My two cents is that an undergraduate education from the top 10% of schools is still extremely valuable, not solely for the educational value but for the networking and the job pipelines that still do exist at many of those schools.
This is some really real shit. Bourdieu called it "social capital" and I think it's hard to understand how powerful it is unless you enjoy it. It certainly wasn't my experience - and I went to Cal - but when I talk to friends of mine who went through Ivys, the power of "who you know" is staggering.
I will say that I still believe in the ideals of a liberal education insofar as I would like the longshoremen and carpenters AND CEOs of the world to be exposed to a broader set of ideas, critical thinking and writing skills. I think college - as this unique bubble of a social space - still provides something of value beyond just preparing people to become workers. Maybe the solution is to build more trades training in conventional 4 year institutions. Maybe we build more liberal education ideals into trades schools. But I don't see the benefit in creating a two-track system with no overlap between them.
Well put, but IMO much of this needs to be, and can be implemented in high school and earlier. You know it from teaching - students aren't entering college with any of these skills, which makes it a huge struggle to teach actual material. I know it's possible to change because I attended a public high school where we learned all the critical thinking, liberal arts, and writing skills that are taught at most colleges, but it has to start from kindergarten on in order to be successful - I honestly have my doubts about whether some of these critical thinking and writing skills can really be taught effectively in a classroom for the first time at age 19.
My two cents is that an undergraduate education from the top 10% of schools is still extremely valuable, not solely for the educational value but for the networking and the job pipelines that still do exist at many of those schools.
This is some really real shit. Bourdieu called it "social capital" and I think it's hard to understand how powerful it is unless you enjoy it. It certainly wasn't my experience - and I went to Cal - but when I talk to friends of mine who went through Ivys, the power of "who you know" is staggering.
Venture capitalists literally roam the hallways at a lot of these schools. Professors have huge networks of top researchers and employers they link their top students into.
In contrast it's hard to get professors at UC schools to so much as write a letter of rec for grad school. Job fairs are filled with small nonprofits looking for unpaid interns, or mega corporations looking for fast-track managers. It's insulting to students who are attending the "supposed" top university to have f**king Target at your job fair.
My two cents is that an undergraduate education from the top 10% of schools is still extremely valuable, not solely for the educational value but for the networking and the job pipelines that still do exist at many of those schools.
This is some really real shit. Bourdieu called it "social capital" and I think it's hard to understand how powerful it is unless you enjoy it. It certainly wasn't my experience - and I went to Cal - but when I talk to friends of mine who went through Ivys, the power of "who you know" is staggering.
Venture capitalists literally roam the hallways at a lot of these schools. Professors have huge networks of top researchers and employers they link their top students into.
That's great to hear, Jigsaw. My friend is doing T for A in Detroit and is loving it. My cousin teaches 5th grade and makes as much as a mid-level analyst at my work, plus she only works 9 months a year. However, she's disenfranchised by her "problem" students and their parents who consistently fail to give a shit.
That's how they described my students when I first started teaching. "Oh, your class has a bunch of troublemakers and bad characters in it. You're going to have to keep your eyes on them CONSTANTLY." Fortunately, I was able to make lesson plans that were entertaining enough to get them actually interested and inspired to do the work as well as it being informational enough for them to learn. I remember other classrooms next door to me or across the hallway from me where the teachers did nothing but yell at the students. It works, but if that's the only way you can gain your class's attention there might be trouble.
"1, 2, 3. Eyes on me! 1, 2. Eyes on you!" always seemed to work for me. Or the "Clap once if you hear me!" When the students who are talking see other students clapping, they'll stop to wonder what's going on. And the advantage of having a summer vacation and other national holidays off is great.
Dude, if I decided to "get creative" with my electrical work and say, wire a 15 amp circuit with red black and green 22AWG as an homage to native tongues my studios would burn down.
I work on turn of the last century homes, the wiring is fucked most of the time: hidden knob and tube, buried junction boxes, live white wires, aluminum wiring, etc... My electrician has to figure out what the hell's going on behind the walls before he get's started... this involves a shitload of problem solving and thinking outside the box.
