Whether is is their self-serving policies, their exploitation of student-athletes, the enormous costs, the ideological slant, the student loan racket, the social justice programs or a host of other things I am sure I have no idea about. Would we be better served if we cut Universities out of the loop?

 

Wouldn't most corporations be better off offering high level job training programs where they offer the best and the brightest positions based on merit rather than count on third party Universities that have a multitude of agendas?

 

I am asking big picture here.

Health care professions are likely an exception. I'm not cool with having my gall bladder removed by a serf.

Wouldn't most corporations be better off offering high level job training programs where they offer the best and the brightest positions based on merit rather than count on third party Universities that have a multitude of agendas?

 

Two thoughts that jump right to my head:

 

How much merit do most 18 year olds have coming out of high school? Might be great for the genius kids but what about the guy whose above average but not great?

 

Also, while I know a lot of corporations have big time training programs, wouldn't the cost of this high level job training program cost them quite a bit more? Corporations can wait until their future employees get a lot of that training, without them having to pay for it, under the current model.

Two thoughts that jump right to my head:

 

How much merit do most 18 year olds have coming out of high school?

 

Also, while I know a lot of corporations have big time training programs, wouldn't the cost of this high level job training program cost them quite a bit more? Corporations can wait until their future employees get a lot of that training, without them having to pay for it, under the current model.

 

That is for corporations (or any business) to figure out.

 

In short, I think 4 year college degrees are WAY overrated and far too costly.

That is for corporations (or any business) to figure out.

 

In short, I think 4 year college degrees are WAY overrated and far too costly.

 

I wouldn't disagree with that at all. But I don't think the answer is to get rid of them.

 

I'm not smart enough to have the answers because I was one of those above average but not genius kids haha!

 

I will have to think of this one more before I give a better answer, but I don't think this would be good for our society. I'm sure someone else will have a better answer before I come back that I can just "like".

Health care professions are likely an exception. I'm not cool with having my gall bladder removed by a serf.

 

Agree but I would like to see the regular 4 year undergrad degree go away for them. Have a one year intensive program that would obviously flunk most of the riff raff out and then in year two you head to Med school and/or whatever other speciality you are getting into.

That is for corporations (or any business) to figure out.

 

In short, I think 4 year college degrees are WAY overrated and far too costly.

 

They are for what you get compared to the cost for most professions.

 

A majority of employers look at the college degree as way to know you were able to complete a great task from start to finish.

They are for what you get compared to the cost for most professions.

 

A majority of employers look at the college degree as way to know you were able to complete a great task from start to finish.

 

I get that, I am saying there are too many agendas intertwined with the "mandatory prerequisite" of a 4 year degree.

I get that, I am saying there are too many agendas intertwined with the "mandatory prerequisite" of a 4 year degree.

 

I agree with you 100% . I was just making a point that a lot of corporations don't even value it that highly. Companies that ask about GPA or dig in deep into your degree are in the minority. It's just a general prerequisite.

In some ways, maybe. In other ways, not.

 

Universities are not very good at "job training." Maybe some programs like accounting, engineering, education, etc. provide more job-specific curriculum. So, perhaps job-specific education could be farmed out to some sort of neo-vocational school.

 

But, universities have traditionally done liberal education very well (I mean in terms of breadth, like learning art and philosophy and chemistry and physics). There's a lot of value in that, too, not only in terms of post-graduate success, but also being, well, educated.

 

The problem is we've crossed streams on these things. Universities do liberal education well, and that is an advantage to their students as evidenced by the increased earning potential university graduates have,* but then we get our collective underwear in a bunch when universities spend too much time and money on these "frivolous" things and not on job training, which they don't do well.

 

I have plenty of other complaints about how universities have shifted too. Mainly in moving from providing education to providing "life experience." But, that's getting away from the thread.

 

*The other night in the debate Rubio made the quip that welders make more than philosophers. Plenty of articles came out afterward showing that people with a bachelor's in philosophy average about double the income of welders. The sentiment of what Rubio said is right on one thing: companies aren't out hiring for the position of "philosopher." But, they probably are hiring people who can think critically and creatively, who can work independently and in groups, and can process diverse sources of information, all attributes someone with a liberal arts degree might have.

I agree with you 100% . I was just making a point that a lot of corporations don't even value it that highly. Companies that ask about GPA or dig in deep into your degree are in the minority. It's just a general prerequisite.

 

And we can certainly come up with a meaningful alternative to a 4 year degree.

 

A one year intensive program focusing strictly on education would do just fine. Think of it as an Alternative School For Leaders.

 

Let everyone that wants the college experience go to college, let the go getters kick some tail.

And we can certainly come up with a meaningful alternative to a 4 year degree.

 

A one year intensive program focusing strictly on education would do just fine. Think of it as an Alternative School For Leaders.

 

Let everyone that wants the college experience go to college, let the go getters kick some tail.

 

The argument against it and I'm sure someone will comment it eventually is the general courses make well rounded people. It's a hogwash. No one learns or grow from Psych 101 , Sociology 101, or any of those liberal arts requirements.

In some ways, maybe. In other ways, not.

 

Universities are not very good at "job training." Maybe some programs like accounting, engineering, education, etc. provide more job-specific curriculum. So, perhaps job-specific education could be farmed out to some sort of neo-vocational school.

 

But, universities have traditionally done liberal education very well (I mean in terms of breadth, like learning art and philosophy and chemistry and physics). There's a lot of value in that, too, not only in terms of post-graduate success, but also being, well, educated.

 

The problem is we've crossed streams on these things. Universities do liberal education well, and that is an advantage to their students as evidenced by the increased earning potential university graduates have,* but then we get our collective underwear in a bunch when universities spend too much time and money on these "frivolous" things and not on job training, which they don't do well.

 

I have plenty of other complaints about how universities have shifted too. Mainly in moving from providing education to providing "life experience." But, that's getting away from the thread.

 

*The other night in the debate Rubio made the quip that welders make more than philosophers. Plenty of articles came out afterward showing that people with a bachelor's in philosophy average about double the income of welders. The sentiment of what Rubio said is right on one thing: companies aren't out hiring for the position of "philosopher." But, they probably are hiring people who can think critically and creatively, who can work independently and in groups, and can process diverse sources of information, all attributes someone with a liberal arts degree might have.

 

I'd love to break that study down. Philosophy degree is only really good to be a Philosophy teacher. This is coming from a guy who minored in it for awhile. Can get on board with of all the liberal arts requirements this probably holds the most merit when coming to critical thinking. But majoring in it , is a complete waste of time.

And we can certainly come up with a meaningful alternative to a 4 year degree.

 

A one year intensive program focusing strictly on education would do just fine. Think of it as an Alternative School For Leaders.

 

Let everyone that wants the college experience go to college, let the go getters kick some tail.

 

Agreed. In my personal experience I've developed more doing my job. Maybe 40% at most of what I learned in college helps me today.

 

It's insane the years wasted on a college campus.

Health care professions are likely an exception. I'm not cool with having my gall bladder removed by a serf.

True, but does it matter if they took 6 hours of Humanities studying Art.