I really do believe that American culture has a very misguided view of higher education. It is seen as a victory to send every kid to college, even if those kids come out with a liberal arts degree that doesn’t give them any real job skills.
Now, don’t think I am bashing everyone with a liberal arts degree. I myself have a bachelor degree in a liberal arts subject. However, I chose my profoundly useless major knowing that I would be going on to grad school in a subject matter where there are fortunately good job prospects (health care). I fear that a lot of young people go to college without being aware that wracking up student loan debt without having a clear plan for how to get a job that will allow you to pay back the debt can be a recipe for disaster.
My problem with these arguments is that they always end up “College isn’t for everyone. Well, of course college is the right choice for me and my children. I guess I’m talking about those guys over there…college isn’t for them!”
Nobody is ever willing to say “Yeah, I’m going to encourage my kid to become a plumber.” It’s always about wanting someone else to encourage their kids to go into the lucrative field of manual labor. Everyone is full of enthusiasm for how awesome the future of trade-school grads is, but oddly nobody wants to choose this path for themselves. It’s fun’n’easy to make other people’s choices for them, especially when the expected results would benefit you (by making your degree rarer and more valuable.)
And who are these other people who really ought to be welders and cabinet makers? Generally they are poor and probably not white. There is a specific demographic that is getting included in “people who should not go to college,” and that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The privileged elites do consist of those who have gone to college, and I’m interested in including more people from diverse backgrounds among the privileged elites, not fewer.
Don’t you think people have some idea of what they want out of life? Don’t you think there is a good reason why people from poor families would still like to send their kids to college? Do you really think everyone who isn’t you or the people immediately around you are too stupid to know what they want?
People with Bachelor’s degrees still make almost a million dollars more, over their lifetime, than those without. People with Master’s degrees tack on about another half-million. Sure, in the real world this doesn’t translate cleanly into instant money in your pocket, but its still abundantly clear that to get ahead in life you need a college degree.
One could make an argument that the Dept of Ed/FSA programs (in the US, anyway, no idea how it works in lesser places ) needlessly encourage huge clusters of non-college-material type kids to go down that path.
It’s a fine line between providing assistance where it genuinely belongs, vs providing the perverse incentives to get kids to go on to 4 (or more…) years of partying instead of becoming Joe Lunchbox.
Whatever the intentions, you have to look at the real-life end result these changes would lead to.
If we de-emphasized college education and encouraged more young people to seek out non-degreed career paths, the end result would not be fewer unmotivated, unqualified people in college classrooms. The unmotivated and unqualified of the middle and upper classes would still go to university in pretty much equal numbers. Their parents would do whatever it took to make sure they got an education, because they know that having a college education really does increase your opportunities.
What we would lose is a whole variety of lower-middle class and poor people, including plenty of bright and motivated people who could do a lot with their lives if given the same opportunities that ordinary middle-class people take for granted. These are the kids that would find themselves without a spot in the classroom.
This may not be the intention, but this is how things would work out (and indeed, that is how things do work out in the many European countries that have this sort of system in place.)
College most definitely isn’t for everyone, and that is not a bad thing. I have a cousin who’s daddy owned a company and was wealthy, so they sent him to a college in Florida. After six years he emerged with a Bachelor’s degree in Spanish! I, OTOH, had to work several part-time jobs, and finish my engineering degree at night the final three years because I had to pay my own way, since my folks were regular blue-collar slobs. Oh and my cousin? After failing miserably during his short tenure in the middle-management position they created for him at daddy’s company, is now a security guard somewhere. What an incredible waste of time and resources!
My father made no bones about telling my siblings and I that he would offer no financial support for a “useless” liberal arts degree.
I’m guessing that most parents here at the SDMB strongly urge their children to not only obtain higher education, but also to excel at their schoolwork, participate in activities and generally make some positive contribution to society. There exist parents, however, who are perfectly content with their children getting C’s through high school and aiming for a career that requires no higher education. I have no problem with that. I do not feel bad about saying college isn’t for “those people over there.”
