history), it would impoverish our culture. But I agree that kids need to be realistic about the relationship between their choice and their later prospects-- I agree it is a trade-off.