I guess what angered me about Stacks post is I thought he was implying that the creative should stick to uni and the duds should pick up a trade. As someone who got a degree and studied a trade I can say creativity is a huge asset no matter what path you choose to follow. If someone is accountable, reliable and creative they'll succeed at most anything they put their minds to. It's been a minute since I have been in school so I find it disheartening to hear Stack's accounts of the amount of amateur students he's getting. Maybe TV ate their imaginations.
teachers and their ability to teach are one of the most important and influential things in a young person development into an adult, this point can not be stressed enough. however, this can lead to incredible victories or tragic ends. in the school system i came through it was more the latter than former.
at around the time a young person enters highschool [13 years old?], the funneling of students into a set course will already begin. and while this is based on the abilities of the students, it is also dictated by the teachers and administrative staff of the school. when a child is perceived to be of higher level intelligence, his teachers will be more inclined to steer him in the direction of what is considered 'appropriate to his/her abilities'. the other side of the coin would show that a student of par to lesser intelligence would be steered towards something more vocational. that is a huge responsibility and i'm not entirely convinced the decision making is sound. because a child is smarter than his classmates, should he be told that being an electrician or plumber is a waste of his time? i assure that if you walked into a classroom that is exactly what you would hear. when the fact of the matter is, those people are exactly what you would want in the more "hands on" branch of the work force. if you aced every aptitude test, iq test, and carried a gpa of 3.5 or higher and made it no secret that you wanted to enter the trades, there isn't a teacher, guidance counselor or principle that wouldn't try to talk you out of it in lieu of some more "respected" life path [read: doctor, lawyer, engineer, et al].
i also understand that if a child is having a hard time establishing a life path at 15 it is the responsibility of these same people to help guide him, so it's a slippery slope. i just feel as though teachers possess a trait that truly desires students to realize their full potential, and while this is an important and beautiful thing for a human to hold, it can also blind someone from the reality of life in the real world. the skills and abilities of an individual can be put to excellent use no matter the field of expertise or rung on the social ladder.
I will say that I still believe in the ideals of a liberal education insofar as I would like the longshoremen and carpenters AND CEOs of the world to be exposed to a broader set of ideas, critical thinking and writing skills. I think college - as this unique bubble of a social space - still provides something of value beyond just preparing people to become workers.
Big-time cosignature on this. There's an awful lot of value to the college experience beyond the classes you take. Or, as the quip goes, don't let academics get in the way of your education.
In contrast it's hard to get professors at UC schools to so much as write a letter of rec for grad school. Job fairs are filled with small nonprofits looking for unpaid interns, or mega corporations looking for fast-track managers. It's insulting to students who are attending the "supposed" top university to have f**king Target at your job fair.
Are you basing this off of your experience at uc Santa Cruz? I never saw target at any job fairs, by contrast there were plenty of cool, relevant local orgs. Plenty of my friends from cal got hooked up with great opportunities from the networks they established there, while the ones that didn't were never really inspired in the first place. Obviously your major plays a big role in this too. How many public schools throughout the country have connections with the likes of Lawrence Livermore Berkeley labs?
Pre-med majors, etc have it rough but they knew that going into college. If you are smart about what programs you get into, uc schools (yes, even sc) are a great way to connect to the premier job markets.
4) Much as the bootstrap stories are appealing narratives, let's also keep in mind that in previous generations, the amount of gov't spending helped seed the growth of our current middle class. Between the GI Bill and the heyday of the FHA, you had billions of tax dollars being spent to help people go to college, get jobs and buy homes. Of course, those policies funneled the vast majority of that money to White folks and not anyone else, but the point being here, the wealth of the "greatest generation" and baby boomers didn't come out of thin air in many cases. People forget this all the time, creating the classic cliche of about folks born on 3rd base thinking they hit a triple...and then looking at the younger gen stepping up to bat and wondering why they're not getting on base (I'm torturing this analogy but you follow my meaning).
Great thoughts. Thanks for turning this thread around for the better.
I might also add that in addition to the above points, the cost of undergrad tuition at public universities has increased exponetially. One example: all UC schools were free to those accepted until Ronald Reagan came into office and forced payment of tuition in 1970. By contrast, tuition to UC Berkeley is now $12,500 per year, a staggering cost for many low and middle income Californian families.
