Education is a farce.

bzzzzt!

Absolutely, entirely, unequivocally, (and in every other way), Wrong!

I am willing to grant that some employers put too much emphasis on hiring people with letters after their names rather than seeking people who are qualified for their jobs,
However,
In every job I have ever had, the best employees were the ones who had the most unrelated experience prior to their hiring. I am not saying that experience in the particular field is not a plus, it certainly is. But in addition, the better employees have additional experiences beyond that. College provides that “extra” experience without having to go hold down seven extra jobs in four years.

The worst employees I have encountered were those Computer Science graduates who had managed to find four year trade schools where they could take almost nothing but Computer Science throughout their school career. They could describe aspects of the operating system that I did not know existed, but they could not deliver a simple report to a user without having their hands held all the way through. Or they would deliver exactly what the user ordered without ever finding out what the user needed. (And I am talking about ones that I met who had been out of school for several years.)

It is not even being able to think outside the box (which college only gives the few who look for it, anyway). It is the issue of dealing with multiple conflicting demands simultaneously, (like having four profs each assign 120 pages of reading per night), of “reading” the boss or the customer to provide the best work that will be acceptable, (like having papers due to one prof who demands that the college stylebook be revered above Scripture and another prof who will throw anything from the college stylebook in the trash and demand that all work follow the Chicago Manual of Style), all the while discovering that one prof (boss) will take off points for style of clothing while another prof (supervisor) will reduce one’s grade for not using (or for using) PC language.

In the midst of all this valuable preparation for how the real world acts, you get to lounge around reading Shakespeare, Moliere, Aeschylus, Milton, and a hundred authors that you will never have the time to read once you’re out.
Now, the joke that has been making the rounds in recent years has an all too real sting to it:
Q. “What’s the most important thing to learn in college?”
A. “How to say ‘Would you like fries with that?’”

What the degree says to an employer, however, is that the individual had the gumption to put in four years (and a lot of money), persevering through all kinds of bullshit, and putting in enough effort to get decent grades. The potential employee, then, is rather less likely to be a quitter, they are more likely to be able to exchange information without confusing themselves or their correspondent, they are less likely to be flummoxed by new words or new meanings to old words. Are any of these things absolute? Of course, not. There are lots of kids who find ways to get through school on a bluff. But college still acts like a filter to a certain number of twits, so employers still like to see it on the resumé.

On the other hand, for a great many careers, there are ways to snag summer intern positions that will let one find out whether that career is “right” for the individual while adding actual “experience” to the resumé.

In my positions that I have held I have oftentimes earned more than anyone else in a similar position with similar qualifications that DID go to college. I knew more than they did as a whole and could learn most of what they knew that I didn’t rather quickly and I am 23 about the age you get OUT of college. College doesn’t prepare you that well, if you are going to college for work experience then that’s a big mistake. That’s what trade schools are for.

Erek

What skill does it show other then the ability to get a degree? The fact that someone has a BA doesn’t show me their good an communication, working towards deadlines, working with others, or anything else that a high school dimploma wouldn’t show. There’s only three reasons why I can think anyone would want a BA.

  1. It will assist them in their long term career/education goals.

  2. They simply want the education for the sake of education.

  3. They simply want a degree because employers look for it.

I personally don’t find anything wrong with getting a degree for any of these reasons. I don’t find a BA to be a bad thing or a silly thing to get. I do think it is rather silly to put such a higher premium on a piece of paper that has little to do with whatever occupation one is going into.

Marc

I think most colleges offer internship programs. If a student doesn’t take advantage of that then that’s his fault. You can get work experience while in college in the field related to your major.

Marc

Ah yes…the quotation that so many love, and that is such utter nonsense; a shining example of modern American anti-intellectualism.

I’m a physics graduate student. If you had handed me my top bookshelf four years ago, do you honestly think that I would have come away with knowledge equivalent to a bachelor’s degree in physics?

