# Dispelling the notion that "college is not worth it". **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 28, 2014, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216 "2014-04-28T21:43:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2014, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/141 "2014-05-05T20:49:31Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > Interesting points. When I was a child, I was taught that public service career paths were heavily exam-oriented. E.g. the government would put out a cattle call for people interested in becoming a Housing Inspector, everyone who was interested showed up in a big auditorium, everyone took the City of Podunk Housing Inspector Battery 4th Edition, Revised, and they took the X highest scorers (where X = number of positions open). When I grew up, I found it wasn’t like that at all. I applied for a public-service position and the entire thing was a traditional interview with behavioral questions, “what if” scenarios, do _you_ have any questions for us, etc… Not a test in sight. Since we’re talking college grads here, I think tests are pretty stupid. A good GPA from a good institution is pretty good evidence that the candidate knows how to take tests. Unless there is a very specific skill you are hiring for, what is the test going to tell you? A good chunk of the people I interview are new Ph.Ds - a test would be pretty insulting for them. I want to see if they know the structure of the field behind the facts - not just what the definition of a method is but why the method is used and how it relates to other methods. Now if you are hiring cashiers a test on how well you make change and how fast you can punch the buttons might be good. ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/142 "2014-05-05T21:17:56Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Since we’re talking college grads here, I think tests are pretty stupid. A good GPA from a good institution is pretty good evidence that the candidate knows how to take tests… It’s very simple and goes back to the heart of the OP. There are some people who know the material but can’t afford to take a class in it, or they don’t have time to take a class in it because they are too busy working two jobs and taking care of kids, ailing parents, etc. Letting them take a test recognizes that some people can learn outside of college (Surprising, isn’t it! I think the Teachers’ Union tried to brainwash us as kids to think that we were all dumb shits who needed to be spoon-fed tidbits of learning one by one, directly from them. Job security!). Don’t make them spend money they don’t have to get lectured on material they already know. If they don’t know the material, flunk 'em. Flunk the ignorant bastards straight back to last Thursday. But if they know it, they know it. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2014, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/143 "2014-05-05T21:21:16Z")
Most people have ample time to prove they know how to do things. It’s called “working a job.” A good education is about so much more than classes or skills. Indeed, those were some of the least important things about grad school for me. What was more important was the mentorship, the community, the networks I still have, the ability to use cutting edge tools in experimental ways, the access to unusual resources, the conferences and workshops, and the ongoing support. I am sure there are other ways to build strong communities of learning with mentorship, access to resources and strong collaboration. But outside of university and maybe some research oriented nonprofits, I haven’t seen it done in a rigorous way. Or to put it more simply, you can’t fool business for long. Why do you think businesses aren’t all fighting over the unschooled? You would think it’s be a smart HR move. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2014, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/144 "2014-05-05T22:15:00Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > Letting them take a test recognizes that some people can learn outside of college (Surprising, isn’t it! I think the Teachers’ Union tried to brainwash us as kids to think that we were all dumb shits who needed to be spoon-fed tidbits of learning one by one, directly from them. Job security!). Don’t make them spend money they don’t have to get lectured on material they already know. If they don’t know the material, flunk 'em. Flunk the ignorant bastards straight back to last Thursday. But if they know it, they know it. This idea works better in some subjects, and at some levels, than in others. College grades, degrees, etc. reflect more than just “knowing material” to the extent of being able to pass a test on it. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2014, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/145 "2014-05-05T22:39:56Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > These are some of the reasons why I’m so in favor of [Competency-Based Education/Assessment](http://www.educause.edu/library/competency-based-education). > > Let schools become a place where you can go to learn things you don’t already know, be trained in theories and skills, and practice them. Do you like the cachet of attending classes in a 300 year old building that your great-grandfather took classes in? Sure, pay through the nose for Harvard. Do you think that MIT instructors are just that damn smart and that going there will make you as smart as them? Go to MIT. > > Separate the process of awarding of degrees to government-run or nonprofit boards that will assess anyone. If you can learn the material elsewhere - at a less prestigious school, on grandma’s lap, at informal community gatherings, at your own school you set up, fine. Can’t afford tuition at a traditional school? Learn on your own like Lincoln did by candlelight. When you’re ready, go to the State of New York Board of Educational Assessments