4) Much as the bootstrap stories are appealing narratives, let's also keep in mind that in previous generations, the amount of gov't spending helped seed the growth of our current middle class. Between the GI Bill and the heyday of the FHA, you had billions of tax dollars being spent to help people go to college, get jobs and buy homes. Of course, those policies funneled the vast majority of that money to White folks and not anyone else, but the point being here, the wealth of the "greatest generation" and baby boomers didn't come out of thin air in many cases. People forget this all the time, creating the classic cliche of about folks born on 3rd base thinking they hit a triple...and then looking at the younger gen stepping up to bat and wondering why they're not getting on base (I'm torturing this analogy but you follow my meaning).
Great thoughts. Thanks for turning this thread around for the better.
I might also add that in addition to the above points, the cost of undergrad tuition at public universities has increased exponetially. One example: all UC schools were free to those accepted until Ronald Reagan came into office and forced payment of tuition in 1970. By contrast, tuition to UC Berkeley is now $12,500 per year, a staggering cost for many low and middle income Californian families.
Fee hikes in CA are a whole other can of worms. Students are paying more and getting less.
Spelunk, Manny, and I are all products of the UC system, I take it. : )
I went to speak to my advisor and he said "Why are you kids in such a hurry to get through these programs?"
I spoke with my mother and she said "You need to figure your life out because you're running out of time."
Does she mean I'm going to die soon? Whatever.
I respect my elders, but these crusty farts are ridiculous with their "Kids nowadays are all lazy, feel that they are entitled, are obsessed with technology, don't know the meaning of hard work and value of a dollar....blahblahblah" crap. This conclusion is based on what? It's not like teens and young adults have a monopoly on laziness: there are lots of people over 30-40 who don't have their shit together and lead complacent, mediocre lives. In my opinion, "kids these days" are more motivated than ever in a long time to get educated and make something of themselves so they won't be, like their parents, 9-5 drones who fear on a daily basis that they will be the next ones to lose their expendable, bottom-of-the-corporate-food-chain jobs and not be able to pay off the shit they can't afford and don't need. We're smarter than you think.
Higher education is a huge industry and there have been numerous articles recently predicting that it is the next bubble to burst. I know from my own experience that Law Schools continue to graduate thousands of lawyers who have zero job prospects at the moment and will be leaving school with, at the very least, $100,000 in debt. Only a very small percentage get a $170,000/year job in "Big Law" and its not like if you don;t get one of those jobs, you might get one for $150,0000. More likely, if you're lucky you get a government job that pays $60,000 or you're doing contract work at $15-20/hr. Some of the people in my sumer class were graduating with over a quarter of a million dollars in loans between undergraduate and law school.
I know from my own experience that Law Schools continue to graduate thousands of lawyers who have zero job prospects at the moment and will be leaving school with, at the very least, $100,000 in debt. Only a very small percentage get a $170,000/year job in "Big Law" and its not like if you don;t get one of those jobs, you might get one for $150,0000. More likely, if you're lucky you get a government job that pays $60,000 or you're doing contract work at $15-20/hr. Some of the people in my sumer class were graduating with over a quarter of a million dollars in loans between undergraduate and law school.
I work at a top-tier business school, and it's pretty much the same story.
I respect my elders, but these crusty farts are ridiculous with their "Kids nowadays are all lazy, feel that they are entitled, are obsessed with technology, don't know the meaning of hard work and value of a dollar....blahblahblah" crap. This conclusion is based on what? It's not like teens and young adults have a monopoly on laziness: there are lots of people over 30-40 who don't have their shit together and lead complacent, mediocre lives. In my opinion, "kids these days" are more motivated than ever in a long time to get educated and make something of themselves so they won't be, like their parents, 9-5 drones who fear on a daily basis that they will be the next ones to lose their expendable, bottom-of-the-corporate-food-chain jobs and not be able to pay off the shit they can't afford and don't need. We're smarter than you think.
