This generation of kids...

[reetpleat]

An *exceptional* truly poor person can. The mediocre poor person, the B or C student, doesn't have a chance. But if you're a mediocre middle class person, well, the colleges are full of them. *That* is the injustice.

I honestly believe that a desire to go to college and an expectation to go to college are bigger factors in going than the cost.

But I could be wrong.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I honestly believe that a desire to go to college and an expectation to go to college are bigger factors in going than the cost.

But I could be wrong.

The thing is, the average working-class kid in school isn't going to get the attention or the encouragement he or she will need to go to college -- the exceptional ones will, the straight-A ones, but the ordinary, unremarkable kids won't. Not from parents, not from teachers, not from counselors. They aren't "the college type." But the ordinary middle-class kids, even the screwups, boozers, stoners, and slackers, will be pushed into going whether they want to or not.

Many of those ordinary working class kids are every bit as capable of doing any number of jobs in the working world as their middle class counterparts -- perhaps even more so in some cases -- but because they don't have the degree, they don't get the chance. In our society today the degree is less a sign of achievement than it is a sign that the bearer is "not one of those people." That, again, is the injustice.

 

[Pompidou]

I dunno -- my grandfather, with an eighth-grade education, owned his own successful business for nearly forty years. He was a widely-respected figure in our town, and nobody much cared if he'd been to school or not. It wasn't a certificate that mattered then -- it was what you were capable of doing.

Your grandfather was an entrepreneur, and that option is still open to anyone, college or not, even today. There are two sorts of people: fortunate people, and self made people. Anyone interested in entrepreneurship can do so with a good idea and good credit. My degree's not helping me one bit in the eyes of my lender. For the self made man like your grandfather, it's all about determination. I'm not especially qualified in any regard, but I haven't given up for three years, and now it's falling into place. That - that's an option for anybody, regardless of class. If they're not willing to try, than they didn't deserve better, anyway. Getting ahead in life is a balance of money and hard work. Anyone can get ahead, but they have to balance the two of those - the less of one they have, the more they need of the other.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Anyone interested in entrepreneurship can do so with a good idea and good credit.

The latter is usually much more difficult than the former, especially these days.

 

[Lady Day]

I really dislike the way the scholarship system works now. You have to be truly rich to send your kid to a "good" school without a scholarship. This is because the cost of college is far to high. I have no clue where the money all goes, but if I went for $309 a semester and the cost is now $5500 (apples to apples comparison), there's something wrong going on. Salaries haven't gone up that much and neither has housing, milk, bread or meat. Where DID the money go?

A lot of higher education institutions are becoming for profit schools, and like a solid sport franchises, they need to advertise, advertise advertise.. I went to one for my masters and while I do felt I got a decent education, I feel I *paid* for my degree rather than earned it.

Not so in my non profit undergrad program. I learned invaluable tools and will always be grateful for that experience.

The name of where you go is becoming like name brand jeans. Ive taken $50 classes at community colleges that would have cost me $1500 at a for profit school.

I also feel you dont have to work toward a degree to get a lot out of higher education. Enroll in a community school class every now and then. I do.

LD

 

[Foofoogal]

The thing is, the average working-class kid in school isn't going to get the attention or the encouragement he or she will need to go to college -- the exceptional ones will, the straight-A ones, but the ordinary, unremarkable kids won't. Not from parents, not from teachers, not from counselors. They aren't "the college type." But the ordinary middle-class kids, even the screwups, boozers, stoners, and slackers, will be pushed into going whether they want to or not.
--------------------------

As a very poor kid monetarily (not in other ways and no. 9 of 11 children) there were exceptions.
My brother burn the candle down so to speak and was Valedictorian of his class. Won a 4 year scholarship to A and M University and it has served him very well.
A nephew did the same. Extremely intelligent he designs games and does other computer stuff.

We had to sacrifice to send our children to college as we could not get any grant money as we made too much.
I do think something is screwy though with the system but at my age I have come to be a bit cynical about a lot of things.
It is tragic for a very smart kid to not be able to go to college but if they are smart they generally do other things out of sheer determination.
Getting out of an area where there is no opportunity is the first step. Just reality.
I am not Pollyanna but I have seen it all my life. I will never, ever buy I am poor so I cannot do anything and everyone owes me.

 

[1961MJS]

Hi

At Heights High School in Wichita, the kids who got the attention were the Special Education kids. Regular kids got pretty much nothing, and the Advanced Placement kids didn't do much better. None were challenged much.

My son's 5th grade teacher told him he needed to work hard and get A's. His sixth or seventh grade teacher told him that C's were average, and that was what he should work toward.

