There are myriad problems with this article (how many people making $16k a year save 5% of their income?).
Still, it touches on something I've long said about higher education - we value the achievement of getting a degree far more than the knowledge gained in its pursuit. We're a big, dumb country that loves reaching quantifiable milestones. We don't want to "learn," we want to demonstrate that we've worked toward a goal. It doesn't matter if I can't write a cogent paragraph or reduce a fraction to its lowest common denominator, I have a high school diploma and a college degree. I've achieved something. And as this article points out, everything (most importantly the job market) is built around rewarding the achievement more than the knowledge.
I didn't look at the math too closely, but I assumed that it was pretty fuzzy. I've seen other analyses that show people who go to work immediately in a high paying trade job (like plumbing, masonry, welding, etc) make more money for like the first 15-20 years, but eventually their better educated counterparts catch up and surpass them. The actual math and quantified results on depend on the assumptions made.
I don't disagree with what your saying whatsoever. However, there does seem to be one notable exception--the tech industry. Bill Gates was a college dropout and the Google guys quit their masters programs at Stanford (I think?). It seems like new industries (such as tech) aren't--at least in their infancy--subjected to the traditional requirements of having a higher degree.
I think what you're talking about is entrepreneurship. Those guys didn't need degrees because they were starting their own things. I guarantee you need at least a college degree to get hired at Microsoft or Google today, no matter how bleeding-edge your tech knowledge may be.
The author's initial question is a crucial one: Is the college degree worthless? It seems as though if you account for earnings/savings alone he'd be correct. But, at the same time, this isn't the only indicator of worth. Maybe students learn something. Anything. That'd be a nice thought too.
Of course, the argument would be a lot more palatable if he was arguing against the high costs of college--maybe even advocating for legislation that lowers the costs of college. Instead, he seems to be saying we should just pass it up altogether. I think this makes it a bit harder to agree with.
Posts
4 comments:
There are myriad problems with this article (how many people making $16k a year save 5% of their income?).
Still, it touches on something I've long said about higher education - we value the achievement of getting a degree far more than the knowledge gained in its pursuit. We're a big, dumb country that loves reaching quantifiable milestones. We don't want to "learn," we want to demonstrate that we've worked toward a goal. It doesn't matter if I can't write a cogent paragraph or reduce a fraction to its lowest common denominator, I have a high school diploma and a college degree. I've achieved something. And as this article points out, everything (most importantly the job market) is built around rewarding the achievement more than the knowledge.
I didn't look at the math too closely, but I assumed that it was pretty fuzzy. I've seen other analyses that show people who go to work immediately in a high paying trade job (like plumbing, masonry, welding, etc) make more money for like the first 15-20 years, but eventually their better educated counterparts catch up and surpass them. The actual math and quantified results on depend on the assumptions made.
I don't disagree with what your saying whatsoever. However, there does seem to be one notable exception--the tech industry. Bill Gates was a college dropout and the Google guys quit their masters programs at Stanford (I think?). It seems like new industries (such as tech) aren't--at least in their infancy--subjected to the traditional requirements of having a higher degree.
I think what you're talking about is entrepreneurship. Those guys didn't need degrees because they were starting their own things. I guarantee you need at least a college degree to get hired at Microsoft or Google today, no matter how bleeding-edge your tech knowledge may be.
The author's initial question is a crucial one: Is the college degree worthless? It seems as though if you account for earnings/savings alone he'd be correct. But, at the same time, this isn't the only indicator of worth. Maybe students learn something. Anything. That'd be a nice thought too.
Of course, the argument would be a lot more palatable if he was arguing against the high costs of college--maybe even advocating for legislation that lowers the costs of college. Instead, he seems to be saying we should just pass it up altogether. I think this makes it a bit harder to agree with.
Post a Comment