The problem I see with people in their 20's isn't that they are lazy and don't want to work hard, but they have a completely different attitude towards the work environment and dealing with people who are higher up the ladder than I could have had when I started my career. It's a constant struggle with recent grads to get them to just be professional and learn their jobs and take honest criticism without having to cater to their feelings like 5 year olds. All those years of "everyone is a winner" treatment doesn't seem to serve people well when they get to jobs where they have actual responsibilities and where there are real negative consequences for poor performance. Instead of learning and trying to improve many of them just want to complain that they are being treated unfairly by old farts who don't want to let them get ahead. No doubt there is some of that going on, but it goes both ways and the sense of smug entitlement is definitely there from a lot of kids in my experience.
All those years of ???everyone is a winner??? treatment doesn???t seem to serve people well when they get to jobs where they have actual responsibilities and where there are real negative consequences for poor performance.
Amen. That is where the problem lies...I work with problem teenagers and it is impossible to get them to do anything as the FIRST thing out fo their mouths is "what are you going to give us if we do it?" I understand I am working with problem kids, but they think they are to be rewarded for doing what is asked of them...they will refuse to participate in even the simplest of activities and games unless they are given some sort of material reward for doing so.
Not just that they expect to be rewarded, but you can't even just tell someone 'Do this now". You have to ask nicely or they get butthurt. I feel like the Wolf in Pulp Fiction sometimes trying to get people to do what they have to.
"Pretty please, with sugar on top. Do your fucking job"
There is way too much stuff to wade through in this thread. The general these-kids-today cane waving is both comical and frustrating.
The_Hook_Up said:
Amen. That is where the problem lies...I work with problem teenagers and it is impossible to get them to do anything as the FIRST thing out fo their mouths is "what are you going to give us if we do it?" I understand I am working with problem kids, but they think they are to be rewarded for doing what is asked of them...they will refuse to participate in even the simplest of activities and games unless they are given some sort of material reward for doing so.
Well, to see it from their point of view, why the fuck should they? Exactly what are they getting out of it? How will it improve their life? The answers might be obvious all depending on one???s perspective and reality. There???s a lot of people who work their asses off and never get beyond survival level ??? that is just a simple fact???and it makes impressions on children who come up in it. Investing time to get ahead, for personal fulfillment, to gain skills, experience, seniority, etc. are not givens, they are not universal truths, but money is.
I said this early in the thread but it probably didn't resonate:
In my experience the major setback to the 20 something thinking is their willingness to believe that things can be done just as good virtually and instantly in almost every aspect of their life. Whether it's conversing via text or email, or using plug in emulators of real audio gear, many seem to be blissfully happy trucking along without any physical locus, and as such, less and less innovation is springing forth from their generation. Most I have met laugh at the idea of apprenticeship learning because they believe there is a youtube video that can teach them better. THey don't want to listen to directions because they believe google maps will tell them how to get somewhere better. The idea of working longer than 2 months on any given thing is foreign to them.
Don't get me wrong, many many things are better because of advancements in technology, but we shouldn't forget we have this current technological platform because a prior generation struggled to put a man on the moon. I am currently working on Ampex tape machines from the transistor turnover era and I tear up looking at the pure innovative genius that went into making a machine for someone to record music on back in the day.
Not just that they expect to be rewarded, but you can't even just tell someone 'Do this now". You have to ask nicely or they get butthurt. I feel like the Wolf in Pulp Fiction sometimes trying to get people to do what they have to.
"Pretty please, with sugar on top. Do your fucking job"
THIS.
when im the person signing your cheque, i do not have to appeal to your sensibilities. this is a scourge among university hires.
The reality is that not everyone is going to become wealthy......some folks are going to work hard and barely scrape by... some folks will work smart or get lucky and become ridiculously rich...this isn't "unfair" it's life.....and my guess is those kids that say "Why the fuck should I do that" will wind up on the lower end of the economic scale.....they obviously have no respect for their superiors/teachers/parents/authority.....which is cool, someone's gotta hold down that spot.
My kids were not punished if they cussed growing up but the one thing they were forbidden from saying was "That's not fair".
Comments
This is some really real shit. Bourdieu called it "social capital" and I think it's hard to understand how powerful it is unless you enjoy it. It certainly wasn't my experience - and I went to Cal - but when I talk to friends of mine who went through Ivys, the power of "who you know" is staggering.
