The original idea behind school isn’t to educate the masses. Why would a factory worker need to know calculus and Shakespeare? He needs to read the clock and timetables, be on time, wake up in the morning early enough to be punctual, …
Likewise higher education isn’t about the thinks you learn. It is about learning methods to learn. If you can learn the nitrogen cycle, you can learn our scrum statuses. If you can hand in your homework in time, you can keep our deadlines.
This isn’t to say the system is good, but it helps to understand it when you want to criticize it.
But learning to critically question statements and judging them yourself (which requires some knowledge, for example you can’t question anti-vaxxers when you don’t know anything about how vaccines work) instead of simply believing them is extremely important in a democracy.
Judging sources for the information requires way less knowledge. To continue your analogy, for most people it’s obvious to take your medical advice from your family doctor instead of that crazy aunt in Facebook
While you’d generally believe that to be true it can be hard for people with no knowledge who aren’t the brightest to see through statements like “doctors just are part of the wealthy smart people society who aim to keep us down”.
The problem is when medicine is for profit, you really do end up with that feeling when doctors are rushed to get you out of the door because they need to see ten patients an hour. When you’re the product it’s harder to build that trust.
It was probably better before when family doctors actually had a relationship with your family.
Dont you think that answer is far to clear cut? How about if it’s abstatement heard from a supposed friend’s doctor and you dont want to get a hold of your family doctor for as inane of a question as it is?
I have watched YouTube videos of smart people reading a smart book that basically said that our education system has the focus on learning facts which gives us a submissive attitude. It gives us a feeling of passivity, of the silent observer.
That said, I realize that the system is getting better in the sense that it tries to evoke curiosity and makes kids to explorers instead of observers if that makes sense. Also, as someone who got interested in history only after school, I know that basic knowledge is important and bad if missing. Than again, why didn’t school make me want to know stuff.
Cant you find out the answer for these questions with a series of short tests?
I once applied for a job at IBM and instead of an initial interview they sent me a series of interactive tests to check my skills. I ended up moving to another country and didn’t follow through, but still liked this approach.
Also in the EU I can see lots of job listings are using now a system where you either have a certain type of education/degree or a certain previous experience to be eligible to apply.
Still you need to have knowledge of the specific field, but technically if you started at the bottom with an entry level low skill job you can get higher with experience alone and without a university degree.
A local factory likes people with college degrees, any degree, no matter what college or course, but also offer tests twice a year in large groups for exactly the reason that plenty y of people are qualified, and can do everything they need, but never went to college.
Will they? Probably not unless it’s a niche employer. Why bother going through the extra effort when you can just say “degrees only” and turn your nose up at anyone without one?
I guess 5 rounds of 90 minutes long multi-stage interview process is much more efficient, where people selling an idealised version of themselves in imaginary scenarios.
Also talking to HR/recruitment department, who has no idea of the actual job is a great way to find the right candidate.
A college degree ahows you can complete a series of seemingly-unrelated tasks (courses) across multiple phases (semesters), to finish a major project (degree).
It means you finish what you start and have an eye on the future instead of the present.
Your answer sounds like it was lifted from a LinkedIn motivational post.
College favours the rich, who can afford it and I don’t think people with higher education are better at planning their future.
Lots of people are forced through college by their parents, often backed up with money and safety nets of security - if they fail the first time they just throw more money at it and try again.
A lack of a degree isn’t proof of anything, good or bad (for most jobs).
But a degree is a positive indicator.
The reality is that when hiring an employee I don’t care how privileged they are. I care about whether they’re going to be a good fit for the position.
There are other things people can use to demonstrate their ability to be a good employee. If someone worked for a company for multiple years and was promoted during that time it’s a good indicator.
If someone is 23 and has worked for 10 different companies, I’m gonna guess they’re flaky.
However, if someone worked for the same company more than once that’s a good sign, because after leaving the company wanted them back.
But, all else being equal, having a degree is better than not for a skilled position, and will usually demand more money.
It’s definitely not a perfect system and you’re absolutely right that it significantly favors people with strong support and safety nets, especially those of a financial nature.
That being said it’s a very easy shorthand for a company to take and is reliable enough to keep using it, just like how financial institutions in the US use SSNs as private identifiers because it’s easier and cheaper than running and supporting their own systems/assessments and mostly works well enough
I’ve grown rather cynical of corp-speak lately, and I’ve heard this line before.
Whether said overtly or not, at least nowadays I’d be willing to bet a degree is used as a positive indicator that the candidate is likely in debt, will do anything for a job, and therefore will stick around and put up with almost anything for less wages, because they lack leverage.
They’re therefore cheaper to hire than an independent individual that might exercise their freedom to leave if they’re not treated with respect.
This might also explain why folks with high level degrees are constantly called “overqualified” and ghosted.
Ah, Elementary through Highschool teaches you to be an employee.
Higher education is being sold dreams and taking on debt to learn to be a better employee. Sounds about right.