Learning at this level does not come out of a book; that’s just a reference and perhaps an overview. It doesn’t come much out of lectures, either. The way we learn is to stand around with a couple other other grad students in someone’s office tossing out ideas and throwing equations up on the board, and every now and then checking with other people down the hall, until someone makes a breakthrough on the problem we’re working on. There are few of us who would survive long in this field on our own.

It’s similar for the freshman physics class I’m TAing this semester. If you try to tell me that my students could all learn this material from reading the textbook, I will (based on their homeworks, quizzes, and conversations with me) laugh at you. They are indeed supposed to read the book; then they hear it again from the professor in a different way, and then they play with the ideas in the lab, and then they work with each other in groups, with me around to provide yet another perspective if needed and maybe a nudge in the right direction. Collaborative learning is the key to higher education, and you should have noticed this unless you spent all four years in that drunken haze or majored in something that required nothing but rote memorization.

$1.50 in late fees, my ass.

I am sorry to report that I also agree with this assessment. I work around some very technically bright people. They could go on at great length about the highly sophisticated technologies in which they specialize. But ask them to put together a business letter and in a few minutes, they’ll come back with a question such as “how do you spell ‘business’?”

And this is not an isolated incident. All the jobs I’ve ever had have required a narrow field of technical training, and that’s exactly how the people I worked with were trained. Ask them to step outside of their field of specialization for a moment, and they become timid and uncertain.

Luckily, I saw the handwriting on the wall while I was in school. Sure, I was getting in depth physical sciences (geared in the direction of electrical engineering, but without the degree) but I felt lacking in other areas. I wanted to know how to properly compose a letter, for example. I knew I would need a vocabulary outside of the technical arena if I wanted to be seen as anything other than a geek. I had the presence of mind to take it upon myself to do the “rounding-out” of my education that I knew I would be missing from college.

Having said that, there is something romantically old fashioned about the old school (har!) ways of days gone by where a large majority of people were schooled as tradesmen. You learned the shoe repair (or whatever) business from dad and that would put the food on your family’s table. College was, as the fair porpentine suggested, for the few. But that has probably been selected against (a la Darwin) because of the highly transitional workforce we have to deal with today. Being highly but narrowly skilled is putting all of your eggs in one basket.

Well hopefully, after five or ten years (or however many years it takes one to become an unsatisfied electrician) you will have picked up a fair amount of real world experience in the form of customer interaction, handling invoices, managing apprentices, the “multiple conflicting demands” to which tomndebb alluded, and most importantly office politics (do they offer that in college? ;)) But hopefully you’ve begun to sense your lack of job satisfaction before it became unbearable & took steps to acquire whatever additional education necessary to step into a field you might like better.

I did not go to college, and I will be the first to admit that there are gaps in my understanding of many things. But I am doing my best to fill in those gaps, be they in history, advanced basket weaving theory or Shakespeare. In my mind, this is an attempt to achieve my own version of a college education while simultaneously being gainfully employed and not having judgement passed on me by pious college TAs. Of course, all of this hinges upon my desire to be a better person. Those who lack such desires may be better off with the specter of “go to college or be a failure” hanging over their heads.

Whoops! Nothing against TAs, Phil! I’m sure you’ll be a great one!

In response to SpoilerVirgin:

Looking back on my college experience, I can honestly say I fucked it up.

Dumb thing #1: I played college football, thus eliminating every ounce of “free time” I may have used for studying or marketing internships (yes, during the summer too).
Dumb thing #2: I went to a college that was fairly isolated in the country… the opportunity for internships in the [[chuckle]] “off-season” was narrow.
Dumb thing #3: I was hell-bent on graduating ASAP, so I loaded up on classes and graduated in 4 years.
Dumb thing #4: I started off as an English major. I was able to transfer, and turn that into Journalism/PR luckily, but this did limit my experience (though I did have reasonable experience upon graduation)
Dumb thing #5: I honestly believed a college education would “earn” me at least a decent entry-level position in the workforce. Yes, I can say with certainty that it is sold that way. “Go to college, Acco… it’s the ticket to a better life.” This was pounded into my head for years, by every one of my counselors, teachers, and parents, too. (They didn’t go to college, so it was very important that Acco did.)