I have trouble believing that placing an emphasis on trades earlier in life would have the kind of dramatic changes you are describing. People are not going to simply choose a path based upon what they see as options in school. The best school can do is make people aware of the possibilities. It’s their family and friends that will most influence their career path or lack of one.
Showing kids that trades are a means to a comfortable lifestyle as much as a BA or MA will only increase their awareness. It’s valuable to make kids aware of these options so that if they are failing at college, or if they are disinterested or unmotivated, they will be able to understand with a clear mind that they have options, viable options, other than McDonald’s.
I am not sure why you are bringing class into this and those statistics. Class only matters for the reason you already stated - list of viable options. The statistics are only valuable if they are recent and shown to be stably true.
So much of what goes on in college, and what people do after college (whether they graduate or not), supports the OP’s claim–which isn’t controversial at all, in most countries. Nevertheless, public school technical education (in California, at least) is scandalously lacking. All too often it’s left to sketchy private schools that just get students horribly in debt.
If the assertion of the OP bucks anything at all, it’s the long-prevalent ideology in U.S. culture that our economy must be the “number one” and “superior” economy.
The portion of middle-class that expanded so much in the last century did so with college education. Not surprisingly, it is also the portion of the middle class that participates in public discourse the most. So there is an implicit cultural assumption that the only thing that will keep us there in that economic position is universal (academic) education.
I think that the problem here is a matter of perspective. Statistics show that a given person will be more successful with a degree, but I’m sure many of us also know people with a Bachelor’s degree working at Starbuck’s. Similarly, we can see the proliferation of these “useless” degrees diluting the value of “real” degrees and increasing individual debt unnecessarily, but how does one determine that a student is better off not pursuing a certain study?
I think the wide-spread knowledge of those statistics are a large part of the problem and the assumption that the average graduate makes more than that average non-graduate and assuming that it inherently makes getting a “useless” degree a meaningful endeavor. And colleges themselves have incentive to encourage these degrees because they get the money regardless of the usefulness or success of any given individual student.
Worse, because of the saturation of degrees, a lot of jobs these days require degrees that really don’t need them, and that the necessary experience and knowledge could easily be gained through internships and such instead. So this just ultimately forces people to get degrees so they can get a job that they don’t really need the degree for at all. They spend all this time and money, that could have been spent being productive in the economy, just to get to a point they could have easily gotten to without that cost just a decade or two ago. It’s a vicious cycle.
I think the solution is a difficult one. Students and their parents NEED to have a better understanding of the costs and benefits of college, not just a degree in general, but specifically that major. Maybe it won’t make them a lot of money, but they’re passionate about it, so it’s okay. Similarly, businesses need to seriously reconsider the sorts of requirements they have for opennings. For instance, I see a lot of IT related jobs requiring 4-year degrees, yet all they really need is some relevant experience and maybe a couple of certifications, all of which is doable in a trade school at a fraction of the cost and time of a traditional University education.
I would prefer to see a more hybrid approach to education, getting students directly involved in the field with relevant experience right away, but also some classroom time spent learning concepts and theory. Even as someone who has a graduate degree myself, I think the current education model is broken and I think it’s unfortunate that it results in fewer opportunities for the poor and excessive amounts of debt and wasted time for others.
Matter of fact, when I was in HS, I remember being in a class where the teacher went through the Occupational Outlook Handbook and suggested that a person could make a fine living as a truck driver, machinest, etc. I think that was meant to be some kind of encouragement to those with no plans of going to college.
I think emphasizing trade schools to students who may be suited for them would be great. I disagree that it would limit the potential for lower class students to obtain a higher education. Those bright lower class students and still achieve. The not-so-bright lower class students, however, will be better off not muddling through two years of college only to find out they can’t do it, can’t afford it and can’t use it. Sure, the less motivated middle class kids will still go to college, but if they can afford 6 years of higher education for a degree in general studies, so be it.
Oh the poor! Isn’t it silly how they struggle to climb into the halls of privilege? How they waste their so much time and energy pretending like they are worthy of the same things we have? Really, picturing them in the classroom is terribly amusing, isn’t it? I mean, one or two here and there keeps things a little colorful, but now all of them think they belong in the classroom and it’s all gone too far.