I teach myself new complex skills all the time, but I imagine I’m still written off a ton because I didn’t pay for at least the four year license to learn to learn. Lol
(I want to emphasize I’m being playfully sarcastic about our clown world society and not attacking you, you are very correct about needing to understand before one critiques!)
Well that’s about the system in the USA or some third world countries. Locking higher education behind a paywall only helps to keep the population uneducated, combine that with no focus on critical thinking in school and you get a population that’s easy to control and to polarise.
Of course politicians like Trump (or pseudo-democracies or straight up autocratic regimes in third world countries) really benefit from an easily-convinced population that’s not questioning them too much, so, given how strong the republicans currently are, that sadly probably won’t change anytime soon.
At some point they’ll realise that they need free or at least very affordable education to stay internationally competitive…
On a national level we’re reaping the tainted harvest wrought by years of cultivating an uneducated populace.
They make for great desperate-workers, emotionally swayed voters, readily-motivated armed forces, and well-trained consumers, but making higher education an increasingly lofty privilege while also undermining it at every turn for politics is totally coming back to bite us.
Instead of being seen as the wealth of our nation, people are seen as another commodity product for corporations to buy and sell. (Readily evident at the defunding and disrespect towards arts and social sciences.)
Now when there’s a “shortage” of educated workers, they just import them from wherever’s cheapest.
…And tons of our college funding still goes to the football teams. To entertain and profit off the uneducated masses.
Well that’s about the system in the USA or some third world countries.
And boy, are we feeling it. Infrastructure crumbling. Crime, unemployment, homelessness on the rise. Everybody is stupid. But check out our new super-carrier! /s
Man I wish I had some positive note to end this with but I’m just frustrated, and a lot of me wishes to just escape. Lol.
The original idea behind school isn’t to educate the masses. Why would a factory worker need to know calculus and Shakespeare? He needs to read the clock and timetables, be on time, wake up in the morning early enough to be punctual, …
In certain country reading clock and timetables was deemed not enough for factory worker.
The original idea behind school isn’t to educate the masses. Why would a factory worker need to know calculus and Shakespeare? He needs to read the clock and timetables, be on time, wake up in the morning early enough to be punctual, …
Likewise higher education isn’t about the thinks you learn. It is about learning methods to learn. If you can learn the nitrogen cycle, you can learn our scrum statuses. If you can hand in your homework in time, you can keep our deadlines.
This isn’t to say the system is good, but it helps to understand it when you want to criticize it.
But learning to critically question statements and judging them yourself (which requires some knowledge, for example you can’t question anti-vaxxers when you don’t know anything about how vaccines work) instead of simply believing them is extremely important in a democracy.
Judging sources for the information requires way less knowledge. To continue your analogy, for most people it’s obvious to take your medical advice from your family doctor instead of that crazy aunt in Facebook
While you’d generally believe that to be true it can be hard for people with no knowledge who aren’t the brightest to see through statements like “doctors just are part of the wealthy smart people society who aim to keep us down”.
Never underestimate human stupidity.
The problem is when medicine is for profit, you really do end up with that feeling when doctors are rushed to get you out of the door because they need to see ten patients an hour. When you’re the product it’s harder to build that trust.
It was probably better before when family doctors actually had a relationship with your family.
Dont you think that answer is far to clear cut? How about if it’s abstatement heard from a supposed friend’s doctor and you dont want to get a hold of your family doctor for as inane of a question as it is?
I have watched YouTube videos of smart people reading a smart book that basically said that our education system has the focus on learning facts which gives us a submissive attitude. It gives us a feeling of passivity, of the silent observer.
That said, I realize that the system is getting better in the sense that it tries to evoke curiosity and makes kids to explorers instead of observers if that makes sense. Also, as someone who got interested in history only after school, I know that basic knowledge is important and bad if missing. Than again, why didn’t school make me want to know stuff.
There’s ample evidence to show that no one learns critical thinking in college. At best, you select for people who are better at it.
Cant you find out the answer for these questions with a series of short tests?
I once applied for a job at IBM and instead of an initial interview they sent me a series of interactive tests to check my skills. I ended up moving to another country and didn’t follow through, but still liked this approach.
Also in the EU I can see lots of job listings are using now a system where you either have a certain type of education/degree or a certain previous experience to be eligible to apply.
Still you need to have knowledge of the specific field, but technically if you started at the bottom with an entry level low skill job you can get higher with experience alone and without a university degree.
Can they? Yes. Absolutely. 100%.
A local factory likes people with college degrees, any degree, no matter what college or course, but also offer tests twice a year in large groups for exactly the reason that plenty y of people are qualified, and can do everything they need, but never went to college.
Will they? Probably not unless it’s a niche employer. Why bother going through the extra effort when you can just say “degrees only” and turn your nose up at anyone without one?
I guess 5 rounds of 90 minutes long multi-stage interview process is much more efficient, where people selling an idealised version of themselves in imaginary scenarios.
