• LAVA Moderator: streaM Freak

College in America

CHiLD-0F-THE-BEAT

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
13,575
Location
Bris-Vegas.
Apologies to those who have seen this before. I found this whilst surfing around today and thought it would be pertinent for a lot of you guys studying in the US.

Cut for size:
NSFW:
4df9a49d-8fc7-4de1-b693-2249bb59b2c2.jpg


Interesting statistics.
 
Interesting? Yes. Do they accurately reflect colleges across the U.S? Debatable. Colleges + Universities fall into different tiers. It's hard to compile a set of numbers that accurately describes all of them. Do they party more at WVU than Swarthmore College? Hell yeah they do.

Several things I'd like to point out though.
1) You don't' have to go to a 40k+ school. I got into them, but I opted to go to a school of lesser prestige, with a higher acceptance rate, because of scholarships they offered.
2) It's cliche, but... you get out of it what you put in. If you don't' focus on your studies you won't get a lot out of them.
3) If you die from alcohol poisoning, that's your own fault. I used to care... used to feel sad whenever I read about a student dying of alcohol poisoning, but now I have no sympathy. We're all big boys now. You choose to consume a handle of vodka over a night? You deal with the consequences. However unsympathetic and harsh this may seem - you made your bed, you better fucking sleep in it.
4) For a more accurate picture, the decline of students/graduates stems more from how dumb and lazy Americans have become rather than the colleges themselves.
5) Enrollments are down everywhere. Admission standards are being lowered. So naturally, freshmen are going to be dumb as fuck.
 
So what, the main idea of this is that university students spend all their time fucking around, that university studies are stupid, and that studying social sciences is a waste of time?

I love that "popular careers include..." You show me one study which indicates that having a degree (including in social sciences) does not equal long term labour market advantage and stability over those without a degree (you can't because it isn't true).
 
So what, the main idea of this is that university students spend all their time fucking around, that university studies are stupid, and that studying social sciences is a waste of time?



^This has long been my working theory.

But yep, those statistics kinda make my case about what we've had polite disagreements over in this forum.
 
I have no idea where those statistics come from, or what 'correctly analysing prose' means.

But what I can tell you is that empirical work on what happens to people in life depending on their level of education shows that a degree is pretty much the most important thing you can have in the contemporary labour market, and that the influence that having a degree has on the rest of your life is enormous.

I work on a longitudinal research project which tracked a large cohort of young people from when they left school fifteen years ago to now, when they are in their mid thirties. We measured their parents socioeconomic status and level of education, and tracked them through their various education pathways and into the various jobs they've had. We sent them a survey, and interviewed a selection of them, every year. The biggest difference in the study is that between those who got a degree and those who didn't.

People with degrees get better jobs, with higher salaries. The difference is both with regards to income, and with regards to stability. Stability is incredibly important, particularly if you want to buy a house or have children. People with degrees have much, much more stable employment situations, ie, they are more likely to be working in permanent, full time, career jobs with benefits like sick leave, parental leave, etc. This also means that they can afford to buy and pay off a house, another source of stability so long as you can afford it.

People with degrees report higher levels of physical and mental health, happiness and overall wellbeing (and this reflects national statistics on health as well - education is a very good predictor of overall health, probably because of its connection to socioeconomic status). In interviews, people with degrees also have different outlooks on life. They are more optimistic, and see the world as their oyster, full of opportunities. This is because their educational capital gives them the flexibility to deal with a rapidly changing job market, as well as the knowledge to understand when and how to move jobs.

People without degrees earn less, have more unstable jobs, more and longer periods of unemployment, are less likely to buy a house, report lower levels of physical and mental health and happiness, and have more trouble balancing different priorities in life (work, family etc) because of their instability and low income. They are also less able to deal with social change, for example if there is not much employment in the local area they are less likely to be able to move out of that area, because they have less transferrable skills, less flexibility, and less money.

The differences are absolutely stark. Education is pretty much the most important way of getting a stable foothold on life. It's the way that class differences get reproduced, and it's the most important method of social mobility for those who come from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The idea that a university education is a waste of time is a complete fabrication. It just isn't true, and it reflects an attitude more suited to a labour market which no longer exists than to contemporary social conditions. Fifty years ago a working class male could leave school at 16 and get a stable job that would allow them to eventually buy a house and have children. This is not the case any more. The labour market has changed dramatically over the last few decades. Those without degrees are more likely to wind up in the 'secondary labour market': low paid, insecure, casual employment with no benefits and no transferable skills.

This rubbishing of higher education is just willful ignorance, and passing it on to young people will mean they have less of a chance in the future.
 