He did both. Straight A's until seventh grade, then straight B's and C's. "They said that C's were all I should work for Dad." They're teachers obviously they're smarter than me...

Later

 

[Undertow]

The latter is usually much more difficult than the former, especially these days.

Precisely why it's not who you are, so much as who you know.

I'm sure many of you have seen this in your own workplace.

Gotta trim the fat; who's next? The senior lead who's been around for 35 years, knows everything better than the books, who's literally invaluable? Yeah, she mysteriously retires.

The jerk middle manager who's friends with the boss, who doesn't know anything about what his employees do, who could be replaced by an efficient version of MS Outlook - oh you bet, he stays and he gets a raise.

The middle manager probably had a BA in Liberal Arts, too, while the senior lead never obtained a degree because she was already sharp as a tack. [huh]

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

What's really sad is nowadays that you went to college seems more important to employers than what you learned. I've heard many people tell me that very little of what they learned in school actually applies to their job even though many have a specific type of degree that's requisite to working in their particular field.

Okay, I get the argument that to an employer a college degree tells him/her that the applicant is likely to be a motivated, hard-working, goal-oriented individual. But to me, $40,000-100,000 is very pricey for what basically amounts to a character reference.

 

[jamespowers]

What's really sad is nowadays that you went to college seems more important to employers than what you learned. I've heard many people tell me that very little of what they learned in school actually applies to their job even though many have a specific type of degree that's requisite to working in their particular field.

Okay, I get the argument that to an employer a college degree tells him/her that the applicant is likely to be a motivated, hard-working, goal-oriented individual. But to me, $40,000-100,000 is very pricey for what basically amounts to a character reference.

Not necessarily a character reference but it shows you can follow directions long enough to get a degree. I was actually told that once by an employer.

 

[1961MJS]

Hi

Getting your degree shows persistence. It only implies knowledge unfortunately.

In one way, I am grateful for our company's requirement that all management have a 4 year Bachelor's degree as a minimum. It kept an old friend of my wife's from becoming a manager. She's been at the company for 30 years, and she has two primary attributes that keep her popular if you get my drift. Well, those and an incredibly brown nose. I haven't liked her since roughly the third day after we met 26 years ago.

Later

 

[reetpleat]

The thing is, the average working-class kid in school isn't going to get the attention or the encouragement he or she will need to go to college -- the exceptional ones will, the straight-A ones, but the ordinary, unremarkable kids won't. Not from parents, not from teachers, not from counselors. They aren't "the college type." But the ordinary middle-class kids, even the screwups, boozers, stoners, and slackers, will be pushed into going whether they want to or not.

Many of those ordinary working class kids are every bit as capable of doing any number of jobs in the working world as their middle class counterparts -- perhaps even more so in some cases -- but because they don't have the degree, they don't get the chance. In our society today the degree is less a sign of achievement than it is a sign that the bearer is "not one of those people." That, again, is the injustice.

I agree wholeheartedly. Except for the last part which I think may or may not be true. I am sure there is a certain amount of classism around it still.

But even though this is true, a second barrier is surely, people of their same class telling them that college is overrated, for snobs, etc. Also, of course, from parents that just don't value it or don't have the time attention or personal presence to encourage their kid at all.

Funny thing is, working class people tend to come in three camps. One says that college is very important and their chance to do better than their ancestors. the second is those that think college and training are important, but only if it is technical, or trade etc that will get you a job and earn more money. this was my dad. The third are the type that think that college is just upper class nonsense and being a working guy was good enough for me and should be good enough for you.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Hi

Getting your degree shows persistence. It only implies knowledge unfortunately.

Given a choice, I'd think a well-run company would prefer proven experience in the field -- someone who's worked in a field for ten or twenty years, but who doesn't have a degree, can obviously demonstrate both persistence and knowledge. Using a degree as a shibboleth to decide advancement in such cases just doesn't make sense to me -- unless, again, it's being used to weed out "the wrong kind of people."

(For that matter, I don't get people my age who still lead off every conversation with where they went to school. If all you have to brag about is what you did in a classroom thirty years ago, you haven't done a whole lot with your life, have you?)

 

[jamespowers]

(For that matter, I don't get people my age who still lead off every conversation with where they went to school. If all you have to brag about is what you did in a classroom thirty years ago, you haven't done a whole lot with your life, have you?)

For those type of people just tell them one of three schools: Harvard, Yale or Stanford. That will usually shut them up unless they went there as well.
I tend to like the wrong kind of people.