Also talking to HR/recruitment department, who has no idea of the actual job is a great way to find the right candidate.
…its ridiculous
I hate interviews. I’ve been on both sides and neither is fun.
One person is pretending to be what they think the employer wants. The other is trying to figure out who’s the least full of shit.
I just generally hate situations where everybody is expected to be fake, and not playing the “right character” will get you shunned.
A college degree ahows you can complete a series of seemingly-unrelated tasks (courses) across multiple phases (semesters), to finish a major project (degree).
It means you finish what you start and have an eye on the future instead of the present.
Your answer sounds like it was lifted from a LinkedIn motivational post.
College favours the rich, who can afford it and I don’t think people with higher education are better at planning their future.
Lots of people are forced through college by their parents, often backed up with money and safety nets of security - if they fail the first time they just throw more money at it and try again.
A lack of a degree isn’t proof of anything, good or bad (for most jobs).
But a degree is a positive indicator.
The reality is that when hiring an employee I don’t care how privileged they are. I care about whether they’re going to be a good fit for the position.
There are other things people can use to demonstrate their ability to be a good employee. If someone worked for a company for multiple years and was promoted during that time it’s a good indicator.
If someone is 23 and has worked for 10 different companies, I’m gonna guess they’re flaky.
However, if someone worked for the same company more than once that’s a good sign, because after leaving the company wanted them back.
But, all else being equal, having a degree is better than not for a skilled position, and will usually demand more money.
Not everyone has the capacity to make it through college.
It’s definitely not a perfect system and you’re absolutely right that it significantly favors people with strong support and safety nets, especially those of a financial nature.
That being said it’s a very easy shorthand for a company to take and is reliable enough to keep using it, just like how financial institutions in the US use SSNs as private identifiers because it’s easier and cheaper than running and supporting their own systems/assessments and mostly works well enough
The SSN system is one of the more moronic things the US does, which is really saying something.
I’ll rephrase it to show flaw: Schools favours the rich, who can afford it and I don’t think literate people are better at planning their future.
I’ve grown rather cynical of corp-speak lately, and I’ve heard this line before.
Whether said overtly or not, at least nowadays I’d be willing to bet a degree is used as a positive indicator that the candidate is likely in debt, will do anything for a job, and therefore will stick around and put up with almost anything for less wages, because they lack leverage.
They’re therefore cheaper to hire than an independent individual that might exercise their freedom to leave if they’re not treated with respect.
This might also explain why folks with high level degrees are constantly called “overqualified” and ghosted.
Ah, Elementary through Highschool teaches you to be an employee.
Higher education is being sold dreams and taking on debt to learn to be a better employee. Sounds about right.
I teach myself new complex skills all the time, but I imagine I’m still written off a ton because I didn’t pay for at least the four year license to learn to learn. Lol
(I want to emphasize I’m being playfully sarcastic about our clown world society and not attacking you, you are very correct about needing to understand before one critiques!)
No offense taken. That’s about the criticism I had in mind
Don’t be worse than Russia. Please fix.
Well that’s about the system in the USA or some third world countries. Locking higher education behind a paywall only helps to keep the population uneducated, combine that with no focus on critical thinking in school and you get a population that’s easy to control and to polarise.
Of course politicians like Trump (or pseudo-democracies or straight up autocratic regimes in third world countries) really benefit from an easily-convinced population that’s not questioning them too much, so, given how strong the republicans currently are, that sadly probably won’t change anytime soon.
At some point they’ll realise that they need free or at least very affordable education to stay internationally competitive…
Agreed with every word.
On a national level we’re reaping the tainted harvest wrought by years of cultivating an uneducated populace.
They make for great desperate-workers, emotionally swayed voters, readily-motivated armed forces, and well-trained consumers, but making higher education an increasingly lofty privilege while also undermining it at every turn for politics is totally coming back to bite us.
Instead of being seen as the wealth of our nation, people are seen as another commodity product for corporations to buy and sell. (Readily evident at the defunding and disrespect towards arts and social sciences.)
Now when there’s a “shortage” of educated workers, they just import them from wherever’s cheapest.
…And tons of our college funding still goes to the football teams. To entertain and profit off the uneducated masses.
And boy, are we feeling it. Infrastructure crumbling. Crime, unemployment, homelessness on the rise. Everybody is stupid. But check out our new super-carrier! /s
Man I wish I had some positive note to end this with but I’m just frustrated, and a lot of me wishes to just escape. Lol.
In certain country reading clock and timetables was deemed not enough for factory worker.
A factory worker seems like one of those jobs that doesnt require a college degree.
I was talking about the origin of general schools in general
Considering public education began before the industrial revolution and factories, that seems a little suspect.
Is that the case? I mean schools existed before in different shapes and forms but from what I gathered, it was in the 1800s that it really coughed on
I think in the context of the factory worker, they are talking about high school
Don’t forget blind obendience!
Okay but at that point high school has proven that.