Did you attend a college or university?

[sheeplady]

Not entirely true. He/she cannot hold themselves out as possessing a specialty in a board certifiable specialty, but they can practice as physicians. And I know of at least one who does: washed out of his residency at Mass General decades ago, but still practices general medicine. Although, for my money, I'd never allow anyone near me who wasn't board certified.

Does he hold a license? Ifve never heard of someone practicing without a license directly on people legally. (Radiologists and pathologists who don't touch people excepted.)

 

[HudsonHawk]

Does he hold a license? Ifve never heard of someone practicing without a license directly on people legally. (Radiologists and pathologists who don't touch people excepted.)

In my state, you cannot practice medicine without a valid license, which includes both a physician's exam and a medical jurisprudence exam.

 

[ChiTownScion]

Does he hold a license? Ifve never heard of someone practicing without a license directly on people legally. (Radiologists and pathologists who don't touch people excepted.)

That he does. But, no board cert.

 

[ChiTownScion]

And conversely, you don't *need* a good paying job if your needs are simple. My main job pays $34,000 a year, but it's integral to my community -- and though I might complain about some of the backsides I have to kiss, overall the sense of satisfaction I get out of this job, in this town, with these people, is far more than I could ever put down on an IRS form. You could offer me $60,000 tomorrow doing the same thing somewhere else, and I'd say "nertz."

And there are those who have unlimited financial resources to whom life's essence is nothing more than the acquisition of the next toy. Poor bastards, indeed.

 

[Historyteach24]

I went to Marshall University in Huntington, WV to study social studies education. I use that degree to teach 7th graders. My masters program will be finished in the winter. It is through American Military University System and it is in American History.

 

[Guttersnipe]

Does he hold a license? I've never heard of someone practicing without a license directly on people legally. (Radiologists and pathologists who don't touch people excepted.)

In my state, you cannot practice medicine without a valid license, which includes both a physician's exam and a medical jurisprudence exam.

As I understand it, physicians are legally licensed by the state in which they practice, whereas, board certifications are credentials granted by self-regulating professional organizations. I know that as the trajectory of my Grandfather career as an MD changed, he held several board certifications at various times. However, he held his California medical license from 1932 until he retired in the mid-1980s.

 

[pawineguy]

BA in Marketing and my wife is an Ivy League PhD in a science field. My degree means nothing now as someone who has the experience to consult and run my own firm. (and currently starting another in a different field) My wife, however, is in a specialized field that requires her high level of education and many years of experience on top of that. The wonderful thing about many science PhDs in the U.S. is that they come tuition free and even include a nice monthly paycheck, enough to split an apartment, gas for your car and to eat... (I believe she was paid around $14,500 a year, approximately 20 years ago) No teaching required, if she taught a class she'd pick up a few thousand extra.

 

[HudsonHawk]

As I understand it, physicians are legally licensed by the state in which they practice, whereas, board certifications are credentials granted by self-regulating professional organizations. I know that as the trajectory of my Grandfather career as an MD changed, he held several board certifications at various times. However, he held his California medical license from 1932 until he retired in the mid-1980s.

I think there's some confusion of the term "board". I think sheeplady's original point is that the M.D. degree itself doesn't allow you to practice medicine, you have to be licensed, which is usually by a state medical board. Not to be confused or conflated with professional specialty certification boards.

 

[big lad on a spree]

BA and MSc over here

 

[AmateisGal]

A variation on the theme we've been discussing here is having a sense of your kid (or, if you are the kid, having a sense of self) as some people benefit from college way beyond just the job / career it can lead to and others never even get the job / career benefit.

I went to a state school, was incredibly excited to go and learn (I remember looking at the course catalogue and couldn't believe all the options) and my liberal arts education did for me what - at its best - it is advertised to do: opened my mind up to ideas and disciplines I didn't even know were out there, made a more critical thinker out of me and sparked an interest in learning that has continued to this day nearly thirty years later. I got so much bang for my buck it is silly. But that was me.

There were some kids who I went to college with who had no real interest in learning - some where there to goof off, some to "get the degree" for the career or to say they had it and some, while trying, weren't design for that type of learning. I posted earlier that I think everyone - the financial institutions, the government, the colleges / universities and the students / parents have some responsibility for this crazy "take on debt for college blindly" philosophy - but even away from the money, parents and their kids should be trying to identify if college is right for them, if, as you noted, a community college would get them what they want / need or, as others have noted earlier, a trade or vocation is a better path.

