There is a fascinating prompt on this week's intelligence squared:
Too many kids are going to college.
As you prepare for your futures after high school, the question must be asked:
Why, if so, is college important?
Give the episode a listen and comment on the blog whether you've listened to one speaker, four speakers, or the entire podcast. What is the necessity of degree in an information career market?
NOTE: The podcast is not available on the IQ2 webpage but can be found on iTunes for free. Those of us who have heard the podcast, where did you listen to it?
Peter Thiel starts off with an extremely convincing point. Many people that go to colleges end up without a job nowadays. Is it worth it to pay all these expenses and use all this time although the chances of getting a decent job are extremely low? Education is extremely important, but what is it really when you end up just wasting time and money?
ReplyDeleteHenry Bienen also makes a really good point. Society benefits from greater productivity and lower crime from the more educated people. Instead of focusing on the individual, the outcome of a society as a whole is improved.
Charles Murray disapproves of the BA. He says it is meaningless and does not show employers anything on smart an individual is. We need something to tell employers "what they know and what they can do not where they learned it and how they learned it."
Vivek Wadwa attacks his position through a third person view, making it very effective. He makes a great point that the education is what makes America what it is.
I feel that college is important. The college experience can help broaden someone's thought and help move this country forward. It also benefits the society as a whole, reducing crime rates and increasing awareness in health issues.
Whoa, MIT was advertising that one of their freshmen chose to go to MIT instead of taking Peter's $100K become-an-entrepreneur-and-skip-college scholarship. “Questioning the value of education is like questioning the existence of Santa Claus.”
ReplyDeleteThe first dude just pointed out quasi relevant problems- he says college isn’t guaranteed to get you a job any more, and he says too many kids are going to college, but he doesn’t offer an alternative…
“Social analyses should be performed by data and analyses.” I agree completely with the second speaker that only talking about college dropouts who were successful is misleading.
“Advanced degree holders do VASTLY better.” I like this and I find it somewhat believable.
Yeah, college is cool, bro. It gets you places in life. What could be scarier than working a dead end job? (working 2 dead end jobs)
Judging from the statistics, you still get a job without a college degree, but you’d stand a worse chance than your degree holding counterpart. Some talented individuals might be able to jump into entrepreneurship right out of high school, but I believe that the majority of individuals who can afford the mental and financial toll of college would benefit from it, and colleges aren’t complaining about the growing applicant pool, so no one’s really being harmed here.
Someone challenge me. I dare you.
@Daryl-I accept your challenge. You said "...the majority of individuals who can afford the mental and financial toll of college would benefit from it." For one, many people are struggling to afford the costs of these colleges, and that is the reason why people are looking towards financial aid, scholarships and student loans. So the "majority" would technically be part of the minority of students who go to college. I agree that they can benefit from it since they are still learning, but we have to consider that not everyone can come out successful. Many graduates come out unemployed and have nothing to do with their lives. The lack of jobs during out economic recession hit these students the hardest. Like Peter Thiel said, in the end, the expenses and time put in does not come out in a greater magnitude. What happens is that you end up wasting both time and money.
ReplyDeleteI think that the views of the side that think that we should have lots of kids going to college just presented the facts that everyone pretty much knows. They know that if someone were to go to college and get a Bachelor Degree that they stand a better chance of getting a job in this economy. Also, they include facts that state how people from other countries want to come to the United States just to go to college here and how going to college is pretty much the American dream.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I believe that the other side also presented some very good points. What is the point of someone going to college and spending all that tuition money if all they are doing is going for a degree. If they don't choose to apply themselves in their 4 years of college, then they won't get anything out of it, and that's thousands of dollars down the drain. Also, this side provided examples of very successful people that were college dropout yet still became very famous. However, they do mention that the chances of this are slim which counteracts their points. Plus both people on the defending side went to very prestigious colleges which doesn't help their point get across to the public.
