I like the European tradition (also common here in Australia) of a "gap year." Send the child abroad and get educated in different cultures, different ways of living. Backpacking, living dangerously (you still get the parties!), picking fruit, learning how to function in a society very different to what they know. Then, if they are interested in education, and have a drive to succeed at creating something in their lives - it is more real, realizable, and adds meaning to their lives.
The college environment was a really convenient step into structured adulthood, and I remain to this day reticent to just abandon it, but I think that the decision to attend a college needs to be made on the basis of the goal that it's fulfilling.
I got an engineering degree to do a style of technical work it would be quite difficult to teach on the job without a dedicated, corporate education system. I think if you want to be an engineer, a physicist, a chemist, a surgeon, you need to pick up a lot of specific knowledge, and a university is about the only place packaging that knowledge, right now.
Oh, how I wish they'd drop the 'general education' requirements and let students pick the classes they'd like to add to their focus, as they have time and interest, but that's a relatively minor complaint.
I think that, minus a focused drive to a profession that has a specific and substantial body of knowledge that you must master, it's possible that universities ought to be something pursued as a hobby while building an independent life down other channels. I would love to go back and take some history classes and some economics classes at some point, and may yet do it, but I'm not going to let those interests get in the way of the requirements of adult life.
At the most, university ought to be a bridge to independent adulthood, not a shield from it.
I'm a fan of general ed. While it is vital to be awesome in your specialty - it is also vital to be able to relate to people, history, language (this doesn't mean 'gender studies' or the other fluffy stuff). My father encouraged me to take remedial stuff - like typing, 10-key, writing, history, music, film, literature - which greatly improved my success in the workplace (accounting, also a technical specialty, though not as demanding as engineering!), as well as exposing me to things (I'm thinking about that film class) I would never have considered, and expanding my inner landscape.
I also agree that there are vital lessons to be learned at University. Living away from home for the first time - in a safe, structured environment where food is provided (dorms) and you learn to share your space with strangers. Learning how to organise your time without Mom around to help. SHOWING UP (this is a big lesson). DOING THE WORK (the next big lesson). Realising that you are no longer at the top of your class, and have to work to make it happen.
Australia doesn't do boarding/dorms at University so much, and I think they are worse off for it.
I agree - University as a bridge, not a shield. Too many snowflakes aren't dealing with the lessons in my second paragraph - so maybe University is wasted on them?
Here's what my father would object to (even though he was a Business PhD) - is the businessifying of education. He came from deep poverty and shame about that poverty. For him, education was opportunity, and this profit motive and greed will lock out people like him, who worked his way through 3 degrees in the 50's and 60's (yeah, no grants, no loans).
I actually very much agree with you on the *value* of taking diverse classes. Some of the history classes I took were packed with learning I draw on to this day.
But they didn't contribute to my graduation. The 'general ed' classes that I was *required* to take were things like 'persuasive communication', wherein I learned almost nothing. I was forced to take something like 24 credit hours of non-voluntary 'general education' courses - two full semesters - that I got to pick off a list. Some of them weren't so bad, but it doesn't change that I might have picked things that were much more interesting and useful for me, if I'd had chance.
Emphasize the value of diverse coursework at every opportunity, but stop making *your* (not you, but the University's) priorities central to that diversity. Requiring a full year of non-voluntary, non-productive coursework in order to get a technical degree is extortion.
Some of the classes that affected me outside of my field: Film, Psychology in Literature, The Bible As Literature, Shakespeare I (particularly gnarly prof, that I had to *prove* myself to), Biology, Psychology, Speech, Music Appreciation, Art History.
These helped me with public speaking, which I now do regularly. They broadened my horizons, so that I'm not the little parochial small-town girl that I was. They taught me different ways to learn. They caused me to question my beliefs (debate was encouraged, questions were essential!).
But again, my era was in the early 80's.
Now that it's an expensive diploma mill - I see your point. I wouldn't be surprised if "Diversity studies" is on that list.
When I was at Uni, of course we had mates who were taking the most useless courses they could find. Daddy was paying, or college was cheap, or they were on PELL or other easy arrangements - and I think my tuition was $1700 a term. That's not out of reach, like it is now.
Oh, aren't I the lucky one? I just checked tuition at the alma mater, and it's "only" $5200 a term. Only 3x more (not like 10x or more I've read about here). But there are lots of added fees-per-credit-hour specialties that didn't exist before. Like STEM, medical & nursing.
Mine is a little over $6500 a semester, now, but living on campus is probably that again.
I graduated in the mid-naughts, and my problem isn't entirely that the elective classes were 100% useless as that there was a required list from which to pick. All of my best classes, history and creative writing most notably, were ones I took out of my own initiative. There are *lots* of really useful classes to go take. The "core education" classes are a curated list, and requiring people to take a curated list of classes in order to secure a diploma in an unrelated major - as well-meaning as that may be - remains extortion in my mind.
