Can we fix colleges?

[Bienenhalde]

(1) already outdated or (2) slow to adapt to the changing demands of industries.

In my experience that tends to be more applicable to sensationalist newspapers which moan about "micky mouse" arts and humanities subjects rather than universities being archaic; indeed it's exactly the fact that universities are being more modern which is causing the newspapers to get so mad. Mpffhrr iN mY dAy tHEy jUsT tAUGht LatIn...

Isn't it a serious concern that Latin and other classical studies are getting cut in favor of STEM and vocational classes, though?

[Major-Tom]

Standard philosophy wouldn't cover monetary theory, it's obvious he got his economic knowledge from some other source.

He has a philosophy degree, but that isn't what made him successful.

Isn't it? There are rather a lot of people who have studied monetary theory but not philosophy and who are nowhere near as rich as Soros, perhaps his knowledge of philosophy has given him an advantage.

I don't understand the back and forth here, the 50s were a different time. In the US, at least, I reckon it is difficult to get a high-paying financing job if you majored in philosophy.

Not that liberal arts degrees are irrelevant, they still hold their relevancy. We just ought to do a better job telling students in those programs, "look, here are the job paths you have with (x) degree, don't assume that you can just become a high-paid member of the intelligentsia out of college."

[Ethel mermania]

In my experience that tends to be more applicable to sensationalist newspapers which moan about "micky mouse" arts and humanities subjects rather than universities being archaic; indeed it's exactly the fact that universities are being more modern which is causing the newspapers to get so mad. Mpffhrr iN mY dAy tHEy jUsT tAUGht LatIn...

Isn't it a serious concern that Latin and other classical studies are getting cut in favor of STEM and vocational classes, though?

What is the purpose of college? Is the question we have to ask ourselves.

[Saiwania]

What is the purpose of college? Is the question we have to ask ourselves.

It certainly isn't to spend more money than what you get out of it for most people going, because its too expensive to be running up a giant balance you can't pay off quickly enough. You choose a stupid degree and you'll wind up in debt or paying interest for decades afterwards if someone screws up badly enough in picking which piece of paper to get.

It only makes sense to get whatever course of study you want from a college if you're already independently wealthy or if you have a grant/scholarship that is a full ride practically speaking, where all tuition costs are paid for by someone else.

[Ethel mermania]

What is the purpose of college? Is the question we have to ask ourselves.

It certainly isn't to spend more money than what you get out of it for most people going, because its too expensive to be running up a giant balance you can't pay off quickly enough. You choose a stupid degree and you'll wind up in debt or paying interest for decades afterwards if someone screws up badly enough in picking which piece of paper to get.

It only makes sense to get whatever course of study you want from a college if you're already independently wealthy or if you have a grant/scholarship that is a full ride practically speaking, where all tuition costs are paid for by someone else.

There is some truth to this, my God daughter and her friends have sociology degrees that cost them a fortune, and the jobs pay crap. she is going into another field that pays better, and her debt will be added on.

[Ifreann]

Isn't it? There are rather a lot of people who have studied monetary theory but not philosophy and who are nowhere near as rich as Soros, perhaps his knowledge of philosophy has given him an advantage.

I don't understand the back and forth here, the 50s were a different time. In the US, at least, I reckon it is difficult to get a high-paying financing job if you majored in philosophy.

It's perfectly simple, Saiwania asked about millionaires with philosophy degrees, and I checked and found that Soros studied philosophy.

Apparently people don't like the fact that there's a billionaire philosopher and want to make excuses for that not counting so they can carry on believing that the study of philosophy can never lead to getting rich.

[Kubra]

On the phil bit another thing to mention is as a pre-law degree phil undergrads perform better on the LSAT's, so in any given phil class at least a quarter are fixing to move on to law.

[Saiwania]

Apparently people don't like the fact that there's a billionaire philosopher and want to make excuses for that not counting so they can carry on believing that the study of philosophy can never lead to getting rich.

The point is that it doesn't more often than not. Where as if someone becomes a Doctor or Dentist, it is more of a sure bet because it is so hard to find inhabited places that don't need at least one medical professional if not more, and there is almost never any oversupply because most people can't do it. If someone of that background can't find immediate employment, they only have to move and its virtually guaranteed that they're protected from unemployment to a large extent, regardless of recession or boom.

Because if someone has a cavity, they have no choice but to find some way to get their bad tooth filled or pulled if they don't want the tooth decay to get worse or for themself to die of some infection that advanced long enough if its untreated.

[Ifreann]

Apparently people don't like the fact that there's a billionaire philosopher and want to make excuses for that not counting so they can carry on believing that the study of philosophy can never lead to getting rich.

The point is that it doesn't more often than not. Where as if someone becomes a Doctor or Dentist, it is more of a sure bet because it is so hard to find inhabited places that don't need at least one medical professional if not more. If someone of that background can't find immediate employment, they only have to move and its virtually guaranteed that they're protected from unemployment to a large extent, regardless of recession or boom.