I thought long and hard about being an electrician because, as I believe it was Lizzie posted early, those skills, with some reasonable business acumen, provide the most job security (away from a strong union job) that I know of. For me, despite wanting some security - as I saw what the depression did to both of my parents and their families - I was too excited about college not to go.

And Lizzie's and Hudson Hawk's posts above about their no-monetary-driven job and community satisfaction play a big roll - but can be hard to discern at 18.

It's a shame that we seem to have evolved into a "go to college" mentality, when the decisions should be broader and more individually based.

Yesterday I went to a professional development seminar for my job and it was about creativity and innovation (I work at a university). Our speaker was a professor who was a also a mechanical engineer. He loves, loves, loves talking about creativity and innovation and loves more putting it to use in the real world. He makes robots for a living and is currently working on robots for surgery. Our university is working on an innovation campus where people from all disciplines and all walks of life can get together and create and make stuff.

But what really surprised me is that he is NOT pushing people to go to college, i.e. "you have to go to college to succeed." In this new world of ours, you don't necessarily have to do that. I found it quite refreshing. He even used his own son as an example of someone who might not be one who will benefit from going to college.

The world is really changing, and there are some who say that the traditional way of teaching, the four-year degree, etc., is going to become extinct. I don't know how true that is, but there are some theories on that that are quite interesting.

This comes home to me personally because I have a soon-to-be fifteen-year-old daughter who doesn't love school and at this point, has no desire to go to college. I know that college teaches more than just "book" smarts for some - it also teaches life skills. I learned a lot when I went to college - as a sheltered girl who grew up in a small town, I was pretty naive and clueless. But for the first two years I lived on campus, I learned how to take care of myself and live independently in a safe environment. Now not everyone needs that - but I sure did.

All this is to say, college isn't for everyone, and in this day and age, it isn't what is used to be. You don't "need" a college education to succeed.

So, yes, Fading Fast, I agree with what you said above.

 

[jlw]

A.S. in General Studies from Georgia Military College, class of 1996
B.A. in Political Science with a History minor from Valdosta State University, class of 1998
M.P.A. from The University of Georgia, class of 2004

I was in my mid-20s when I enrolled. I attended grad school one class a semester while working full time.

 

[WesternHatWearer]

A.S. in General Studies from Georgia Military College, class of 1996
B.A. in Political Science with a History minor from Valdosta State University, class of 1998
M.P.A. from The University of Georgia, class of 2004

I was in my mid-20s when I enrolled. I attended grad school one class a semester while working full time.

Another neighbor! Welcome to the Forum!

 

[jlw]

Another neighbor! Welcome to the Forum!

Thank you kindly.

 

[Hat Dandy]

Apparently, we're a highly educated lot here on the Fedora Lounge. Nearly 95% of us who took the poll attended college/university. I only, however have a B.A. in Economics, with a minor in Political Science.

 

[Wally_Hood]

Apparently, we're a highly educated lot here on the Fedora Lounge. Nearly 95% of us who took the poll attended college/university. I only, however have a B.A. in Economics, with a minor in Political Science.

I would encourage you to not think of a BA as only :earning a BA is an achievement, and earning that means you learned a lot about yourself as well.

 

[HadleyH]

of course I attended University...

like my brother who is an Architect

and my sister who is a Medical doctor

I'm only a Journalist... but don't work anymore ..

 

[AmateisGal]

I would encourage you to not think of a BA as only :earning a BA is an achievement, and earning that means you learned a lot about yourself as well.

Agreed!

 

[MikeKardec]

Yesterday I went to a professional development seminar for my job and it was about creativity and innovation (I work at a university). Our speaker was a professor who was a also a mechanical engineer. He loves, loves, loves talking about creativity and innovation and loves more putting it to use in the real world. He makes robots for a living and is currently working on robots for surgery. Our university is working on an innovation campus where people from all disciplines and all walks of life can get together and create and make stuff.

But what really surprised me is that he is NOT pushing people to go to college, i.e. "you have to go to college to succeed." In this new world of ours, you don't necessarily have to do that. I found it quite refreshing. He even used his own son as an example of someone who might not be one who will benefit from going to college.

The world is really changing, and there are some who say that the traditional way of teaching, the four-year degree, etc., is going to become extinct. I don't know how true that is, but there are some theories on that that are quite interesting.