For the first time I had the privilege to see the speakers while they spoke and this believe affects how one convinces ones audience. For example Peter was wearing a yellow ties, which goes to show just how good the choices he makes in life are. I'm just kidding but the appearance of the speakers did help. For one Peter had a lot of hand movements which helped his argument and also the fact that he himself went to college and is now arguing against spoke volumes and swayed me more towards that point. Also Peter has a impeccable resume and this allows hims to call back many occurrences from the past that I found really convinced me of his point. For example the silicon valley one and how people who didn't go to college were so good at what they did routinely. Also his closing statement and linking it to all the modern day things that are going on right now was really effective. I really did not have enough time to listen to the other speakers and for that I apologize.
ReplyDelete-MOHAMMED ISMAIL
I think that college has become more of an obligation than it should be. College should be an opportunity to specialize in interests or skills an individual has, not an extension of the 12 years of school we already have. While many people and business can benefit from this type of specialization, there is a lot of wasted opportunity in that people go to college for the sake of going to college.
ReplyDeleteJust to encourage some more discussion based on the already brilliant discussion being held here, I'd like to continue Tong's thoughts and suggest that the IQ2 topic is perhaps suggesting that too many students are attending school to study majors that do not yield particularly noted skills in the business world. And perhaps there are simply not enough jobs to serve the amount of students wishing to find work in a particular field. When asked why I didn't attend a PhD in American literature, I often respond "Because there aren't any jobs at Barnes and Noble." I would love to continue my graduate studies, but I frankly cannot pay for the degree and if I earn a doctorate, there is little to no chance that a high paying professor position is available. Just because there are art students and law students and student students doesn't mean there are jobs waiting for them...
ReplyDeleteI generally disagree with the notion that too many Americans go to college. I think there is a real problem in our education system that doesn't gear Americans towards realistic job opportunities (Too many people go to college for performing arts which often isn't a monetarily rewarding occupation.) but I think saying there is too much higher education doesn't solve the problem. We need to set up more appealing trade schools that gear students to actual occupations.
ReplyDelete-Danny Funaro
To add onto Sam's thought, I would like to add that ultimately it just comes down to looking good on paper and to have a better resume. I agree with Tong's idea that too many students are studying majors that do not require such extensive concentrated study.
ReplyDeleteWhat has happened to the self-made American man? The pioneer who is handy with tools and is able to react quickly to situations? People who are like this deserve more credit than they are given regardless of the amount of schooling they receive. Any klutz can go to college and memorize different ways to approach real life situations. However, college would be useless if said klutz does not perform well in the workforce because s/he is just not suited for the major. Too many people are going to college to attain book smarts when street smarts are enough for almost all occupations.
-Andrew Xie
Although I haven't started to listen to the podcast, I have a comment about Tong Bo's statement that money and time is wasted. First of all, it depends on the situation of the person. If the person is hard-worker and actually interested in the subject he or she is studying, it would not be a waste of time. With money matters, if a person cannot afford college, there is financial aid. Even though there might not be enough, the fact that this person wants to go to college proves that they it isn't a waste of time for them. (Undergraduate) College is most likely necessary if one wants to attend graduate school. I personally believe that undergraduate school is unnecessary because many of the skills learned are the same as the ones in AP courses in high school. I believe that everyone should just skip to graduate school once they finish high school. However, some of you may argue that as an undergrad, that one learns valuable skills that are not taught in high school; for example, something related to business. HOWEVER, that skill is offered in high school. One can be an business intern, join clubs that develop this skill, etc. So college is basically high school on an "honors" level. There is no difference. So, everyone should just apply to grad school. Graduate school is the actual place where one learns the skills that they need to be in a specific profession like medicine or law. Many people said that just because you go to law school doesn't mean that there are law positions opened for you, but this shouldn't prevent you from collaborating with people to open your own firm or working hard while in college, and finding an internship and potentially being able to work for that firm in the future. It's all about skill and how badly you want it.
ReplyDelete... I just realized something. Perhaps the reason why undergraduate school exists is to teach people how to live in their own, and to show colleges how well you manage. That still does not make sense because some people still live at home with their moms and dads while in college.