Sorry about all the background. I realize now that I may have to eventually go back to school to get further, specialized education.

I can remember the lean months after graduation when I was searching for a job and looking at the new English majors going to their humanities classes… and I wanted to take them by the shoulders and shake some sense into them and say “God, man! Save yourself, think of the job prospects! No one will pay you to sit in a dusty room and recite Shakespeare! You need job skills!”

But they’ll find out the hard way, just like I did.

But given the number of times the average person changes careers, is it really worth it to pour four years of time, effort, and money into preparation for a career that could easily lead to disappointment?

Fact is, 18 year olds don’t know shit about what they want to do with their lives, and the same goes for 22 year olds. Four years of technical education can very easily lead to entrapment in a disliked career, resentment, and bitter disappointment.

I am not suggesting that everyone pursue general educations at the expense of specialized ones. My education, though in both the humanities and in the social sciences, is highly specialized. I am claiming that given the propensity for people of my age and of my generation to change careers often due to the conditions of today’s job market, it seems that a general education is every bit as useful as a trade education, especially if students take advantage of internship opportunities along the way.

I’m one year out of an ivy league school and am already on my second job. Three months ago I was working for a political nonprofit, now I’m at a law firm, doing completely different work. I contend that while my education has absolutely nothing to do with the work I am doing, it has benefitted me enormously in a professional capacity.

As several posters have already mentioned, you take from education what you put in. Four years of trade school spent in a drunken haze is no better than four years at a liberal arts college spent in the same condition.

And it is. The personal benefits of education require no enumeration. You might have to postpone your financial gratification, but if you work at it, it will come.

My first year out of school I barely squeaked by. One year later, suffice to say, I am living rather comfortably.

[sub]Once I get those bills paid off, that is…[/sub]

For those posting that it’s the general knowledge that you obtain in college that helps you get a job, and when you lose that job to a better trained individual, helps you land a new one…save it. Listen to me closely…SAVE IT.

Put “general knowledge of life” in the technical skills section of your resume. Best of luck.

Or better yet, put it in “Education.” They never look there.
And that’s my point. I went to school for four years. 90% of what I learned, although life enriching, was useless in the job market. And the kicker? They didn’t even check up on it! I could have lied about college altogether! So again, what was I led to believe I was paying for, and what did I get?

If education isn’t a farce, it’s a racket.

And for the post on high school education…don’t even get me started.

How insulting is it to try as hard as I did in college only to have my employer NOT check my transcripts, or even ask to see my diploma? It’s degrading. And I have a great job with a great company. But I could have got it without the four years of “problem-solving skills.”

A woman received an undergraduate degree from my school (a highly reputable one, I might add) without ever having been taught by anyone higher than a GRAD STUDENT.

No, I’m positive that education is a racket.
Unless it’s purpose is to produce drones.
Which it does well.
Why do we tolerate our lives?
And for those that are happy, congratulations. I’m happy too.

But why do we tolerate being ripped off?

I paid for a worthless education to get a job so that I can be taxed before I get my paycheck, taxed on what I buy, taxed on what I made during the year, and taxed on the profits of my investments.

I just don’t feel lately that I’m living my life for me.

And yeah, I could just call it “the way things are” but I don’t want to.

Does anyone have the answer? Does anyone remember the question?

For those posting that it’s the general knowledge that you obtain in college that helps you get a job, and when you lose that job to a better trained individual, helps you land a new one…save it. Listen to me closely…SAVE IT.

Put “general knowledge of life” in the technical skills section of your resume. Best of luck.

