Mixergy.com posted an article about why college is a waste
of time and money. This post was a response to Seth Godin’s article about
problems with college textbooks. The responding author proposed that the problem is
more than the books. “Aren’t we really looking at a 4-year time and money
drain?” While the problem of insufficient time and money in college can be
real, I do not believe that the author supported himself (or herself) well.
He (or she) created a list of what is wrong with the college
system.
It creates corporate
drones. It causes students to “become pawns of whatever company pays them
enough to help make payments on their debt”. Maybe. But if you do not go to
college, the jobs that you can acquire are limited. The best jobs without a degree are jobs such as a web developer, a secretary, a mechanic, a
surveyor, a cosmetologist, a machine operator, etc. Even these jobs require
some schooling. However, I recognize that they are less expensive. They also
bring in less income. While there may be less dead from school, there will be
more debt from normal life. It will be harder to pay of mortgages, pay taxes,
support a family, buy groceries, pay for gas, and many other things that a
citizen of the United States must pay. Career Cast recorded average income
levels for jobs that do not require a college degree and for jobs that do
require a college degree. The job bringing in the college degree makes abut double
the salary. That adds up over a few years. Yes, debts from college cause
employees to be dependent on their job and boss, but won’t that happen no
matter what the job is? Money will always be difficult to obtain, whether in
college or out.
It doesn’t teach the
way people learn. The author claims that people learn by doing, not by
sitting in class and being lectured to. This is an incorrect claim. There are
three learning styles that people may have. Indiana University said, “Everyone
processes and learns new information in different ways. There are three maincognitive learning styles: visual [seeing], auditory [hearing], and kinesthetic [doing].” The reality is
that college is indeed mostly reading, writing papers, and listening to
lectures. The visual learner will learn well in college as much of the homework
is reading and writing. The auditory learner will retain information through
the lectures. In the lectures, visual learners will retain information through
taking notes. The kinesthetic learner may be at a disadvantage in gen-ed classes. However, kinesthetic learners typically major in science or math.
These degrees are much more hands on in definition; especially science. Most
classes taken have labs. Thus, the kinesthetic learner is still being taught in
the way they personally learn. The author of the article was assuming that no
one learns from lectures. Readers can assume that the author does not learn
from lectures… The author is probably either a kinesthetic/hands on learner... or should have learned to take better notes.
Four years of
information is too much too retain. True. There is a lot of information
that will be forgotten. But once learned, it is easier recalled. If a student
cannot remember what they learned previously, it probably shows their study
style – cramming. While college can encourage cramming, it is really
encouraging freedom. Students have the syllabus from the beginning and are very
capable of spacing their time out appropriately. If a student makes sure they
learn the information best suited to their learning style, there is much more
of a chance they will remember it. However, not every piece of information will
be used in the workplace. They must be aware of certain concepts, but will not
need to know every detail. So then why is college important, you ask? Many
details will be needed, and employers still require all of the classes.
Its promise is a hoax.
“A correlation
between B.A.s and incomes is not proof of cause and effect. It may reflect
nothing more than the fact that the economy rewards smart people and smart
people are likely to go to college.” Okay. But if more “smart people” do not go
to college, aren’t you just creating people that are less smart? I do not see
how resisting college fixes this problem.
Also,
that implies that college does not increase the intelligence of people who
attend college. Intelligent people may attend college. But they become more
intelligent. Without the neurosurgeoun attending college, I certainly would not
have trusted Mayo clinicians to remove my dad’s brain tumor this past year.
Whether the intelligence of graduates is depending on their
abilities or their studies, statistics show that the unemployment rate of
people who went to college is significantly lower than those who did not. It’s
promise is not a hoax.
The truth is that
college is one big party. Before my next statement, I would like to
preface with my personal decision. I will be attending Taylor University
because of my love for their discipleship community. I love that their focus is
solely on the glory of God. Education and community fall in line with that. I
choose to glorify God with my body and with my actions, because of my huge love
for Him and what He has done. Thus, I will not be taking part in parties and neither will the school
that I will be attending. However, regardless of my personal decision, this problem
still must be addressed.
“Are
there some students who study hard and learn a lot in college? Yes, but most of
those students are learning despite the environment, not because of it.” (emphasis added) I
think the author just proved that it does not matter whether it is a party school or
not. Students are learning at college.
I
agree that college is expensive (and I would love for it to be less expensive),
but that is a completely different argument than the one the author was making.
College
is not a waste of time or money.
No comments:
Post a Comment