Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do believe that the undergraduate degree has suffered depreciation in terms of status. Perhaps due to the laws of supply and demand?
Junior colleges were created for the returning soldiers after WWII. They could use their GI bill to attend. Unlike 4 year schools, they did not usually offer dorm housing and the student body was older, not just out of high school. This was the first concept of the "nontraditional" student. Later, there were college programs developed for older, adult students, who did not fit in with students who were recent graduates of high school. They even offered exams that gave college credit for life/work experience. Colleges have kept expanding, making it more available for the masses.
I do believe that the undergraduate degree has suffered depreciation in terms of status. Perhaps due to the laws of supply and demand?
Junior colleges were created for the returning soldiers after WWII. They could use their GI bill to attend. Unlike 4 year schools, they did not usually offer dorm housing and the student body was older, not just out of high school. This was the first concept of the "nontraditional" student. Later, there were college programs developed for older, adult students, who did not fit in with students who were recent graduates of high school. They even offered exams that gave college credit for life/work experience. Colleges have kept expanding, making it more available for the masses.
You may be correct about the creation of "junior colleges"; I do not know their history. I do know that returning GIs also went to 4 year colleges in large numbers. However, that was not the first concept of "nontraditional" student. Carnegie Institute of Technology in Pittsburgh, now known as Carnegie-Mellon University, had a "night school" back in the 1930s that my father attended. He took 1- 2 classes per semester until he had completed the equivalent of about 2 1/2 years of college, at which point he had enough money saved to go full time.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 04-08-2019 at 01:26 PM..
I do believe that the undergraduate degree has suffered depreciation in terms of status. Perhaps due to the laws of supply and demand?
Status may be the wrong term. I think "value" is more accurate. At one time, not that long ago, a four-year degree was a mark of real accomplishment and capability. Once the devolution to job ticket began, it started a spiral of "everyone has to have a degree because everyone has a degree" - and you see jobs down to receptionist and clerk and assistant with a degree requirement.
Devalued to the point of obsolescence, for all but the narrow career/job categories that always required formal higher education.
I think k a better approach is for the schools to be the hook for a portion. If student debt if unpaid. They would focus on the job likelihood with s degree they offer and the students motivation to be responsible too
I think k a better approach is for the schools to be the hook for a portion. If student debt if unpaid. They would focus on the job likelihood with s degree they offer and the students motivation to be responsible too
But here is the thing, not all degrees get jobs. What job could an English major get. I'm just picking one of many and I'm not trying to be mean, but some majors aren't as good as others in getting jobs.
As it is, everybody and their mom can go to college, as a result, student debt is insane and lots of people are just dumb and shouldn't be in college at all. What if there were far stricter requirements, say only the smartest most intelligent people were allowed to go to college? Kind of like how it was back in the day?
Better in what way exactly? Help me understand why you believe stricter admissions policies would improve matters.
They do have much stricter requirements to get in. At least top colleges do. Perhaps the real question is whether it would be better if there were fewer colleges. Get rid of all of them that are below the top two tiers. Make a college degree back into an elite accomplishment instead of the normal conclusion of a high school education.
I do not agree with that, but I do think there should be more focus on technical degrees awarded in two or three years. We need to get rid of the idiotic stigma that becoming a plumber, electrician, mechanic or chef is a failure in life. they should award such degrees with as much pomp as any other degree, possibly more. We need good electricians far more than we need another PhD in Art history or Gender Studies.
I do not think there are too many colleges, or admissions are too easy. I just think the colleges are mistaken to all focus on the same things.
But here is the thing, not all degrees get jobs. What job could an English major get. I'm just picking one of many and I'm not trying to be mean, but some majors aren't as good as others in getting jobs.
First - Degrees don't get jobs, people get jobs. An English major would have communicated that more clearly. While I know what you meant, there are times that clarity is essential.
English majors can teach, write, edit, work in corporate communications, contracts or training or go to law school. That's just off the top of my head.
STEM or tech degrees don't guarantee employment either. One must still be employable, which encompasses more than simply a specific degree.
I majored in English, as did my husband and many of our friends. We are all gainfully employed. I worked in the mortgage industry for many years. My husband works in publishing, as do several of our friends. Another went on to get a Master's in library science and now works at a college library; his wife, also an undergrad English major, is an assistant professor there; another got into politics, another went on to medical school.
We probably didn't have as high of a starting salary, right out of the gate, as our engineering major friends, but we caught up, eventually.
I do believe that the undergraduate degree has suffered depreciation in terms of status. Perhaps due to the laws of supply and demand?
Junior colleges were created for the returning soldiers after WWII. They could use their GI bill to attend. Unlike 4 year schools, they did not usually offer dorm housing and the student body was older, not just out of high school. This was the first concept of the "nontraditional" student. Later, there were college programs developed for older, adult students, who did not fit in with students who were recent graduates of high school. They even offered exams that gave college credit for life/work experience. Colleges have kept expanding, making it more available for the masses.
The funny thing about viewing this in an economic sense, is that the Universities aren't the ones selling college to kids, the parents are! They're the ones who paint a picture in the heads of their children about college: whether good, bad, neutral...
Peer pressure does come into play later, along with one's own plan for one's self.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