This comes home to me personally because I have a soon-to-be fifteen-year-old daughter who doesn't love school and at this point, has no desire to go to college. I know that college teaches more than just "book" smarts for some - it also teaches life skills. I learned a lot when I went to college - as a sheltered girl who grew up in a small town, I was pretty naive and clueless. But for the first two years I lived on campus, I learned how to take care of myself and live independently in a safe environment. Now not everyone needs that - but I sure did.

All this is to say, college isn't for everyone, and in this day and age, it isn't what is used to be. You don't "need" a college education to succeed.

So, yes, Fading Fast, I agree with what you said above.

It's probably best for kids to go to college when they want to go but it IS a good idea to keep reinforcing that they should do it eventually and for them not to paint themselves into a corner until they try. Sometimes an early marriage or too good a job too young can do that. I have a number of friends who got jobs right out of high school that were excellent for a 20 something but were stifling and low paying for a 40 something ... jobs that kept them from maturing in the work force at the right speed to succeed in middle age.

In my limited experience teaching liberal arts (mostly film and publishing oriented) courses I got the following impression: The students, the professors and the parents all had very different goals for the college experience. This is only my impression and it may be specific to where I taught ... but that is 6 different institutions.

To communicate what I'm talking about I'm going to be overly dramatic:

The students -- wanted to play with adult freedoms while still having the college and their parents to protect them from them selves and others (this being the sex, drugs and rock and roll part).

The professors -- wanted to teach the students that gave superficially gratifying results (mostly to the professors) and to be little copies of themselves ... people who would go on to work in academia because there were too many compromises out in the rest of the world. At least a third of the professors who's classes I visited seemed to be stuffing their politics down the throats of their students ... who, for their part, went for it unquestioningly. I consider myself a liberal (meaning, in my case, "open minded") but this wasn't opening minds to all the possibilities, only the beliefs of the teachers and, amazingly, few of these profs even seemed to know who Trotsky was. None of this was in a history or political science class either.

The parents -- wanted just to believe that the college they were paying so much money for would help make their children independent and able to use their intelligence and prepare them to live a happy life ... except they didn't want the responsibility of carefully shopping around for the best education for their kids. Many of the parents (this is based on what students told me, I never met more than one or two of my students parents) seemed to want their kids to go to a school that was seen as "good" among their peers, it was kind of a 'keeping up with the Jones's' situation.

Now we are NOT talking Ivy League here. But I mostly taught at private colleges and they were not cheap! The kids who made the best of this environment were the ones who were mature enough to absolutely know why they were there, and who they were. They pushed their teachers to deliver the course work and could ignore the teachers personal opinions on matters that were off the subject. They not only fulfilled their parents expectations but used the time to broaden their horizons in many ways as well. Many of these kids were either the youngest, right out of high school and wanting to "be adults" rather than to prolong adolescence, or the oldest, middle aged people who'd gone back to school or those who'd worked a few years or been in the military.

The military students were a teachers dream, they'd been in a place where if they didn't learn to be very good at what they studied someone would die. They were motivated and demanding. They weren't all combat veterans by a long shot but they wanted to get on with their lives and really knew what an education was for.

The best student was always the one that was fiercely focused on graduation. And that was usually the slightly older ones. We may send kid to college a bit too young!

 

[AmateisGal]

It's probably best for kids to go to college when they want to go but it IS a good idea to keep reinforcing that they should do it eventually and for them not to paint themselves into a corner until they try. Sometimes an early marriage or too good a job too young can do that. I have a number of friends who got jobs right out of high school that were excellent for a 20 something but were stifling and low paying for a 40 something ... jobs that kept them from maturing in the work force at the right speed to succeed in middle age.

In my limited experience teaching liberal arts (mostly film and publishing oriented) courses I got the following impression: The students, the professors and the parents all had very different goals for the college experience. This is only my impression and it may be specific to where I taught ... but that is 6 different institutions.

To communicate what I'm talking about I'm going to be overly dramatic:

The students -- wanted to play with adult freedoms while still having the college and their parents to protect them from them selves and others (this being the sex, drugs and rock and roll part).

The professors -- wanted to teach the students that gave superficially gratifying results (mostly to the professors) and to be little copies of themselves ... people who would go on to work in academia because there were too many compromises out in the rest of the world. At least a third of the professors who's classes I visited seemed to be stuffing their politics down the throats of their students ... who, for their part, went for it unquestioningly. I consider myself a liberal (meaning, in my case, "open minded") but this wasn't opening minds to all the possibilities, only the beliefs of the teachers and, amazingly, few of these profs even seemed to know who Trotsky was. None of this was in a history or political science class either.