Because if someone has a cavity, they have no choice but to find some way to get their bad tooth filled or pulled if they don't want the tooth decay to get worse or for themself to die of some infection that advanced long enough if its untreated.

My point is that you asked about a millionaire philosopher and I've showed you one.

[Ethel mermania]

The point is that it doesn't more often than not. Where as if someone becomes a Doctor or Dentist, it is more of a sure bet because it is so hard to find inhabited places that don't need at least one medical professional if not more. If someone of that background can't find immediate employment, they only have to move and its virtually guaranteed that they're protected from unemployment to a large extent, regardless of recession or boom.

Because if someone has a cavity, they have no choice but to find some way to get their bad tooth filled or pulled if they don't want the tooth decay to get worse or for themself to die of some infection that advanced long enough if its untreated.

My point is that you asked about a millionaire philosopher and I've showed you one.

Bill gates is a college dropout. You want to make the argument, dropping out of college is the way to big money?

[Genivaria]

Why would anyone that makes sound financial decisions decide to become a philosopher, social worker, or what have you- if there is no money in it? Or at least not enough to pay the tuition owed off in a timely fashion? It makes more sense that if the education is expensive as hell, that it is treated as an investment.

Because having knowledge is a good thing and lots of people already have money. University education was never designed to be a prerequisite for the entire population to get a job, it was an institution reserved for intellectual elites to be educated on matters related to the intellectual elites. Empirical sciences, engineering, technology, medicine, etc. being university subjects is pretty recent. Universities were created for the humanities, so it's pretty frustrating that STEM people are now trying to drive the humanities out of the institutions that the humanities created.

That is an a very interesting point, I've believed for a good while now that trade schools or apprenticeships should be a respected a valid alternative to college, I have a good friend who's career is very technical and he tells me that plumbers, electricians, carpenters and other craft industries are utterly DESPERATE for people because people just aren't training for those careers anymore.

[Saiwania]

That is an a very interesting point, I've believed for a good while now that trade schools or apprenticeships should be a respected a valid alternative to college, I have a good friend who's career is very technical and he tells me that plumbers, electricians, carpenters and other craft industries are utterly DESPERATE for people because people just aren't training for those careers anymore.

If there is enough money or job stability in it, would definitely go for it. Just that I can't if it is cost prohibitive in terms of getting in or if there are a lack of valid or good training options where I live that isn't some community college. Cheapest program I can find is at least $3,000 upfront.

[Ayytaly]

Abolish fraternities/sororities and blacklist every professor that has sex with their students.

[The Central Union of Nation States]

The problem that I see with colleges is that they fluff up degrees. What will a dental hygienist, nurse, engineer, or mechanist degree have anything to do with psychology (okay maybe the nurse needs this), sociology, communication course, or another class that has nothing to do with your degree forced upon you. It wastes time and money. As for the colleges themselves at the moment they are run like miniature governments. The money governments receive go to a few different place: salaries, student programs, dormitories, campus maintenance, library facilities and scholarships (I am probably missing a few). Those things take a lot to run however they are also milking students by throwing classes that they do not need into the mix.

A schools job is to teach what they need in their career field. For psychology they need the psychology course, for engineer they need lots of math and science, for medical.......do I really need to go on? Though when a student first enters college what do they need? An algebra course and an English course? You mean the things that they have been learning for the last x amount of years through primary, secondary, and high school. Then humanity courses. Then once you have your "prerequisites" then you can finally go learn about your career. If colleges just focused on the courses needed for a career then the cost of colleges would go way down.

Now I have noticed the issue with the payment and "free" college. If you have all levels of schooling paid for by the government then the colleges will continue doing what is above even more so than now, AND it will still have to be paid for by the person going to school as long as they are a citizen. The money will just come from taxes. Also there is the issue to deal with if the person attending is on a visa or not and if the "free" college is enacted one of three things could happen from what I can think of. One, We would keep the colleges open to other nations and other nationalities but the people of that country would pay for those students without any taxes reinforcing that so the taxes would be raised. Two, the colleges would not allow students from other countries to join (which is not in favor of the colleges because they would make money off of the people being taxed by accepting the out of country students); or three, those students would still have to pay for themselves. Either way "free" college is not free you are just asking the people who may or may not have used college to go and it would only encourage colleges to throw more classes that are not necessary into the mix.