When I did the calculation, I didn't just look at the dollar costs of *being* there, but also the opportunity costs of *not* being gainfully employed at something else. A BS in a productive field ought to be worth $60-70k a year, if I'm not mistaken, and we're taking that away so that people can take an extra anthropology class selected by the university as *important*. I would much rather see universities get people through as efficiently as possible, and then have a really flexible 'continuing education' path to allow people to opt themselves in to classes they have particular interest in. Those who have the time and space to do it can take whatever they want, once they're enrolled as undergraduates, and they can take four or five years to graduate, if they so choose. Happy for them. But forcing that on everyone is silliness.
There are any number of others. I found an article from career builder that listed a bunch of others, as well, but they had salaries listed that were dubious, to me, as truly first-year-out-of-college salaries.
I can personally vouch for the numbers for EE/ME/Software, and I've seen much *higher* numbers for mining. For new recruits, not in Silicon Valley (where the salaries are much higher yet).
When I say "productive field", I mean (and without intending to demean the value of humanities: the careerbuilder site had a number of managerial and social careers that they *said* start at $100k+) a field where they produce a specific family of products and where the significant collection of knowledge you bring out of university is directly related to that specific family of products.
A software engineer with 5 years experience, and working in San Francisco is making $130k a year. Every year that you delay graduation is a year of salary that you don't get, and those years are *expensive*.
The private university I went to now runs $75k / year with room and board. State universities here around $30k. No way to justify spending $180k more for similar educations. The $120k state school cost itself is hard to justify.
My wife and me are trying to figure out what the right decision is regarding encouraging our children to attend university.
Every time we contribute to their 529's we have more reservations.
Hard because both of us come from poverty, but have 2 degrees each.
I'm not sure it's worth it anymore. My alma mater is literally 20X more for tuition than it was my freshman year in 88'.
I'm so disappointed. They used to teach you how to think. Now it's what to think.
Hard decision. Although, from my own experience, given today's quality of education, I'd probably just went straight to hustling at 18.
Although the partying was fun!...;)
I like the European tradition (also common here in Australia) of a "gap year." Send the child abroad and get educated in different cultures, different ways of living. Backpacking, living dangerously (you still get the parties!), picking fruit, learning how to function in a society very different to what they know. Then, if they are interested in education, and have a drive to succeed at creating something in their lives - it is more real, realizable, and adds meaning to their lives.
The college environment was a really convenient step into structured adulthood, and I remain to this day reticent to just abandon it, but I think that the decision to attend a college needs to be made on the basis of the goal that it's fulfilling.
I got an engineering degree to do a style of technical work it would be quite difficult to teach on the job without a dedicated, corporate education system. I think if you want to be an engineer, a physicist, a chemist, a surgeon, you need to pick up a lot of specific knowledge, and a university is about the only place packaging that knowledge, right now.
Oh, how I wish they'd drop the 'general education' requirements and let students pick the classes they'd like to add to their focus, as they have time and interest, but that's a relatively minor complaint.
I think that, minus a focused drive to a profession that has a specific and substantial body of knowledge that you must master, it's possible that universities ought to be something pursued as a hobby while building an independent life down other channels. I would love to go back and take some history classes and some economics classes at some point, and may yet do it, but I'm not going to let those interests get in the way of the requirements of adult life.
At the most, university ought to be a bridge to independent adulthood, not a shield from it.
I'm a fan of general ed. While it is vital to be awesome in your specialty - it is also vital to be able to relate to people, history, language (this doesn't mean 'gender studies' or the other fluffy stuff). My father encouraged me to take remedial stuff - like typing, 10-key, writing, history, music, film, literature - which greatly improved my success in the workplace (accounting, also a technical specialty, though not as demanding as engineering!), as well as exposing me to things (I'm thinking about that film class) I would never have considered, and expanding my inner landscape.
I also agree that there are vital lessons to be learned at University. Living away from home for the first time - in a safe, structured environment where food is provided (dorms) and you learn to share your space with strangers. Learning how to organise your time without Mom around to help. SHOWING UP (this is a big lesson). DOING THE WORK (the next big lesson). Realising that you are no longer at the top of your class, and have to work to make it happen.
Australia doesn't do boarding/dorms at University so much, and I think they are worse off for it.
I agree - University as a bridge, not a shield. Too many snowflakes aren't dealing with the lessons in my second paragraph - so maybe University is wasted on them?
Here's what my father would object to (even though he was a Business PhD) - is the businessifying of education. He came from deep poverty and shame about that poverty. For him, education was opportunity, and this profit motive and greed will lock out people like him, who worked his way through 3 degrees in the 50's and 60's (yeah, no grants, no loans).
Bernie has a point.
I actually very much agree with you on the *value* of taking diverse classes. Some of the history classes I took were packed with learning I draw on to this day.
But they didn't contribute to my graduation. The 'general ed' classes that I was *required* to take were things like 'persuasive communication', wherein I learned almost nothing. I was forced to take something like 24 credit hours of non-voluntary 'general education' courses - two full semesters - that I got to pick off a list. Some of them weren't so bad, but it doesn't change that I might have picked things that were much more interesting and useful for me, if I'd had chance.