The parents -- wanted just to believe that the college they were paying so much money for would help make their children independent and able to use their intelligence and prepare them to live a happy life ... except they didn't want the responsibility of carefully shopping around for the best education for their kids. Many of the parents (this is based on what students told me, I never met more than one or two of my students parents) seemed to want their kids to go to a school that was seen as "good" among their peers, it was kind of a 'keeping up with the Jones's' situation.

Now we are NOT talking Ivy League here. But I mostly taught at private colleges and they were not cheap! The kids who made the best of this environment were the ones who were mature enough to absolutely know why they were there, and who they were. They pushed their teachers to deliver the course work and could ignore the teachers personal opinions on matters that were off the subject. They not only fulfilled their parents expectations but used the time to broaden their horizons in many ways as well. Many of these kids were either the youngest, right out of high school and wanting to "be adults" rather than to prolong adolescence, or the oldest, middle aged people who'd gone back to school or those who'd worked a few years or been in the military.

The military students were a teachers dream, they'd been in a place where if they didn't learn to be very good at what they studied someone would die. They were motivated and demanding. They weren't all combat veterans by a long shot but they wanted to get on with their lives and really knew what an education was for.

The best student was always the one that was fiercely focused on graduation. And that was usually the slightly older ones. We may send kid to college a bit too young!

Really an excellent rundown. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

 

[jlw]

It's probably best for kids to go to college when they want to go but it IS a good idea to keep reinforcing that they should do it eventually and for them not to paint themselves into a corner until they try. Sometimes an early marriage or too good a job too young can do that. I have a number of friends who got jobs right out of high school that were excellent for a 20 something but were stifling and low paying for a 40 something ... jobs that kept them from maturing in the work force at the right speed to succeed in middle age.

In my limited experience teaching liberal arts (mostly film and publishing oriented) courses I got the following impression: The students, the professors and the parents all had very different goals for the college experience. This is only my impression and it may be specific to where I taught ... but that is 6 different institutions.

To communicate what I'm talking about I'm going to be overly dramatic:

The students -- wanted to play with adult freedoms while still having the college and their parents to protect them from them selves and others (this being the sex, drugs and rock and roll part).

The professors -- wanted to teach the students that gave superficially gratifying results (mostly to the professors) and to be little copies of themselves ... people who would go on to work in academia because there were too many compromises out in the rest of the world. At least a third of the professors who's classes I visited seemed to be stuffing their politics down the throats of their students ... who, for their part, went for it unquestioningly. I consider myself a liberal (meaning, in my case, "open minded") but this wasn't opening minds to all the possibilities, only the beliefs of the teachers and, amazingly, few of these profs even seemed to know who Trotsky was. None of this was in a history or political science class either.

The parents -- wanted just to believe that the college they were paying so much money for would help make their children independent and able to use their intelligence and prepare them to live a happy life ... except they didn't want the responsibility of carefully shopping around for the best education for their kids. Many of the parents (this is based on what students told me, I never met more than one or two of my students parents) seemed to want their kids to go to a school that was seen as "good" among their peers, it was kind of a 'keeping up with the Jones's' situation.

Now we are NOT talking Ivy League here. But I mostly taught at private colleges and they were not cheap! The kids who made the best of this environment were the ones who were mature enough to absolutely know why they were there, and who they were. They pushed their teachers to deliver the course work and could ignore the teachers personal opinions on matters that were off the subject. They not only fulfilled their parents expectations but used the time to broaden their horizons in many ways as well. Many of these kids were either the youngest, right out of high school and wanting to "be adults" rather than to prolong adolescence, or the oldest, middle aged people who'd gone back to school or those who'd worked a few years or been in the military.

The military students were a teachers dream, they'd been in a place where if they didn't learn to be very good at what they studied someone would die. They were motivated and demanding. They weren't all combat veterans by a long shot but they wanted to get on with their lives and really knew what an education was for.

The best student was always the one that was fiercely focused on graduation. And that was usually the slightly older ones. We may send kid to college a bit too young!

At the time that I graduated high school, my state had three levels of high school diploma: college prep, general, and vocational. A vocational seal could be added to a college prep or general diploma if a student also took a bunch of shop or agriculture classes.

I graduated with a general diploma with a vocational seal due to a bunch of FFA classes. I never took the SAT, ACT, or any of the other college entrance exams. I was bound and determined that I was never going to college.

Four years later, a circle of events resulted in my enrolling in a junior college. I ended up with a masters from the number three ranked program in the field.

Sometimes a little life education goes a long way.