Well put, but IMO much of this needs to be, and can be implemented in high school and earlier. You know it from teaching - students aren't entering college with any of these skills, which makes it a huge struggle to teach actual material. I know it's possible to change because I attended a public high school where we learned all the critical thinking, liberal arts, and writing skills that are taught at most colleges, but it has to start from kindergarten on in order to be successful - I honestly have my doubts about whether some of these critical thinking and writing skills can really be taught effectively in a classroom for the first time at age 19.
Venture capitalists literally roam the hallways at a lot of these schools. Professors have huge networks of top researchers and employers they link their top students into.
In contrast it's hard to get professors at UC schools to so much as write a letter of rec for grad school. Job fairs are filled with small nonprofits looking for unpaid interns, or mega corporations looking for fast-track managers. It's insulting to students who are attending the "supposed" top university to have f**king Target at your job fair.
LOL--where are you getting this from?
That's how they described my students when I first started teaching. "Oh, your class has a bunch of troublemakers and bad characters in it. You're going to have to keep your eyes on them CONSTANTLY." Fortunately, I was able to make lesson plans that were entertaining enough to get them actually interested and inspired to do the work as well as it being informational enough for them to learn. I remember other classrooms next door to me or across the hallway from me where the teachers did nothing but yell at the students. It works, but if that's the only way you can gain your class's attention there might be trouble.
"1, 2, 3. Eyes on me! 1, 2. Eyes on you!" always seemed to work for me. Or the "Clap once if you hear me!" When the students who are talking see other students clapping, they'll stop to wonder what's going on. And the advantage of having a summer vacation and other national holidays off is great.
I work on turn of the last century homes, the wiring is fucked most of the time: hidden knob and tube, buried junction boxes, live white wires, aluminum wiring, etc... My electrician has to figure out what the hell's going on behind the walls before he get's started... this involves a shitload of problem solving and thinking outside the box.
I guess what angered me about Stacks post is I thought he was implying that the creative should stick to uni and the duds should pick up a trade. As someone who got a degree and studied a trade I can say creativity is a huge asset no matter what path you choose to follow. If someone is accountable, reliable and creative they'll succeed at most anything they put their minds to. It's been a minute since I have been in school so I find it disheartening to hear Stack's accounts of the amount of amateur students he's getting. Maybe TV ate their imaginations.
at around the time a young person enters highschool [13 years old?], the funneling of students into a set course will already begin. and while this is based on the abilities of the students, it is also dictated by the teachers and administrative staff of the school. when a child is perceived to be of higher level intelligence, his teachers will be more inclined to steer him in the direction of what is considered 'appropriate to his/her abilities'. the other side of the coin would show that a student of par to lesser intelligence would be steered towards something more vocational. that is a huge responsibility and i'm not entirely convinced the decision making is sound. because a child is smarter than his classmates, should he be told that being an electrician or plumber is a waste of his time? i assure that if you walked into a classroom that is exactly what you would hear. when the fact of the matter is, those people are exactly what you would want in the more "hands on" branch of the work force. if you aced every aptitude test, iq test, and carried a gpa of 3.5 or higher and made it no secret that you wanted to enter the trades, there isn't a teacher, guidance counselor or principle that wouldn't try to talk you out of it in lieu of some more "respected" life path [read: doctor, lawyer, engineer, et al].
i also understand that if a child is having a hard time establishing a life path at 15 it is the responsibility of these same people to help guide him, so it's a slippery slope. i just feel as though teachers possess a trait that truly desires students to realize their full potential, and while this is an important and beautiful thing for a human to hold, it can also blind someone from the reality of life in the real world. the skills and abilities of an individual can be put to excellent use no matter the field of expertise or rung on the social ladder.
Big-time cosignature on this. There's an awful lot of value to the college experience beyond the classes you take. Or, as the quip goes, don't let academics get in the way of your education.
Are you basing this off of your experience at uc Santa Cruz? I never saw target at any job fairs, by contrast there were plenty of cool, relevant local orgs. Plenty of my friends from cal got hooked up with great opportunities from the networks they established there, while the ones that didn't were never really inspired in the first place. Obviously your major plays a big role in this too. How many public schools throughout the country have connections with the likes of Lawrence Livermore Berkeley labs?