You can find a 'study', survey, poll, etc. about any topic (ANY topic) and find one that has results favoring, once again, 'any' angle or side of the argument. That's the beauty of research. It's impossible to research something with 100% accuracy, or even close to it. In other words, interesting study and findings. However, as someone who attends an American public (state) university I have a lot of great things to say about it. I also have horrible things to say. (I think this survey exaggerates the bad side)
 
You can find a 'study', survey, poll, etc. about any topic (ANY topic) and find one that has results favoring, once again, 'any' angle or side of the argument. That's the beauty of research. It's impossible to research something with 100% accuracy, or even close to it. In other words, interesting study and findings. However, as someone who attends an American public (state) university I have a lot of great things to say about it. I also have horrible things to say. (I think this survey exaggerates the bad side)

Bullshit. As a general rule, higher education gives you a higher income and more job stability. This is not really up for discussion. It's as solid a finding as you'll ever find in social science, and it's replicated across the developed world. If you would like to find out more you can read:

Ball, Maguire and Macrae (2000). Choice, Pathways and Transitions Post-16. Routledge.

Dwyer and Wyn (2001). Youth, Education and Risk. Routledge.

Furlong and Cartmel (2007). Young People and Social Change. Open University Press.

This board is supposed to exist to give people good advice about their education. For a variety of reasons, higher education is not for everyone. But the idea that having a degree is worthless is simply not true. It's analogous to telling someone on the OD board that filtering an OC40 with a cotton ball is just as good as filtering with a micron filter. It's demonstrably untrue and will mean that people make decisions that are not in their own best interest. There should be a rule against it.
 
I currently attend a public 4 year university. I think that one of the more interesting observations that I have made about my peers, is that many of them are their not for education but rather as a right of passage. I feel that their time and the universities resources could be allocated more efficiently if they weren't there.
 
U.C. Berkley offers "Arguing with Judge Judy"?!? That's hilarious.

Anyway, I laregely agree with satiricon's analysis of this literature. Very well-said.

To add, a series of random "interesting" stats may be good reading material for, say, your doctor's waiting room, it really only amounts to a serious of random interesting stats. Nothing about any of these stats, despite each one likely being true or close to an actual statistic, should discourage any single person from going to college in America. That would be insane.

Little displays like this could just as easily be made about the American legal system, the American food industry, American transport, etc. It's not that hard to get people chatting about a bunch of random stats thrown together. Most big-industry systems have enough weirdness out there to generate a pamphlet for shock-value. And it don't take me no college school to point that out there, no...(unlike the person who made it, who is probably bitter over having spent $100k on a marketing degree and now can only make such pamphlets at best ;))
 
Most of this little pamphlet isn't really speaking poorly of the universities themselves, it is speaking poorly of the "average" student, which I can certainly agree with. I can also agree 100% with how much of a joke the various social science classes are. I'm a senior in chemistry, and when I am finishing making up my next class schedule and have my required classes in and just need extra hours that won't take up too much work/time, I go for psychology/social sciences. Those are my "basket weaving" classes. Zero effort, still get A's in them.

The people and attitudes in those classes are a TOTALLY different world from the people in any of my "science science" classes, but the majors that require those classes are by far the most popular and crowded majors at my university. And unless the people in those majors continue on to graduate programs (less than 10% do), the jobs listed in this study are EXACTLY what they have to look forward to. That is not the fault of the college. A college is there to educate in any field that exists, not to prepare you for a job. Preparing yourself for a job is your own task - colleges have career services offices that WILL be honest with you about career options in each field. The career services offices aren't run by the departments with the poor career options, so they have no incentive to lie to you about it.
 
^ just because you can get A's in psychology classes doesn't mean they are "basket-weaving classes". Try having it as your major, and taking upper level research methods and lab courses... not so easy. I mean, being a chem major is challenging, I'm sure, but don't be a snob and put down other disiplines. Some aspects of psychology have a lot of concrete science behind them.

I think the whole idea of the statistics is to point out how many American students treat college as a joke. Obviously there are many people who get good grades and take it seriously, but there is a good percentage of students who do not. I see it all the time. I can EASILY believe that the average student spends more time partying than studying- I know I do, and I still get pretty decent grades (I have a 3.2 gpa). Honestly, I got a laugh out of the whole thing, because I see a lot of truth in it.
 
The people and attitudes in those classes are a TOTALLY different world from the people in any of my "science science" classes, but the majors that require those classes are by far the most popular and crowded majors at my university. And unless the people in those majors continue on to graduate programs (less than 10% do), the jobs listed in this study are EXACTLY what they have to look forward to.

This is not true. While this is a common belief, there is no evidence for this, and in my view it's mostly a patronising stereotype propagated by people who think their disciplines are smarter, more difficult, more scientific, or just better. In terms of pay, social science graduates have the same outcomes as people with undergraduate degrees in other fields like economics or the natural sciences. Social science graduates usually get white collar jobs in a variety of fields ranging from government/public service, the NGO sector, consultants, etc. This is the same as anyone with an undergraduate degree in any discipline which is not directly job related (eg accounting or whatever).
 
Living in America and being a college student I can believe most of that is correct OP.
 
This is not true. While this is a common belief, there is no evidence for this, and in my view it's mostly a patronising stereotype propagated by people who think their disciplines are smarter, more difficult, more scientific, or just better. In terms of pay, social science graduates have the same outcomes as people with undergraduate degrees in other fields like economics or the natural sciences. Social science graduates usually get white collar jobs in a variety of fields ranging from government/public service, the NGO sector, consultants, etc. This is the same as anyone with an undergraduate degree in any discipline which is not directly job related (eg accounting or whatever).