Wow, before I heard the podcast, I thought, how could anyone ever argue that too many kids go to college. Of course, college is a good thing to keep as a part of your future, but the argument being made does make sense. There are people who go to college who don't make it and people who dropout who become successful. They said 4.3% of college students are unemployed, but it don't agree that it is because of college that this is true. Its a matter of how kids handle college, if they're taking the right major or doing something that will get them somewhere in the future. It isn't colleges fault that these kids aren't successful, its because of the student themselves.
ReplyDeleteAlso, just because the institutions of America are the best in the world, doesnt mean the students are the smartest or most successful. Just because the college is good, does not guarantee that the student will succeed in life. It depends on how the student handles their work and future.
@Tong:
ReplyDelete"So the 'majority' would technically be part of the minority of students who go to college."
All this says is that I am talking about college students (a 'minority,' apparently- but this is irrelevant to my argument), which is rather obvious. More likely, you meant to say that the population of students who can afford the mental and financial toll of college is small- although these conditions are difficult to statistically quantify, this statement may be true. I accept that, but even this alternate interpretation does not refute my argument; you make a salient point, but our arguments are not mutually exclusive, and as such you parallel (rather than challenge) my argument.
You continue on to claim many college students are unsuccessful in life, and that college is a waste of time and money, directly contradicting my argument. I would like to point out that not everyone defines success purely in financial terms- for many intellectuals, money is of little to no consequence beyond the amount required to live comfortably.
Something I think everybody should realize is the value of a liberal arts education. To my understanding, those who pursue math/science related fields in college usually have little problems finding jobs. The job market in these fields is literally growing exponentially- this is statistically verifiable. As a result, the discussion of whether college is worth it essentially applies to liberal arts majors. Even those who studied premed/law in college but weren't able to go to medical/law school can find work in a related field because the skill sets they have obtained are in high demand.
Here is an essay from Swarthmore College that explains why college isn't a waste of time and money, even if a college graduate has trouble finding a job.
http://www.swarthmore.edu/Humanities/tkitao1/useless.html
And another one from Ashland University that takes a more direct approach:
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/dialogue/foster-lib_ed.html
@Andrew: Your generalization that street smarts are enough for almost all occupations appalls me. Besides, who iss to say you do not learn these 'street smarts' in college as well?
And, once again: College can't hurt if you can afford it- you will still look better than your degree-lacking counterpart (unless he/she is one of the few that skip college or drop out to take advantage of an even more lucrative opportunity).
Although the cost of college is rising, many financial aid and scholarship opportunities are made available to students, and there are colleges like Macaulay Honors and Cooper Union that offer full scholarships to every student admitted. Although this favors the academically ambitious, those who are less ambitious but ready to deal with college can easily attend a community college... etc etc. I'm sure you see where this is going- if more clarification is needed, ask.
I'm still daring people to challenge me- I feel I've defended my point fairly well.
Wowzers. This thread has taken a life of its own.
ReplyDeleteDaryl, you raise an interesting point that begs some clarification:
When discussing success, are we speaking of financial stability or the ability to secure a position in a field of interest?
When we discuss finances, the academically ambitious, liberal arts education versus math/science ... Are we discussing students who only attend elite universities by means of scholarships in this country or can we also discuss the average C students earning 1700s on their SATs attending average public institutions without financial aid? What about the graphic designs majors and the marketing majors who earn countless degrees and find little to no opportunity in the working world?
What is success? Is it merely acquiring a secure position once you're out of college? Is it working in a field you love? Is it joining an industry that provides opportunities for upward mobility? This argument has many facets that deserve exploration.
BY THE WAY
I'm curious to see what we'll say when we actually HEAR the podcast.
I think college is meant to be the time when people choose their careers. However, many colleges actually have "undecided" as a major for students. Students under this major do not have to choose their majors immediately, and this major is actually the most popular among college students. In my opinion, this seems like reliving high school where students take required courses in school, without knowing what their future career would be. Too many students are spending their time in college deciding what they want to be by paying for classes that are just AP level courses that could have been taken in high school. Most of the time, experience is the most important. Patients would trust doctors who have had 20+ years of experience, who may not have went to the best college, more than doctors who have recently performed their first surgery. How often will you see their college diploma and what their GPA scores were?