Now I am not saying that the "free" college is not a solution but it should not be recognized as free and be recognized that there are people who do not want to pay for others going to colleges while trades and trade schools themselves are not supported nor have been ever discussed as being supported in this type of discussion from what I have seen. Though the systems put in place today are meant to gouge people out of money. New types of loans need to be put in place; ones that have no interest unless a certain amount of time has passed without a start of payment plan (maybe like a year or two after an earned degree and the plans can have different levels like a low, medium and high payment and you get boons if you do a high payment) and even then having a tier system revolving around time and the more you do not pay in a certain time there will be brackets of interest that you will be locked at. Now people say that this is indentured servitude however you are paying for someone else's services to you. You are paying for the things mentioned above. because those "loans" will go down in price if the unnecessary classes are cut. I have seen degrees that require almost a full 2 semesters of classes that have nothing to do with the degree That is what? a half a year's to a full year's tuition? PLUS the cost of those classes? That would be cutting those loans down by a large amount.

(If anyone has any articles, studies, ideas, etc. that they would like to share with me please do so. Human's make their beliefs off information and change when more information can be given.)

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Isn't it? There are rather a lot of people who have studied monetary theory but not philosophy and who are nowhere near as rich as Soros, perhaps his knowledge of philosophy has given him an advantage.

I don't understand the back and forth here, the 50s were a different time. In the US, at least, I reckon it is difficult to get a high-paying financing job if you majored in philosophy.

Not that liberal arts degrees are irrelevant, they still hold their relevancy. We just ought to do a better job telling students in those programs, "look, here are the job paths you have with (x) degree, don't assume that you can just become a high-paid member of the intelligentsia out of college."

I'm more of the bent: "do what you love best, because that's what you will most enjoy a career from. Unless you have the marks for Medicine, then do that and if it's too hard drop out and come back next year."

That does sound absurd, but it's what you could do with free college. And the Medicine example is chosen because nobody is going to get 5 or 6 years of Medicine on the taxpayer. Or Law, etc. But the first two years free, or if you drop out half way through the first year, transfer EdCreds for a year and a half of your second choice. Then you change your mind again, and want to become a nurse? Some units from your aborted Medicine course might help.

Actually, since I mentioned Nursing. The pay is alright but the hours are terrible, so removing the cost barrier of education to enter it can go on top of the 2 year entitlement everyone gets. So you've got your 2-year piece of paper for Consumer Design but still haven't found a passion for widgets? You can still change your mind and train up for free ... if you want to be a Nurse. Or how about a Teacher?

Letting students decide what they're interested in, is ultimately better for capitalism than trying to guide the students towards skills that will be in demand at first hire, two, three whatever years ahead. There is more flexibility and potential for new growth for capitalists in a labor market oversupplied in "useless" skills, than in a labor market oversupplied in the skills that were in demand a few years ago. And some students will still make their choice based on expected future earnings; let's not try and funnel them all that way.

Disclaimer: I had a free University education and somehow messed it up. I passed First Year. I passed Second Year (pips were squeaked). Problem being, it was a 3-year BSc degree, I had a mental health crisis and gave it up. Worse? I later found out that any time in the next 10 years, I could have taken Third Year with no penalty. I just didn't know that. So are fools made.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Abolish fraternities/sororities and blacklist every professor that has sex with their students.

I have no problem with this. "A lay for an A" should probably be illegal actually.

[Ayytaly]

Abolish fraternities/sororities and blacklist every professor that has sex with their students.

I have no problem with this. "A lay for an A" should probably be illegal actually.

Not to mention that it contradicts the purpose of what a college/university is. If you want to party, either graduate, rent a pub, or drop out and party until you're out of money.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

I have no problem with this. "A lay for an A" should probably be illegal actually.

Not to mention that it contradicts the purpose of what a college/university is. If you want to party, either graduate, rent a pub, or drop out and party until you're out of money.

Er, I don't agree with that so much. Sex is not "partying" in fact sufficient sex is good for your health and helps you sleep.

I'm guessing you're a Muslim who doesn't drink? You don't need to rent a pub, it's a "public house". You just walk right in. When it's open of course. Here there's a law that pubs have to serve you water (tap water) if you walk in and ask for it, and it's free. I wish I could boast, but apparently that law came from England.

No, I see "A lay for an A" as plain bribery. It's no better than going to the prof's office on some pretext, and laying some cash on their desk. And back to you, wouldn't that be a bit like prostitution?

[Ayytaly]

Not to mention that it contradicts the purpose of what a college/university is. If you want to party, either graduate, rent a pub, or drop out and party until you're out of money.

Er, I don't agree with that so much. Sex is not "partying" in fact sufficient sex is good for your health and helps you sleep.

I'm guessing you're a Muslim who doesn't drink? You don't need to rent a pub, it's a "public house". You just walk right in. When it's open of course. Here there's a law that pubs have to serve you water (tap water) if you walk in and ask for it, and it's free. I wish I could boast, but apparently that law came from England.

No, I see "A lay for an A" as plain bribery. It's no better than going to the prof's office on some pretext, and laying some cash on their desk. And back to you, wouldn't that be a bit like prostitution?

Sex causes the penis to use blood that would otherwise carry oxygen to the brain. Loss of oxygen means loss of cerebral efficiency.

Also, grades over AIDS.

P.S. What do you have against Muslims to assume I'm one?