Emphasize the value of diverse coursework at every opportunity, but stop making *your* (not you, but the University's) priorities central to that diversity. Requiring a full year of non-voluntary, non-productive coursework in order to get a technical degree is extortion.
May I have the era of your education please?
Some of the classes that affected me outside of my field: Film, Psychology in Literature, The Bible As Literature, Shakespeare I (particularly gnarly prof, that I had to *prove* myself to), Biology, Psychology, Speech, Music Appreciation, Art History.
These helped me with public speaking, which I now do regularly. They broadened my horizons, so that I'm not the little parochial small-town girl that I was. They taught me different ways to learn. They caused me to question my beliefs (debate was encouraged, questions were essential!).
But again, my era was in the early 80's.
Now that it's an expensive diploma mill - I see your point. I wouldn't be surprised if "Diversity studies" is on that list.
When I was at Uni, of course we had mates who were taking the most useless courses they could find. Daddy was paying, or college was cheap, or they were on PELL or other easy arrangements - and I think my tuition was $1700 a term. That's not out of reach, like it is now.
Bernie has a point.
Oh, aren't I the lucky one? I just checked tuition at the alma mater, and it's "only" $5200 a term. Only 3x more (not like 10x or more I've read about here). But there are lots of added fees-per-credit-hour specialties that didn't exist before. Like STEM, medical & nursing.
Mine is a little over $6500 a semester, now, but living on campus is probably that again.
I graduated in the mid-naughts, and my problem isn't entirely that the elective classes were 100% useless as that there was a required list from which to pick. All of my best classes, history and creative writing most notably, were ones I took out of my own initiative. There are *lots* of really useful classes to go take. The "core education" classes are a curated list, and requiring people to take a curated list of classes in order to secure a diploma in an unrelated major - as well-meaning as that may be - remains extortion in my mind.
When I did the calculation, I didn't just look at the dollar costs of *being* there, but also the opportunity costs of *not* being gainfully employed at something else. A BS in a productive field ought to be worth $60-70k a year, if I'm not mistaken, and we're taking that away so that people can take an extra anthropology class selected by the university as *important*. I would much rather see universities get people through as efficiently as possible, and then have a really flexible 'continuing education' path to allow people to opt themselves in to classes they have particular interest in. Those who have the time and space to do it can take whatever they want, once they're enrolled as undergraduates, and they can take four or five years to graduate, if they so choose. Happy for them. But forcing that on everyone is silliness.
"A BS in a productive field ought to be worth $60-70k a year,"
The most I ever made in my career was about $35k/year. I would have had to become a sociopath to make more than that.
I don't know too many B.S. who make $60k. I do however, know lots of PhDs who are baristas and janitors.
The market doesn't support what the Unis are churning out. It's a mill.
So you are talking about University RIGHT NOW? Not in an era of the past?
From Payscale:
Electrical Engineering: $70k
Chemical Engineering: $70k
Software Engineering: $80k
Mining Engineer: $65k
Organic Chemist: $60k
Physicist: $70k
Mechanical Engineer: $65k
RN: $60k
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary/6fd28da9/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary/4fd947de/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Chemical_Engineer/Salary/41d70ecb/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Chemical_Engineer/Salary/41d70ecb/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Organic_Chemist/Salary/c9a46a0e/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Physicist/Salary/c3f2077f/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Mechanical_Engineer/Salary/5b1f9aef/Entry-Level
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Registered_Nurse_(RN)/Hourly_Rate/b6142914/Entry-Level
There are any number of others. I found an article from career builder that listed a bunch of others, as well, but they had salaries listed that were dubious, to me, as truly first-year-out-of-college salaries.
I can personally vouch for the numbers for EE/ME/Software, and I've seen much *higher* numbers for mining. For new recruits, not in Silicon Valley (where the salaries are much higher yet).
When I say "productive field", I mean (and without intending to demean the value of humanities: the careerbuilder site had a number of managerial and social careers that they *said* start at $100k+) a field where they produce a specific family of products and where the significant collection of knowledge you bring out of university is directly related to that specific family of products.
A software engineer with 5 years experience, and working in San Francisco is making $130k a year. Every year that you delay graduation is a year of salary that you don't get, and those years are *expensive*.
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary/a5e48575/San-Francisco-CA
And you pay more for that engineering degree (as evidenced by the STEM fees I found at my alma mater)!!!!!
Too many B.S. are worth far less. Schoolteacher (in my former home state) averages about $28,800.
Well said. Your points are precisely why we're torn.
And the "social" aspect. Which I think helped me in life just as much as the education itself.
"My alma mater is literally 20X more for tuition than it was my freshman year in 88'."
Whoa!! 😲
I should check out my own school and see how the tuition today compares to when I went there.
I think you'll be surprised. Although it has been roughly 35 years since I started college
The private university I went to now runs $75k / year with room and board. State universities here around $30k. No way to justify spending $180k more for similar educations. The $120k state school cost itself is hard to justify.