and have your skills, knowledge, and achievements evaluated. > > “Wow, you wrote all these papers, and got at least 80% on all these exams? That’s worth a BS in Chemistry. Write some more in-depth papers and do some original research and try for the MS, if you’re up to it. If you are having trouble, we have graduate classes at NYU that you could take. Go all the way to PhD and maybe we’ll hire you as as an assessor here.” > > If the “these hallowed halls” experience is so essential to a “degree” that you can’t see yourself giving out a real degree to someone who didn’t physically sit through Freshman Comp and submit the weekly assignments one-by-one, then fine, create “equivalency” degrees where you can be formally assessed to be at the same general educational level as a typical graduate of Podunk State even though you didn’t actually attend Podunk State, or you didn’t finish. In other words, figure out what a Podunk State graduate knows and can do and then see who else can _also_ do it. If you _can_ do what a Podunk State grad can do, why should you be treated less than people who actually _went_? > > I think a big part of the argument against competency education is that it lowers standards - that the _only_ way to really get educated is to go to lectures, etc. That’s an indication that you are using insufficient assessments. Beef them up. Make the tests harder, add more essay requirements, etc. Even if you could make this work, I’m not thinking your pool of high-scoring test takers would be that different from the pool of job candidates you get now. People who test well tend to go to college–_good_ colleges. Going to a good college gives you even more practice taking tough exams. Having a competency exam may give someone a glimmer a hope that they can study themselves out of a low-paying, low-prestige job. But it would be false hope. Furthermore, an exam score isn’t enough to sort applicants. You’d still have to interview the top scorers and look at their resumes. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/146 "2014-05-06T01:51:47Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Since we’re talking college grads here, I think tests are pretty stupid. A good GPA from a good institution is pretty good evidence that the candidate knows how to take tests. Unless there is a very specific skill you are hiring for, what is the test going to tell you? A good chunk of the people I interview are new Ph.Ds - a test would be pretty insulting for them. I want to see if they know the structure of the field behind the facts - not just what the definition of a method is but why the method is used and how it relates to other methods. I think that tests are great. the are very good evidence that the candidate knows a.how to take the tests and b. the subject matter of the tests. There is no way to ‘know how to take tests’ and pass, unless there is knowledge of the subject matter. Sure, some can \*pass \*with the odds, but, a good grade? Blamed rare. Lack of knowledge of a specific within an organization is not indicative of the wrongness of tests. ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/147 "2014-05-06T02:11:01Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > I think that tests are great. the are very good evidence that the candidate knows a.how to take the tests and b. the subject matter of the tests. > There is no way to ‘know how to take tests’ and pass, unless there is knowledge of the subject matter. Sure, some can \*pass \*with the odds, but, a good grade? Blamed rare. > Lack of knowledge of a specific within an organization is not indicative of the wrongness of tests. Good points. You can also require essays as well, and have them judged anonymously by a panel. This helps make the assessment more rounded and ensures that the candidate can do more than parrot the right answers on a multiple-choice test. And if the test is too easy, and random schmucks are getting extremely high scores, getting hired, and then doing very poorly on the job? Well, make the test harder, or change its focus to more relevant topics. You don’t need to have memorized the names of the ten largest cities in California in order to be an HR Manager at a company in Miami. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/148 "2014-05-06T05:02:02Z")
I think the coming of online colleges like University of Phoenix and the fact regular colleges are putting their courses online will change how people look at college. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/149 "2014-05-06T14:20:23Z")
The wealthiest guys I’ve known went into the trades and ended up running/selling their own business. One was a specialized building contractor who just kept going higher- and higher-end until he was able to sell the company for many millions, move into a mansion with the wife and kids and start a luxury home construction business from scratch. Another was a plumber who morphed into a plumbing contractor- that guy is loaded too. I don’t think college is a waste if a young person has a clear idea of what they’re trying to do. But I think routes other than 4-year college get short shrift and unnecessarily disrespected in our culture. We need people who can _do_ things, and I think young people should know that that can be both respectable and lucrative. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Nylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/77aa72/32.png) [@Mr.Nylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Nylock)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/150 "2014-05-06T15:14:33Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > I don’t think college is a waste if a young person has a clear idea of what they’re trying to do. But I think routes other than 4-year college get short shrift and unnecessarily disrespected in our culture. We need people who can _do_ things, and I think young people should know that that can be both respectable and lucrative. Personally I think the issues go a little deeper than just financial well being. I read a book called “Class” by Paul Fussell, he describes a situation in which 2 families have similar incomes but lead vastly different lives. I think this discussion has all these undertones that go beyond a purely practical assessment of fulfilling financial needs. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/151 "2014-05-06T15:36:57Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Most people have ample time to prove they know how to do things. It’s called “working a job.” > > A good education is about so much more than classes or skills. Indeed, those were some of the least important things about grad school for me. What was more important was the mentorship, the community, the networks I still have, the ability to use cutting edge tools in experimental ways, the access to unusual resources, the conferences and workshops, and the ongoing support. > > I am sure there are other ways to build strong communities of learning with mentorship, access to resources and strong collaboration. But outside of university and maybe some research oriented nonprofits, I haven’t seen it done in a rigorous way. > > Or to put it more simply, you can’t fool business for long. Why do you think businesses aren’t all fighting over the unschooled? You would think it’s be a smart HR move. The issue is not the value of schooling; the issue is the value of schooling _relative to the cost_. However valuable your experience was, there is likely some dollar figure at which you’d say “Well, it wasn’t worth _that_ much.” Employers unquestionably value the schooling; but the question for students is whether or not the value the employers place on it is enough to justify the time and expense of the schooling. If a four-year degree and $25,000 in student loans equates to making $12 instead of $10 an hour as a customer-service rep, then it’s a negative ROI. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/152 "2014-05-06T16:19:31Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > Good points. You can also require essays as well, and have them judged anonymously by a panel. This helps make the assessment more rounded and ensures that the candidate can do more than parrot the right answers on a multiple-choice test. > > And if the test is too easy, and random schmucks are getting extremely high scores, getting hired, and then doing very poorly on the job? Well, make the test harder, or change its focus to more relevant topics. You don’t need to have memorized the names of the ten largest cities in California in order to be an HR Manager at a company in Miami. The thing the test doesn’t show is your ability to perform at a high level across time. And 90% of jobs need someone who is good and reliable rather than someone who is amazing but unorganized. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/153 "2014-05-06T20:18:04Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > I think that tests are great. the are very good evidence that the candidate knows a.how to take the tests and b. the subject matter of the tests. > There is no way to ‘know how to take tests’ and pass, unless there is knowledge of the subject matter. Sure, some can \*pass \*with the odds, but, a good grade? Blamed rare. > Lack of knowledge of a specific within an organization is not indicative of the wrongness of tests. Any test that a company can give for any reasonably high level job can cover just a tiny subset of the material. Instead we outsource it to the universities, and being selective in where we hire from helps ensure that the tests the universities give are good. You know that any tests a company gives will be multiple choice, right? However any reasonable test would have to test for knowledge of concepts, not facts. In a work environment you can look up stuff you don’t know. You can’t look up the underlying reason behind things, or how they fit together. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/154 "2014-05-06T20:22:47Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Most people have ample time to prove they know how to do things. It’s called “working a job.” > > A good education is about so much more than classes or skills. Indeed, those were some of the least important things about grad school for me. What was more important was the mentorship, the community, the networks I still have, the ability to use cutting edge tools in experimental ways, the access to unusual resources, the conferences and workshops, and the ongoing support. Once you pass your quals you more or less know your field. In grad school you learn about ways to look at and solve problems that don’t have answers in the back of the book. That is what I’m looking for and that’s what I ask candidates about. You can’t give a test on it, since each person approaches problems in a different way. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/155 "2014-05-06T20:30:46Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > It’s very simple and goes back to the heart of the OP. There are some people who know the material but can’t afford to take a class in it, or they don’t have time to take a class in it because they are too busy working two jobs and taking care of kids, ailing parents, etc. Letting them take a test recognizes that some people can learn outside of college (Surprising, isn’t it! I think the Teachers’ Union tried to brainwash us as kids to think that we were all dumb shits who needed to be spoon-fed tidbits of learning one by one, directly from them. Job security!). Don’t make them spend money they don’t have to get lectured on material they already know. If they don’t know the material, flunk 'em. Flunk the ignorant bastards straight back to last Thursday. But if they know it, they know it. If all people had to do to learn an area was read about it, each student should get near perfect grades on interim tests. Testing at the end of a term might be good to prove that a student learned the material, but testing during a term should be diagnostic. It is easy to think that you understand something even though you have fundamental misconceptions about it. The philosophy our school system used was to test first, find what needed to be taught on an individual basis, and teach that. Thus kids who got their spelling words perfect the first time didn’t need to do the write a sentence using the word crap. To work that needs fewer students a class with a smaller range of learning ability than is practical, but they agree it is the best way to go. But it requires a closed loop, which people learning by themselves don’t have. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/156 "2014-05-06T20:55:35Z")