It would be interesting to give a random sample of 1st year SS students a chemistry test, and a random sample of 1st year SCI students a sociology test with say 3 days to study.. and see who pulls out better marks.

I think this would settle the, "which major is harder" debate.
 
This is not true. While this is a common belief, there is no evidence for this, and in my view it's mostly a patronising stereotype propagated by people who think their disciplines are smarter, more difficult, more scientific, or just better.

Some majors are more difficult than others. For some people. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses because the human mind is not the same for everybody.
 
To those of you I offended with what I said, I apologize. I'm sure it came off that way, but I didn't mean that those disciplines themselves are not challenging or without substance. What I meant is that the attitudes of most of those in the undergraduate years (particularly the first and second) are much more lackadaisical and disinterested than those I've witnessed in first and second year science courses. Obviously, those who go on to obtain master's degrees and even PhD's in psychology or any social science (or, honestly, a PhD in anything) have great discipline and a wealth of information to learn and understand.

I do still believe that the type of student this article talks about, the "average" college student, is most greatly represented by 1st and 2nd year students. This is obvious, when considering the drop-out rate also mentioned in this article. And with the social sciences as the most popular and crowded majors, it is no surprise that the majority of these students are in these disciplines. And from what I've personally witnessed in these classes, 1st and 2nd year social science students exemplify exactly the type of student this article depicts.
 
I have to agree with those stats and most comments here given my experiences at UW-Madison.

As for hard and easy majors, the real difference is whether you take classes at the basic or honors level and whether you are actually committing yourself to a real, honest program of study regardless of the class level. Overall, the hard sciences are definitely more difficult than the other disciplines (intro chem is harder than intro anything else at the honors level and a little harder at the regular level), but any major can be equally as rigorous if you try to make it that way or take it at a specialty university. I have taken a VERY broad scope of classes (they make you take assloads of humanities/social sciences/etc at UW), and I can say with certainty that I work a lot harder to get As in my honors classes, and notably, although not dramatically, harder in my science classes. I think two big parts of that are 1) class size - there are fewer people in science classes and in honors classes so the work can be more demanding (teachers/TAs can actively engage students and grade their work better) and 2) teaching approach - most of my honors and science classes are extremely real-world-and-methods-based (actually learning applicable theory and techniques) whereas the other classes have been largely memorization of "stuff" with little regard to cross-disciplinary or real-world application (I've learned about all the sciences in damn near every science class, but I don't feel like I've learned anything about any other disciplines in most of my humanities classes - this levels out a lot at the honors level, though). I think this is what may contribute the most to the real or perceived greater difficulty of science classes - science classes expect you to know TONS of information from other areas/previous classes, but humanities classes and many of the social sciences etc tend to be a lot more self-contained.


What I know for sure is that if you party all the time, you won't get much out of college at all. I spend dozens of hours a week studying, and during midterms, school is a full-time job for me. I don't regret not partying. I can do that when I graduate. I've spent quite a bit of time out of school because of health issues, and I partied plenty then. I'm not paying tens of thousands of dollars to drink and goof off...

I would also like to add that, imho, a college degree is totally crap unless it's in a specific field applicable to an actual job. The only reason that it even gives an economic advantage these days is because a relatively small percentage of people have them, but the reason a communications degree usually dooms you to a barista job title is because so many people have them now. Yeah, you might get that job over someone else, but you're still a barista. And as more and more people go to 4 year L&S schools, that will only get worse. People would be much better off in technical/trade schools or apprenticeships in most instances. A business degree isn't going to make you a good businessman if you have no business sense and no real experience...
 
I would also like to add that, imho, a college degree is totally crap unless it's in a specific field applicable to an actual job. The only reason that it even gives an economic advantage these days is because a relatively small percentage of people have them, but the reason a communications degree usually dooms you to a barista job title is because so many people have them now. Yeah, you might get that job over someone else, but you're still a barista. And as more and more people go to 4 year L&S schools, that will only get worse. People would be much better off in technical/trade schools or apprenticeships in most instances. A business degree isn't going to make you a good businessman if you have no business sense and no real experience...

As I said earlier, this isn't true. The majority of graduates of all disciplines go on to work white collars jobs in a variety of sectors. They make more money, have more benefits, and more job security than people without degrees. The idea that any degree, even one with majors in say philosophy and gender studies or something, condems you to work the same job as you would have had without a degree is completely untrue. Overall, the biggest gap in the contemporary labour market is between those with degrees and those without.

Degrees are becoming more common, and will become even more important in the future because of this. As the number of people with degrees increases, degrees will become worth less. This means that not only will the gap between those with degrees and those without degrees grow even more, but that more than a graduate degree will be necessary if you want a decent stable job. Ie, you'll need graduate diplomas, masters degrees or whatever.
 
Top