Or better yet, put it in “Education.” They never look there.
And that’s my point. I went to school for four years. 90% of what I learned, although life enriching,was useless in the job market. And the kicker? They didn’t even check up on it! I could have lied about college altogether! So again, what was I led to believe I was paying for, and what did I get?

If education isn’t a farce, it’s a racket.

And for the post on high school education…don’t even get me started.

How insulting is it to try as hard as I did in college only to have my employer NOT check my transcripts, or even ask to see my diploma? It’s degrading. And I have a great job with a great company. But I could have got it without the four years of “problem-solving skills.”

A woman received an undergraduate degree from my school (a highly reputable one, I might add)without ever having been taught by anyone higher than a GRAD STUDENT.

No, I’m positive that education is a racket.

Unless it’s purpose is to produce drones.
Which it does well.
Why do we tolerate our lives?
And for those that are happy, congratulations. I’m happy too.

But why do we tolerate being ripped off?

I paid for a worthless education to get a job so that I can be taxed before I get my paycheck,taxed on what I buy, taxed on what I made during the year, and taxed on the profits of my investments.

I just don’t feel lately that I’m living my life for me.

And yeah, I could just call it “the way things are” but I don’t want to.

Does anyone have the answer? Does anyone remember the question?

This is a misplaced post, intended for the education is a farce thread…apologies.

You just wrote your own answer.

What racket? There’s something wrong with enriching your life? Worth every penny, if you ask me ( actually I believe most state schools, at least, should be free - But that’s a side issue ). I use very little of what I learned at school at my job. I still think college was absolutely worth it.

An awfully sweeping statement. Do you consider yourself a drone? What reform would you suggest that would make higher education less prone to this problem you see?

Glad to hear it :slight_smile: . Though your first line seems at odds with the last.

I don’t think I was :slight_smile: .

I doubt it, since your presumed question is so deeply rooted in very personal perceptions and feelings.

  • Tamerlane

Thank you for formulating an argument by pulling quotes out of context. Let me help you understand:

I went to school to get CAREER training.

And althought I did apprecaite ALL that I learned,

I didn’t get what I PAID for.

If general skills are valued so highly by several of you posters, then why do universities specify in so many fields.

I didn’t go to school to learn when to press the flashing button and pull the lever. Nothing that specific.

But each profession has universal standards that all practitioners should know.

What is my answer to the answer to the education problem I see? I don’t know.

What I feel is that academia cannot keep up with the advancements of the job market, so it doesn’t even try.

Tell me this:

In our technological age, why are we still so dependent on the book and the chalkboard? These are tools from the pre-colonial period.

Now before you say it’s because they’re still useful, I’m not saying they’re not. But still the most popular educating tools?

I believe that’s why students, on average, are slipping.

Education can’t keep up with the real world.

Shakespeare isn’t going anywhere, and it isn’t changing, which makes it easier to teach than material that would make me viable in the world.

Again I reiterate, a liberal arts education is fantastic. I think it produces well-rounded people. But teach me career skills too. That’s all I asked for. Why aren’t colleges preparing students for the job market. And don’t tell me that’s not what colleges are for. Maybe they weren’t then, but they surely are now.

Doggus: My apologies for excerpting points - I certainly didn’t intend to twist your words. I guess what I was trying to do was use your words to make an argument for MY philosophy. Which perhaps wasn’t such a bright idea :wink: .

I suppose it’s just that I have a difficult time relating, because I don’t regard college, overall as primarily a place to get specific job training ( they’re plenty of exceptions, certainly ) and never have. I always feel it sad when people go to school and major in a subject that they had absolutely no intellectual interest in, only to land a job. Seems to be defeating what I feel the purpose of going school is all about. Not saying you’re in that category, of course, because I wouldn’t know. I’m at least glad you enjoyed your experience.

Frankly, I’d be mildly upset if colleges started focusing much more heavily on specific job training than they do, so I guess we are at philosophical loggerheads anyway :slight_smile: . What you want schools to do and what I want them to do, seem to be at least a little different ( That’s a heavily qualified statement though - No doubt we’d agree on some specific instances ).