ReplyDeleteToo many kids are going to college just so they can get their first job more easily. However, they leave college with tremendous debts. In the debate, student debts are now over a trillion dollars, even more than healthcare and housing. How long will you have to work before you can pay off all the debts? During this time, you might even lose your job and be replaced by someone who is able to do the same work as you but for a lower wage.
-Jiali
@Daryl
ReplyDeleteAs Barney Stinson would say, "challenge accepted." Although I do agree that going to college triumphs not attending college, there were some parts of your argument I disagreed with. You believe in a liberal arts education but I believe you should get a degree in a specific topic. A job market would prefer someone who was really good at one thing over someone who has a more broad understanding of a bunch of different things. Also, statistics can always be manipulated.
You said: "To my understanding, those who pursue math/science related fields in college usually have little problems finding jobs. The job market in these fields is literally growing exponentially- this is statistically verifiable. Even those who studied premed/law in college but weren't able to go to medical/law school can find work in a related field because the skill sets they have obtained are in high demand."
The statistics in the podcast contradict your points; it mentions how about 50,000 people a year graduate from law school but only about 30,000 jobs are available for them. Also, only about 9% of the people who study pre-med have spots available. The podcast also mentions how 17 million people with college degrees are doing unskilled work.
Although having a degree doesn't guarantee you a job, it definitely helps. If people with PhDs can't even find suitable jobs, someone without a college education is definitely not going to get anywhere in life either. The Silicon Valley guys, Gates, Jobs, it's inaccurate that a few success stories about a few geniuses does not set the quo that we do not need a college education. That was then and this is now. Today, a college job is essential, if 6100 people with Phds are doing "janitorial work," the average Joe is a goner without AT LEAST a college education.
In terms of defining success. I would prefer a job I would look forward to everyday over a smaller paying job I despised but payed extremely well. Although obviously the best success would be a mixture of finding a job I absolutely adore with a high pay check.
Oh & http://intelligencesquaredus.org/wp-content/uploads/College_Unedited.mp3 for anyone who hasn't heard it yet and is reading the comments first.
ReplyDeleteOh & Jiali I completely agree with you. If you have time, you should definitely read http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-student-loan-scam-alan-collinge/1103441409
Well before and after the debate I believed that yes, too many kids go to college. At first I thought of it this way, if everyone had a well-to-do career then there would be practically no lower class, and more importantly that there would be no one working the menial jobs, such as being a cashier or whatnot. My view on this point changed when, I believe, Vivik made the point on how there would be automatons taking over the menial jobs. But then I listened to another point, about how there is about a $trillion (did i hear that correctly?) in student loans. Another thing that caught my attention was the fact that 50,000 people graduate from law school while there are only about 30,000 positions, so what happens to the rest? Then there are premed graduates there is room for only 9% "while the other 91% are wasting their time". I also agree with that fact that not everyone goes to college to learn. They go for a piece of paper, but the piece of paper doesn't give you much information on how smart or hardworking a person is AFTER they graduate from college. Something i disagree with is when Vivik said if he was king of the world he would give this education to everyone. We don't have to look far to see that his idea would crumble almost instantly. If we look at Stuyvesant (or practically any other school for that matter) we can see that many of us are here to get a good education, while a small chunk (probably larger in other schools) just gave up and don't care about school, wasting tax payers money by cutting class/not putting in effort. Point is that not everyone wants education, so you would be wasting your time forcing people to take more school.
ReplyDelete@Mr. Ferencz
ReplyDeletePersonally, I define success as working in a field I love. However, the definition of success is subjective, which is a problem for the types of statistical analyses some of the speakers bring up. The definitions you suggest are a mere subset of the whole.
One of the speakers claims America’s community colleges are better than the majority of the best colleges at most countries, and claims to have many friends who attended community colleges while working part time jobs who deem themselves as successful (and debt free). I said that those who were academically and financially ready for college would definitely benefit from it. Now that you mention it, even the average C students with 1700s who are somewhat ready for college can benefit from it, but this depends on their definition of success. As to the graphic design and marketing majors, why did they major in these subjects? Did they go to college to get a job, or did they choose a less career-oriented major for the joy of learning the subject? The unemployed for whom the latter is true can say they are successful, while the former should have realized their interest in the subject matter and desire to do better in the job market conflicted, and perhaps should have prioritized. Specifically, they could have taken on a career-oriented major and kept this other passion as a hobby, or developed them both equally.