Consider this. My niece is about to enter Pharmacy School. It will take 6 years and cost approximately $20,000 per year or $120,000 and thats with scholarships. Pharmacists supposedly start out at around $60,000 and average $120,000 or such around those numbers. So in her case, that would be a pretty good investment or ROI. Now take my other step niece who’s into musical theater. She is gong to some school and I’d guess will be costing about $5,000 a year and so at the end she should have about $30,000 in debt. Someone working in theater makes what? maybe $20,000 a year? Which to me is barely enough to cover basic expenses. Is that a good ROI? (Note - she told me her career plan was to marry a millionaire and I dont think she was joking.) ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/157 "2014-05-06T21:03:14Z")
One thing to throw into this - sometimes a person is just so darn good at an area or so in love with it they almost HAVE to go into it. Others - hey, its a job. Take the above examples of my nieces. The first one who’s going into pharmacy - she really has no interest in becoming a pharmacist. Sure she’s ok with it but in reality she’s going into it because she’s smart and likes the income potential. In contrast to my 2nd niece - she is totally dedicated and focused on musical theater. Back in high school she would frustrate her teachers because while she could darn well get A’s in any class she wanted to - she would blow off anything that didnt have anything to do with theater. It was theater, theater, theater to her. Science, math, history - bleah! She only did the minimal to ensuer a good gpa. Isnt that the way with ost of us? Are we really into the field we want? So then, really maybe a degree in art isnt so bad if that is your passion. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/158 "2014-05-06T22:57:43Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Since we’re talking college grads here, I think tests are pretty stupid. A good GPA from a good institution is pretty good evidence that the candidate knows how to take tests. Unless there is a very specific skill you are hiring for, what is the test going to tell you? A good chunk of the people I interview are new Ph.Ds - a test would be pretty insulting for them. I want to see if they know the structure of the field behind the facts - not just what the definition of a method is but why the method is used and how it relates to other methods. > Now if you are hiring cashiers a test on how well you make change and how fast you can punch the buttons might be good. I don’t agree. One of the reasons employers are turning more to job experience, interviews, and tests is that college degrees are becoming less and less useful as signals. Even in specialized technical fields a college degree doesn’t necessarily mean you know what you’re doing. Anyone who has interviewed comp sci grads can tell you horror stories about the appalling lack of basic knowledge some of them have. I’ve had people with degrees in comp sci utterly fail simple programming challenges. I’ve given interviews to comp sci grads who couldn’t tell me what a stack was, let alone how it differed from a queue. I’ve interviewed grads who couldn’t tell me what recursion was, let alone be able to write a simple recursive function. The truth is, there are many ways to get through college, and not all of them impart much of an education. When you push through so many kids who don’t really care about what they are studying, you incentivize them to find the easy path. Pad your curriculum with the easiest ‘breadth’ courses you can find to bring your GPA up, then squeak through the hard courses with C’s and D’s, and you can get a degree with an average GPA, having learned almost nothing. If you’re really clever, you’ll find the lazy profs who like to give group assignments to reduce their workload. Then just hitch yourself to the best group you can find and let them pull you through. I would agree with you in regards to students who have very high GPA’s. But by definition that’s a small portion of the applicant pool, and we’re facing shortages of engineers and software developers and can’t wait for the 5% from the top of their classes. We have to sort out the applications from the muddled middle. Now when I interview someone (even someone with a degree) I pay a whole lot of attention to their extra-curricular activities. If a person comes through with a degree in comp-sci but his interests have nothing to do with computers, he’s going to have to kill in the interview or I’m not hiring. I’d rather take a guy with a 2-year diploma who spends his evenings writing code for fun or building things and solving problems for entertainment. For one thing, the latter guy is much more likely to stay up to date on a rapidly changing field. So far, this hasn’t applied to people with degrees in computer or electrical engineering - it is still very hard to get an engineering degree without knowing the subject. But the other problem is that so many of them are just terrible at writing. They know the engineering, but if you ask them to prepare a report or give a presentation, be prepared to correct numerous spelling and grammar errors - assuming