But I’ll fall back on my point ( and steal one of yours again :wink: ), that regardless of my feelings on the subject, I don’t think it possible for schools to stay cutting edge in terms of job skills, for the simple reason that most ( or many ) jobs require myriad workplace-specific skills that would be an actual impediment if taught to someone that wouldn’t need that specific set.

So for instance, they do offer a four-year university degree in my blue-collar field. It’s a heavily vocational degree, but nonetheless, there is no way that someone with one could walk onto my jobsite and do the job without extensive training. There are few ( or no ) “textbook” situations at any similar facility I’ve seen. Does that mean that they should be teaching more specific skills on how to deal with my particular work situation? Nope. Because they just aren’t applicable ( except in the broad theoretical sense in which they are already taught ) elsewhere.

I’ll argue your materials point as well, but that’s even more IMHO :slight_smile: . For the record I still think “real books” are the most efficient way to go, for me at least, as I loathe reading large blocks of text off of computer screens or printed hardcopy. Blackboards I’d come closer to agreeing with you - I do think projected computer screens are superior in most pre-prepared usages. But blackboards still are quicker and more flexible for spur of the moment sketching and whatnot.

  • Tamerlane

Doggus: The other question is - If you felt that your college didn’t do an adequate job of teaching you basic skills, how much of that was the specific school or department? Maybe you did get screwed in your education. Plenty of lousy programs out there. But how much of that do you think is the educational system in general and how much is it the fault of a small sub-section of it?

I thought my ( very unremarkable in terms of national prestige ) university did a fine job in teaching most basic bodies of knowledges in a variety of specific fields ( mostly biology and history of various stripes ). It certainly had its weak points though ( I hear the math department was much derided ).

  • Tamerlane

Doggus: Oops! One more in the vein of the post above:

Some schools are “known” by experts in a particular field to be much more theoretical vs. applied in that field than others. Could it be you went to a well-respected program that because of the particular bent of the faculty in the department happened to stress theory, rather than application? If so. I agree that programs should be more explicit about explainibg such things to incoming freshman, who would have no way of knowing better. However, I wouldn’t necessarily agree that the focus should be forcefully shifted.

  • Tamerlane

Doggus, it sounds like the problem isn’t with school. It sounds like the problem is with you… you picked the wrong school or the wrong program.

Jeez, maybe you should have done a little research before you committed to a college.

Hrmph. I am obviously incapable of organizing my thoughts today. Must be time to go to bed.

Doggus: S’okay - Your complaints aren’t about specifity per se ( damn reading comprehension problems this morning, as well ), but rather what you consider basic job skills that are left wanting. So what basic job skills do you think are implied by a Liberal Arts degree, that you would have liked to receive, but didn’t?

Too me that degree title implies a generalized ( more or less ) study of literature and social sciences. Basic skills ( as opposed to specific knowledges ) I would expect to be learn as part of that degree would be all of those things that would go into making you functionally literate ( i.e. reading comprehension, a variety of writing skills, etc. ). That’s about it, far as I can see. Computer skills, for example, certainly don’t fall under the purview of the Liberal Arts. Rather those would ( should ) come as elective courses.

I do agree something that basic, in this day and age, should be a requirement as part of a degree’s “general education” requirement. I imagine in many universities that is increasingly the case. Is that the sort of thing you are arguing for? Because your argument ( which I’m perhaps I’m misinterpreting ) that understanding Shakespeare is an obsolete skill doesn’t really make sense to me. That’s what Liberal Arts degrees are for - To learn Shakespeare ( or at least knowledge of that type ). If you’re saying that there should be a “default degree” that people can take just to learn a variety of basic job skills, I’d say okay, maybe - But at the very least they shouldn’t call it “Liberal Arts”, which to me implies nothing of the sort :slight_smile: .

  • Tamerlane