@Jennifer
You misread most of what I had to say.
1. Nowhere did I claim to believe in a liberal arts education. I know for a fact that such a thing exists.
2. Your alleged belief in obtaining a degree in a 'specific topic' is irrelevant to my argument; nowhere did I mention specificity of majors. This argument takes on an entirely different flavor, and depends largely on the field in question (ergo your generalization does not apply). If I you meant to refer to career-oriented majors, nowhere did I claim to prefer a liberal arts education to a career oriented one; I simply demonstrated its value.
3. True, statistics can be manipulated. However, if the statistics did not support my argument, I would not support it either. Here are some of the statistics I'm referring to presented as objectively as possible:
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes172141.htm
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos305.htm
http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs053.htm
4. The statistics in the podcast do not contradict my points. In fact, my statements were made in specific response to those statistics. “Even those who studied premed/law in college but weren't able to go to medical/law school can find work in a related field because the skill sets they have obtained are in high demand.”
If you insist, I will find more statistics on BLS to support this. It seems to me unreasonable that all these people are going to college for four years and going on to do nothing with their education/lives; comparing career outlooks for those with just high school degrees to those who went into Pre-Law or Pre-Med programs but were not admitted to medical school should clear this up.
The way I read your response, you didn’t actually say anything that contradicted my argument. Rather, you refuted the arguments you thought I implied.
OH YEAH, So like someone asked why the I and the G in Intelligence is red.. and I see it. It highlights a part of the g and makes it look like a Q.. Therefore, IQ (squared)
ReplyDeleteAs a "follow up" to my post...
Well, Robert Rosenkranz (although he isn't a debator) starts out using logos: the percentage of unemployed high school graduates versus college graduates and their respective incomes differ by $20,000, which is about HALF a million dollars over a life time. Clearly, he's supporting college.
Peter Thiel starts out with his credentials: Stanford and Stanford. People will believe that he's smart and he has the right answer. Plus, he also started PayPal, an online credit card charging thingy that numbers of people use. Who could be smarter? He brings up the price of college, which everyone knows about. He also mentions these "technology" people that did not go through college and did well. However, this doesn't apply to everyone, so I don't think skipping college would work. Somehow, he also contradicts himself when he says that some people are creative, etc. Not everyone is creative and perhaps they need to go to college to develop this skill. He also mentions the percentage that college students don't have job; this reminds me of someone I know. A person could have a college diploma but no major (am I right..?) So maybe these people don't have any major.. and that's preventing them from finding work. It is also their fault that they are not taking opportunities as interns while they are students. This improves their chance of finding a job and it's basically their fault if they don't strive to do so. And the worst of his statements is that he would even go to college. He's adding to the population that goes to college, contradicting his argument. Just saying...
Henry Bienen brings into the account that the society is better with educated people. There will be greater productivity, less crime, better health and better citizenship. Eh, he was boring.
Charles Murray starts off a bit shaky.. He mentions that he is arguing against 4 year college; however, that isn't the only college there is. He also insults the BA, which many people in the audience might have. He calls it the "devil", which might be insulting to some religious people. At some point, he sounded like a robot reading off this paper; this makes him sound like he does not know about his information. At this time, he voice also decreases, resulting in a decrease in confidence.
I only listened to three of the four people.
I listened to the first two speakers.
ReplyDeleteI have hardly ever doubted that I will go to college.
The second speaker has the statistics on his side, but the first speaker makes great points despite his disadvantage. Thiel mentions a lot of counter-arguments which were difficult to rebut. All he's saying is that he wishes all young adults in the market for colleges could have a strong enough foresight to determine whether going to college would be worth it for them. The examples he gives of PhD holders doing work which is far below their intellectual level are outliers. It's anything but what a college graduate should expect to experience as their job. In general college graduates earn more in the long run than high school graduates. In many cases having skills in the fields where jobs are is advantageous.