Pre-med majors, etc have it rough but they knew that going into college. If you are smart about what programs you get into, uc schools (yes, even sc) are a great way to connect to the premier job markets.
Great thoughts. Thanks for turning this thread around for the better.
I might also add that in addition to the above points, the cost of undergrad tuition at public universities has increased exponetially. One example: all UC schools were free to those accepted until Ronald Reagan came into office and forced payment of tuition in 1970. By contrast, tuition to UC Berkeley is now $12,500 per year, a staggering cost for many low and middle income Californian families.
Fee hikes in CA are a whole other can of worms. Students are paying more and getting less.
Spelunk, Manny, and I are all products of the UC system, I take it. : )
I went to speak to my advisor and he said "Why are you kids in such a hurry to get through these programs?"
I spoke with my mother and she said "You need to figure your life out because you're running out of time."
Does she mean I'm going to die soon? Whatever.
Excellent job. We rep a lot of independent pharmacists at my work. In re: Brand Name Pharmaceutical. The pharmacy guys are all great clients.
I work at a top-tier business school, and it's pretty much the same story.
The problem I see with people in their 20's isn't that they are lazy and don't want to work hard, but they have a completely different attitude towards the work environment and dealing with people who are higher up the ladder than I could have had when I started my career. It's a constant struggle with recent grads to get them to just be professional and learn their jobs and take honest criticism without having to cater to their feelings like 5 year olds. All those years of "everyone is a winner" treatment doesn't seem to serve people well when they get to jobs where they have actual responsibilities and where there are real negative consequences for poor performance. Instead of learning and trying to improve many of them just want to complain that they are being treated unfairly by old farts who don't want to let them get ahead. No doubt there is some of that going on, but it goes both ways and the sense of smug entitlement is definitely there from a lot of kids in my experience.
Amen. That is where the problem lies...I work with problem teenagers and it is impossible to get them to do anything as the FIRST thing out fo their mouths is "what are you going to give us if we do it?" I understand I am working with problem kids, but they think they are to be rewarded for doing what is asked of them...they will refuse to participate in even the simplest of activities and games unless they are given some sort of material reward for doing so.
"Pretty please, with sugar on top. Do your fucking job"
Well, to see it from their point of view, why the fuck should they? Exactly what are they getting out of it? How will it improve their life? The answers might be obvious all depending on one???s perspective and reality. There???s a lot of people who work their asses off and never get beyond survival level ??? that is just a simple fact???and it makes impressions on children who come up in it. Investing time to get ahead, for personal fulfillment, to gain skills, experience, seniority, etc. are not givens, they are not universal truths, but money is.
In my experience the major setback to the 20 something thinking is their willingness to believe that things can be done just as good virtually and instantly in almost every aspect of their life. Whether it's conversing via text or email, or using plug in emulators of real audio gear, many seem to be blissfully happy trucking along without any physical locus, and as such, less and less innovation is springing forth from their generation. Most I have met laugh at the idea of apprenticeship learning because they believe there is a youtube video that can teach them better. THey don't want to listen to directions because they believe google maps will tell them how to get somewhere better. The idea of working longer than 2 months on any given thing is foreign to them.
Don't get me wrong, many many things are better because of advancements in technology, but we shouldn't forget we have this current technological platform because a prior generation struggled to put a man on the moon. I am currently working on Ampex tape machines from the transistor turnover era and I tear up looking at the pure innovative genius that went into making a machine for someone to record music on back in the day.
When the hell did this happen?
If I can only afford basic cable am I surviving?
THIS.
when im the person signing your cheque, i do not have to appeal to your sensibilities. this is a scourge among university hires.
The reality is that not everyone is going to become wealthy......some folks are going to work hard and barely scrape by... some folks will work smart or get lucky and become ridiculously rich...this isn't "unfair" it's life.....and my guess is those kids that say "Why the fuck should I do that" will wind up on the lower end of the economic scale.....they obviously have no respect for their superiors/teachers/parents/authority.....which is cool, someone's gotta hold down that spot.
My kids were not punished if they cussed growing up but the one thing they were forbidden from saying was "That's not fair".
You should sue someone ....you deserve better.