When will they realize how much happier and more fulfilling their lives will be when they accept their real place in life is fixing my toilet? Who says being a gardener can’t be fulfilling? I have just the greatest gardener, and Jose is always smiling. Really, sometimes I envy their simple lives. I hope Jose’s cute kids can realize that and stick to what they do best.
Anyway, I just don’t know why they think a college education is the best way succeed in life. Some people just don’t know what is good for them. Really, someone ought to be watching out for them a bit better. They get a silly idea in their head like going to college, and it’s so hard t make them realize why college just isn’t for them.
Oh, can you hold on a minute? I’ve got to call my kid’s SAT tutor…
Though I do think one thing that might help kids make more prudent decisions is if employers stopped using a college degree as a means of evaluating candidates if there is no relevant experience or knowledge gained during the course of college study that would be necessary to do the job. With the exception of a few occupations, there is no reasonable expectation that college has prepared students to be better at the jobs the end up at. Unnecessarily using that as a criteria only magnifies the importance of a degree, while lowing the value and utility of it.
I think you’re being awfully unfair in this thread. My boyfriend wishes that instead of getting four years worth of debt and a media arts degree, he had gone for two years to get a Stedicam certificate. I have a friend who went to the same kind of hoity-toity liberal arts school that I did, and then when he couldn’t raise three kids on his salary he went and learned how to be a welder and he’s much happier. I think what you’re saying is just another side to the idea that there’s something shameful or undesirable or about the skilled trades. Which can’t be outsourced and never go out of style.
**lavenderviolet **- You’ll excuse me if I don’t lend to much credibility to the 28 year old schooltecher who wrote the article.
Agreed. College is not for everyone. That’s why everone doesn’t get accepted to Harvard.
Here is the reality. More education tends to pay more than less education. Here is another surprise. Graduates from better schools tend to earn more as well.
Even graduating with a dumb liberal arts degree provides you with many of the contacts, experiences and knowledge you will need to be an educated, intelligent member of society.
If you are dumb, lazy and unmotivated, maybe you shouldn’t go to college and just save your parents some money. Not that those traits would make you successful at any job.
Ours is a class society and much of which class you end up in is decided by how educated you are and what you do for a living. For the poor and working classes, college provides an opportunity for their children to have a better life.
I would agree with the OP that many seem to squander the benefits of higher education. If you want to treat collage as a 4 year party until you are forced to enter the “real world” with no clue about what you want to do for a living, that is pretty much a waste IMHO. But that is an attitude typically created from either an upper class sense of entitlement (“I deserve to be kept in the style that I grew up in”) or a lower class lack of knowledge on how the system works (“just getting your degree is all that matters”).
Skilled tradesmen can indeed make a good living. If they’re any good at it, they can easily pull in 40k a year, which is right about the median. If they are ambitious, it’s a good path to opening your own business.
More to the point, not going to college doesn’t necessarily mean manual labor or trades. When I was 19, I had 2 roommates. One tried to go into showbiz, failed, then tried something else. He now owns his own business and is a leading authority in his field. The other taught himself computers, got a job as a programmer, and was making an above-median wage at 25. Then he became a house-flipper, did well at that, and semi-retired at 35. Combined, they have about three semesters of college.
I have another friend who went to college, got into business, and now wishes he had been an electrician. I often wish I had learned a trade in my youth.
Projection.
Having taught college freshmen for a decade: no, many of them do not. (And some that do have plans involving either the NFL and/or MTV.) I’d say only about half have a realistic, workable career plan. Plenty of them will admit they they’re in college because their parents or teachers pushed them, or because they had no other ideas and college seemed a fun place to stall for time.
My experience squares with the facts: about half of all college students change their majors at least once, and about half of college graduates are in fields unrelated to their major by age 40.
Sure. In many cases its because well-meaning do-gooders tell them that a college degree – any college degree – is the golden path to success.
When I was 18, I was waaaay too stupid to know what I wanted.
Actually, it’s significantly less than a million dollars, but leave that aside. You fail to account for
The opportunity cost of lost wages. Even at entry-level wages, four year’s salary is nothing to sneeze at, to say nothing of the headstart you’ll have on people who spent 4 years in school, many of whom will end up in entry-level jobs anyway.