they are capable of writing even a few hundred words in service of a coherent point. I can’t imagine how much worse it is to sort out graduates with a liberal arts education. There are just so many ways you can work through those degrees while taking complete nonsense or watered down pablum. You CAN take good solid liberal arts courses and come out with a good education, but you can also get through by selecting for easy profs, or profs that are easy to game, or by taking courses that are thinly-disguised ideology and then just kissing ass. I once got an A in an English class where the final exam was an essay on a book I never had time to read (it was going to be on one of five books, and I gambled on having read four of the five - and lost). My prof was a strong feminist, so I just blathered on about how tough women had it in the era the book was set in, and voila. A on the paper, A in the class. I learned nothing, unless you count learning how to game the system. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/159 "2014-05-06T23:24:06Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Even if you could make this work, I’m not thinking your pool of high-scoring test takers would be that different from the pool of job candidates you get now. People who test well tend to go to college–_good_ colleges. Really? There are vast swaths of people out there for whom college is simply not an option, period. I have a lot of very smart people in my family, but I was the first one to go to college. When you’re dirt poor and working 8 hours a day outside of school just to make ends meet, the good colleges might as well be on the moon. If you’re lucky enough to live in a city that has a good college and can live at home while attending, that’s not so bad, so long as you don’t need to work to survive. If you live in a small town in South Dakota and your single parent lives in a trailer, you can be the best student in your tiny rural school and college is still totally out of reach - especially if Mom needs you at home earning money to make ends meet. But an online education in the evenings is a total possibility, and we need to account for that to avoid freezing out a lot of poor people. More student loans and subsidies is not the answer, as they just drive up tuition. We need to expand the supply of education dramatically, and come up with new methods for employers to evaluate such people (or at least remove the roadblocks that prevent them from doing so now). Upper middle class kids and highly intelligent kids will find a way to go to college. It’s the kids who come from poor backgrounds and who are above average in intelligence but not brilliant who should be going to college but often can’t. > [@](#): > > Going to a good college gives you even more practice taking tough exams. Having a competency exam may give someone a glimmer a hope that they can study themselves out of a low-paying, low-prestige job. But it would be false hope. It doesn’t have to be just an exam. We should be promoting more co-op jobs, internships, and other low-risk ways for employers to try out an employee before making a lifelong commitment to him or her. There are other ways to show your skills. If you’re a programmer, contribute to open-source projects. Build a portfolio of successful web sites or other work you’ve done. If you are applying for jobs that require writing skills, set up a blog and write about what you know, and spend the time to write the best stuff you can. Then allow employers to see it. There are also many ways to better yourself and to show employers what kind of person you are. I once got a job where I beat an applicant who had better credentials than I did, but the company liked the fact that I was a private pilot and had a life-long history of self-study and private certifications. If I interview two equivalent people next week, and one shows me an Ivy League degree but a personal history that consists of nothing of note, and another shows me a degree from the local college plus a bunch of online courses in various subjects, perhaps a black belt in a martial art, a ham radio license, Maybe a portfolio of paintings or sculpture, some published magazine articles, or other things that show me a person who is continually learning and improving, he or she would probably get preference because it tells me something about the kind of mind that person has. > [@](#): > > Furthermore, an exam score isn’t enough to sort applicants. You’d still have to interview the top scorers and look at their resumes. That’s true. But you can tell a lot from a person’s resume aside from what her college GPA was. My simple advice to a job applicant: Be the kind of person who is going to be an asset to whoever hires you, then make sure your resume gets that message across to an employer. Education is part of it, but if all you’ve got is a degree and you spend your spare time watching TV or hanging with your friends, you’re not very interesting and you’re not going to stick out from the pack unless you had a sky-high GPA from a good school. So start working on personal improvement. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216/160 "2014-05-07T01:01:02Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I don’t agree. One of the reasons employers are turning more to job experience, interviews, and tests is that college degrees are becoming less and less useful as signals. > > Even in specialized technical fields a college degree doesn’t necessarily mean you know what you’re doing. Anyone who has interviewed comp sci grads can tell you horror stories about the appalling lack of basic knowledge some of them have. I’ve had people with degrees in comp sci utterly fail simple programming challenges. I’ve given interviews to comp sci grads who couldn’t tell me what a stack was, let alone how it differed from a queue. I’ve interviewed grads who couldn’t tell me what recursion was, let alone be able to write a simple recursive function. > > The truth is, there are many ways to get through college, and not all of them impart much of an education. When you push through so many kids who don’t really care about what they are studying, you incentivize them to find the easy path. Pad your curriculum with the easiest ‘breadth’ courses you can find to bring your GPA up, then squeak through the hard courses with C’s and D’s, and you can get a degree with an average GPA, having learned almost nothing. If you’re really clever, you’ll find the lazy profs who like to give group assignments to reduce their workload. Then just hitch yourself to the best group you can find and let them pull you through. > > I would agree with you in regards to students who have very high GPA’s. But by definition that’s a small portion of the applicant pool, and we’re facing shortages of engineers and software developers and can’t wait for the 5% from the top of their classes. We have to sort out the applications from the muddled middle. I’m lucky enough to work for a top company which is very attractive to graduates. I don’t even see student resumes with low GPAs, or student resumes from colleges which will give you a degree not knowing how to write a recursive function. College degrees by themselves aren’t nearly enough. Interviews are absolutely required to see if the person is a fit. There are plenty of candidates who would be fine for grunt programming jobs who I won’t hire because I want innovators. I can see that if you are hiring from colleges which let people out not knowing anything (and let people in who seem incapable of learning) you need a test as a filter to find a pearl in the cesspool. I don’t buy the skills shortage. I hire in a very tiny specialty, and I’ve had no problem filling up my openings. Except in one case. There the team leader wants someone who can jump into his even more specialized job right away. No new graduate can do it, and the number of experienced people is tiny. His skills shortage is self-induced. I don’t have a lot of sympathy for companies who cry skills shortage while not being willing to train and paying near the bottom of the salary scale. I’d have a skills shortage for my jobs if my company were unwilling to pay market rates - I’d lose all my candidates to the competition. > [@](#): > > Now when I interview someone (even someone with a degree) I pay a whole lot of attention to their extra-curricular activities. If a person comes through with a degree in comp-sci but his interests have nothing to do with computers, he’s going to have to kill in the interview or I’m not hiring. I’d rather take a guy with a 2-year diploma who spends his evenings writing code for fun or building things and solving problems for entertainment. For one thing, the latter guy is much more likely to stay up to date on a rapidly changing field. I agree. At another job I hired people with two year degrees. Back then people didn’t write code at home for fun, but you could tell which people were getting two year degrees because circumstances didn’t let them go to a four year college, and which got one because they’d never hack it at a four year college. One guy got a masters while working for us and got promoted to a level occupied by PhDs. We didn’t give him a test, either. > [@](#): > > So far, this hasn’t applied to people with degrees in computer or electrical engineering - it is still very hard to get an engineering degree without knowing the subject. But the other problem is that so many of them are just terrible at writing. They know the engineering, but if you ask them to prepare a report or give a presentation, be prepared to correct numerous spelling and grammar errors - assuming they are capable of writing even a few hundred words in service of a coherent point. The ones I hire have pretty much all written papers, and so have some writing experience, but it isn’t that important here. I wish we had thesis reviews, though. Seeing a presentation and seeing a candidate’s answers to questions is a really good indicator. > [@](#): > > I can’t imagine how much worse it is to sort out graduates with a liberal arts education. There are just so many ways you can work through those degrees while taking complete nonsense or watered down pablum. You CAN take good solid liberal arts courses and come out with a good education, but you can also get through by selecting for easy profs, or profs that are easy to game, or by taking courses that are thinly-disguised ideology and then just kissing ass. The liberal arts professors defending their field claim that a liberal arts education trains students to think deeply and logically (as if engineering didn’t.) I’ve never had to interview any, but I’d think that asking them to defend a thesis from a paper or something would be a good indicator. If they can’t think of any they’ve written about, they can be rejected right away. > [@](#): > > I once got an A in an English class where the final exam was an essay on a book I never had time to read (it was going to be on one of five books, and I gambled on having read four of the five - and lost). My prof was a strong feminist, so I just blathered on about how tough women had it in the era the book was set in, and voila. A on the paper, A in the class. I learned nothing, unless you count learning how to game the system. I don’t think you can condemn the whole field from that example, any more than you can condemn computer science because someone graduated not knowing recursion. In general though engineers and computer scientists can do liberal arts better than liberal arts majors can do computer science. If they say “hah,hah, I can’t do math and I can’t balance my checkbook” everyone thinks they are adorable. If we say, “hah hah, I can’t get through any book above a seventh grade reading level” they’d think we are trogs. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dispelling-the-notion-that-college-is-not-worth-it/687216.md?page=9)