 

[Pompidou]

Given a choice, I'd think a well-run company would prefer proven experience in the field -- someone who's worked in a field for ten or twenty years, but who doesn't have a degree, can obviously demonstrate both persistence and knowledge. Using a degree as a shibboleth to decide advancement in such cases just doesn't make sense to me -- unless, again, it's being used to weed out "the wrong kind of people."

(For that matter, I don't get people my age who still lead off every conversation with where they went to school. If all you have to brag about is what you did in a classroom thirty years ago, you haven't done a whole lot with your life, have you?)

Degrees get you in the company in the first place. You don't get ten or twenty years experience if you don't get hired. I agree that experience should trump degrees, as I've had experience with both sorts of bosses, and preferred the experienced boss to the degreed boss. That said, a degree should be equivalent to 2, 4, 6 or 8 years experience depending on the degree, because the person with no experience doesn't get experience. Not these days. I've seen just as many job postings requiring 5+ years experience as I have requiring a degree. I suppose a person only notices what's holding him/her back, and not all the things s/he has.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Degrees get you in the company in the first place. You don't get ten or twenty years experience if you don't get hired. I agree that experience should trump degrees, as I've had experience with both sorts of bosses, and preferred the experienced boss to the degreed boss. That said, a degree should be equivalent to 2, 4, 6 or 8 years experience depending on the degree, because the person with no experience doesn't get experience. Not these days. I've seen just as many job postings requiring 5+ years experience as I have requiring a degree. I suppose a person only notices what's holding him/her back, and not all the things s/he has.

There are still many of us in the world today with ten or twenty or thirty years experience in various fields who don't have degrees -- when we entered the fields, they weren't required. Journalism is my example, I'm sure there are plenty of others that folks could mention. The current obsession with degrees as an entree to the workplace for *any* worthwhile white collar job really doesn't go back much further than the 1980s or 1990s.

It's worth keeping in mind that less than 30 percent of the adult population in the US has a four-year degree.

 

[Pompidou]

I was talking more about the applicant that still needs to get a foot in the door. There are indeed lots of experienced but non-degreed workers with 30+ years experience. There are lots of degreed workers not yet 30. Both need to be accommodated. I'm simply saying, experience and degrees should be taken at equal value, year for year. Four years experience should equal a BA. I do see a good number of job postings with such a statement: "4 year degree or comparable experience". That seems perfectly fair to me, and accounts for both types of job applicants.

 

[reetpleat]

Yes, but now we are getting anecdotal evidence about some "company" that promotes or retains the "college boy" over the hardened experienced non college person.

I just don't buy that this is a big issue.

On the other hand, what does the army do when they have a promising candidate for officer? Don't they send them to college?

And how does a worker advance themselves at a company? They take night and weekend courses to get a masters in business for example.

Now, would you not rather promote the guy who went and got the extra education on their own time than the person who just put their time in for the duration.

 

[LizzieMaine]

On the other hand, what does the army do when they have a promising candidate for officer? Don't they send them to college?

And how does a worker advance themselves at a company? They take night and weekend courses to get a masters in business for example.

Now, would you not rather promote the guy who went and got the extra education on their own time than the person who just put their time in for the duration.

I think our military folks would be more qualified to comment on Officers' Candidate School, but the last I knew it was a short-duration intensive and specialized training program offered to experienced non-coms. Not the same education you get in a service academy, but the bar on your shoulder at the end is the same. That's the model the rest of the world should follow -- once you've proven yourself, the rank and the respect is the same no matter how you earned it.

As far as promoting from within, I'd look at results if it were up to me. Who really *produces* on the job. I worked with college grads and non-grads in radio, and I didn't see any particular advantage the degree holders had over those without a degree. All I cared about was did they get the story I sent them out to get, and was it written and put together properly. I had a journalism grad whose copy was always a mess, and I had to completely redo everything he submitted before putting it on the air. I had a gruff, middle-aged ex-NYC cop who gave me perfect copy, concisely written and accurate, every time. Guess who I promoted when an opening came around.

 

[Puzzicato]

As far as promoting from within, I'd look at results if it were up to me. Who really *produces* on the job. I worked with college grads and non-grads in radio, and I didn't see any particular advantage the degree holders had over those without a degree.

We had a management vacancy a couple of years ago and 3 members of staff applied. One of the unsuccessful candidates was very unhappy because she was a year ahead of the successful one, in the same degree that they were taking part time. But the thing was, the successful candidate had 5 years more experience in the field, had a proven track record for acting up in a managerial position and had some really brilliant ideas (which she has now implemented) for developing the role and her team.

A degree is a nice thing to have, but if it isn't accompanied by the practical application of learning and a bit of common sense, I really don't see the point.