The significant and sometimes massive debt students pile up. It is entirely common for students to graduate with debts of $50,000 or more. With interest, that’s $250 a month for twenty years. If you’re an engineer, that’s no problem; if you have a B.A. in Theater or Art History or Literature or Psychology, you’re fucked. The New York Times recently ran a feature about a girl who owed $100,000 on her Women’s Studies degree.
The fact that the wage advantage of a college degree varies dramatically depending on what the major is and (to a lesser extent) where it’s from. Of course you’ll get a return on a Computer Science or Accounting degree, or on any degree at all from Yale. But the kids who are going to major in those things and get into those schools were going to college anyway. The ones affected the most by “everyone should go to college” rhetoric are the ones who wind up at Mediocre State U, taking History or Sociology because those classes are interesting, and without any concrete career plans.
“Going to college” is not the same thing as getting a degree. The average six-year graduation rate for four-year schools is now right a bit under 50%. That is to say, half of those who enroll never finish. They will, of course, still pay for that half-a-degree. Please see this for detail: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/feature/college_dropout_factories.php
Note that it is overwhelmingly poor, minority kids who enroll in the worst of the dropout factories, as well as the worst of the for-profit colleges. I’ve seen dozens of kids racking up huge debts on degrees they either don’t finish or didn’t need in the first place. They did it because some well-meaning person told them if they just went to college, they’d be set for life. And they get fucked over, as surely as if they’d “invested” in a ponzi scheme.
There are plenty of writers and scholars who have pointed out that the higher-ed system rips off and fucks over poor minorities even more than whites (often political progressives – see Anya Kamenetz’ work). Given that, your implication that those who think college is oversold are racists is not just obnoxious, it’s ignorant.
If he has no plan of his own for why he wants to go to college? Yeah, I’m going to encourage my kid to become a plumber.
Oh, the sanctimonious white progressive! Isn’t it fun how he addresses complex social problems down to one simplistic bromide? How wonderful it would be if only everyone were so erudite, sophisticated and enlightened! Why, we’d solve everything in a trice!
Everyone should go to college, and the government should take steps to make it so, just like the government should encourage everyone to own a house! After all, it’s not like such efforts could ever have negative consequences!
Technically, the poor can get some access to state colleges through hardship based scholarships & grants. It’s the middle incomes that are paying a lot for school.
Of course, as a poor kid in college, I found myself in a puzzlingly middle-class subculture. Wait, why do you assume I have money? But that may have just been the school I was in.
Just as a data point one of the prices I saw in my personal life from not emphasizing the skilled trades is that many people I knew didn’t know the opportunities that were out there. I went to school in a redneck, poor, backwards part of Virginia. A lot of guys I knew hated school, they hated doing paper work, they hated having to sit at a school desk all day. They hated having to learn about history, social studies, and all kinds of other boring stuff they weren’t interested in and would never want to know about.
I consider myself lucky that I’ve always loved reading and learning things, it set me on a good path and having that love for knowledge at a young age makes you someone who can benefit immensely from school. On most measures people would say I was smarter than those guys who had no use for “book learnin” that I grew up with.
The truth of the matter is, that’s valuing one aspect of being human over all others. I was better than them at one thing, but they were better than me at things as well.
What happened to those guys is many of them ended up working fucking shit minimum wage jobs into their mid 20s. If people had made them aware of trade schools at graduation, I think things would have been different. Several of those guys are in skilled trades now, but they lost 5 years because they weren’t properly informed about their options.
Their options were “more school, books and studying that we hate” or “go work the first shit job you can find.” A lot of them pushed carts at grocery stores, mowed lawns, worked retail, worked as entry level used car salesmen and all kinds of other things that just aren’t rewarding. If they had an adult trying to sell them on a place where they could go and learn something they found interesting, where they’d work with their hands and actually be making or fixing things and not having to write papers and such, they probably would have gotten to start their “real” careers before wasting 5-7 years in low paying, menial jobs.
) needlessly encourage huge clusters of non-college-material type kids to go down that path.