Coming out of Stuy I wouldn't feel prepared for a career. If most other high school teach at an even lower level then it's not a good idea, regardless how much thought you put into it, to take a path other than college.
http://intelligencesquaredus.org/index.php/past-debates/too-many-kids-go-to-college/
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daryl that it would be much harder to find a job without a college degree than with a college degree.
However, I believe that a college degree is just a piece of paper and is not worth much nowadays.
As one of the debators said, people now go to college just to get that piece of paper and they haven't actually learned much at college.
The first question asked from the audience was about forging social connections in college. I believe that this is true only in the elite colleges because that's where most of the rich people come out of. For example, I know some people who are attending Harvard and they say that people go there just to make political ties.
Now, to answer the questions:
Why, if so, is college important?
I believe that college is important because it teaches people skills they need in order to work in some sort of career, or at least they are supposed to. It seems like most colleges do not do this because they have a core requirement, which includes many classes that might not be relevent to the job a student wants. The "core" classes should just be the high school classes.
What is the necessity of degree in an information career market?
I believe that there are so many people with degrees that having a degree does not mean much, unless it is from a top teir college, in which case it just means a little more. Instead of looking for degrees, employers should have a test in order to sort out the best candidates for the job because different colleges have different difficulty levels to get a degree.
-Eric Xiao
First before I ever begin, I have to say Victoria Yuan you are simply a GENIUS, how you saw that I do not know but you did and that is amazing. Also thanks for answering my question. These people at Intelligence Squared, sure are intelligent.
ReplyDeleteI watched another speaker today, Carl, and I thought his argument was really good. He spoke affirmatively and with charisma and everything he said struck true. The things he said about a BA and not knowing anything about a person if you know that he has a BA was really effective. Also I don't know, I'm starting to get mixed feelings about this debate. After listening to two people I really don't think they are debating what topic is at hand. I think they heavily deviate from if too many people are going and rather argue over whether people should go to college or not. For example in Carl's statement, he never mentions anything about quantities of people going to college. He just says that BA's are fraudulent and all this other stuff. And how college makes people mindless but nowhere is the argument of whether too many people go is addressed. So I think the speakers are good but just about all of the deviate from what they are supposed to be arguing.
-MOHAMMED ISMALE
I am probably the last one to post. I found it ironic that the pros went to Stanford and Harvard.
ReplyDeletePeter's argument was interesting. I never thought about education as a bubble. I believe his arguments were pretty strong. Many people do come out of colleges with debts when they go to college to get a better paying job. Many people don't realize the impact of a loan until after college. I thought his argument became weaker when he said someone with a Ph.D. does janitorial work. However, the statistics helped his cause. Many people go to law school and med school in hopes I doing something interesting while others just want to get a job to earn a lot of money. Thus, too many go to colleges for the wrong cause.
I believe Henry's argument didn't really support his side but rather answered the question Is it useful to go to college? I agree that education helps you get the better wages, but that is because employers look for people with educational experience. Employers believe people with educational experience have more maturity and more experience in a formal atmosphere.
Charles' argument answers the same question as Henry. He seems to go against B.A. really strong, but he forgets to include any real facts like Peter. It seems like he thinks getting a B.A. in Harvard is a lot better than getting a B.A. in a small, less competitive college. It's similar to asking whether passing high school in Stuy is better than passing high school in a bad school. I guess since I go to Stuy, I am bias about this. Stuy students gain a lot more educational experience than other schools because more students care about their grades. His also stated many people just want a piece of paper. True, many people do want a piece of paper stating that they have a degree. Many people just want to get a degree and a good paying job, like an office job. This argument seems to be more specific in that too many take the B.A. degree.
Finally, I believe Vivik's argument explains that more people should go to college. It seems like he believes that he is the only foreigner and that is why he should understand whether too many people go to colleges in U.S. He evens says something similar in the second round. His main argument is if not enough people go to college, India and China will become a more educated place. It seems kind of unrelated to the main argument. However, I must note, he also changes his argument to go against Peter's and Henry's argument.
At the end, I thought the pros were able to prove their point stronger, especially because of Peter's argument.
--Soulin Haque, Pd.2