Article for Comments: The “Myths” of College Education, Basic Skills and you.

[Bob Hubbard]

This is an article I just completed. Wasn't sure on if it truly fit elsewhere, so, I'm tossing it up here for comments and thoughts. Feedback, appreciated.


Thanks
Bob


=====



The “Myths” of College Education, Basic Skills and you.
By Bob Hubbard

First, some ancient history. In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s I took 4 forays into the world of “college education”. Based on those experiences, my opinion of the usefulness of such things was rather low. I was taught outdated skills on obsolete equipment by closed minded conservatives who were out of touch with the industry I was attempting to enter. Now, 15+ years later, I have to wonder however, where the true fault lie?

I picked my first college based on a brief tour, where the food was excellent, the college small, and the tour guide cute. I turned down another school because the campus was large, the food sub par, and the guide bored. Guess which school had the superior education opportunity though? The advisor I had insisted that things I and others were already doing weren’t possible at that time. As the only computer instructor on campus, he also nitpicked my work, deducting points for code formatting (3 indents rather than the 2 he preferred) on working programs, while awarding higher grades to others non-functional but properly formatted programs. I left, disillusioned and angry.
Fault – Mine.

My second attempt was ill timed. I abandoned my dream and enrolled, switching gears at the same time I hit some major relationship issues. I ended up flopping out, and only the guidance of one of my teachers helped me get through the personal crisis.
Again, Fault-mine.

Attempt 3 was a community college. I took a tour, saw top notch equipment, talked to some excellent instructors and saw a great program laid out in front of me. On enrolling however, I ended up in the wrong program, substandard equipment and a narrow viewpoint that disillusioned me again, leading to my departure.
Fault? Not sure here really.

My final attempt was started with great fanfare. I was motivated and really excited to be there. In my third term however, a series of issues again disillusioned me, and I left, this time for good. What were those issues? Technical incompetence by an instructor (who was learning today what he would teach tomorrow, literally), combined with running out of money led to the end of my college experimentation.
Fault? – Mine.

In the first example, I picked the wrong school. If I had gone with the other choice, my life would have taken a much different turn. With the others, a combination of poor timing, poor research and running out of time led to my failures.

Ok, so I tried 4 times, struck out. What does it all mean? Do I think college is a waste of time, money, etc?

Yes, and No.

Yes, I do think it is a waste of time if:
- You have won the lottery
- Plan on only working menial jobs your entire life
- Have no desires to ever run your own business, manage, or lead.

No, I think you need it if you:
- Want to have something solid to fall back on if your dreams fail to come true.
- Want to be taken seriously in numerous fields
- Want a chance at a better job, higher pay and greater promotion.

I’ve talked with numerous employers. When they look at hiring technical people, one of the things they look at is if you have a college degree. Even a mere associates degree from a 2 year school will more than double your chances at a good paying position, compared to only having a high school degree.

You have a binder full of technical certifications? That’s nice. Let me quote a recruiter from one of the companies I spoke to about this: “If you don’t have a college degree, we aren’t interested. We don’t care how many certifications you have if you don’t have a degree, even just a 2-year one.”

“But I don’t need all that stuff they want me to take.”
Yup, I said that. The mind of the 18-22 year old is often quite stubborn. At 15, writing and speaking scared the hell out of me. At 22 I felt certain that I’d never need to do more than write the occasional letter. Now, at 35, I regret not having paid more attention in those classes when I took them.

It is said that math makes the world go around. It’s true. You use math everywhere you go. Ever give a cashier $10.04 on an $9.04 order and had them look at you funny? At the least, you need basic math: addition and subtraction. Multiplication and division wouldn’t hurt either. A knowledge of fractions and decimals also is required. If you don’t understand that a quarter of something is 25% is 1/4th, then you will be ill equipped to handle many of even the most entry level of jobs.

Basic language skills are also a requirement. If you cannot speak your native language with any semblance of comprehension, you will not be taken seriously by those who can. The same goes for your writing skills. If you write and speak like you are in a net chat room, employers and clients will not do business with you. The same is true of your reading skills. To be perfectly blunt, if any of the words I have written are beyond you, then you will be hard pressed to be taken seriously by those in today’s world.

“But, I’m going to be a: singer, actor, football player, artist, etc”.
So what? All of these require solid communications skills.
Singers need to read contracts, lyrics and communicate with agents, sponsors and corporate types. Actors need to read scripts, understand contracts, etc. Football players? A solid education allows them to manage their success, and prepares them with alternates in the event of injury, retirement or not making the cut. If you can’t read and speak, it doesn’t matter how well you know the moves and the plays, you’ll never qualify to be a coach, an announcer or even the waterboy. Artist? Well, as an employer, I get a lot of inquiries from people looking for work. I immediately discard any that contain poor grammar, typos, spelling errors or “leet speek”.

“But I’m going to work for my mom/dad/family/friend.”
Yes, you might. But all of these skills will be of value there. Also, businesses close every day. A friend of mine was going to work in her parents pharmacy. Everything was planned out. Until they had to close the family business. Because she was in a good school, she now has the chance to work elsewhere in her field. Without it, she’d be just another person at the local fast food place wondering how things got that bad.

Bottom line?
Regardless of what your goal is, you need a solid education today. With a college degree, more employers will open the door for you, you’ll have a better chance of advancement as well as a faster rate of advancement, and have solid skills to fall back on when times get rough, which they certainly will at some point. Do careful research before you commit to a school. Check out the programs, the equipment, the faculty and the environment in depth. I’ve made some mistakes over the years and they have cost me. Don’t let poor planning, or the false belief that you don’t need an education be what holds you back from your dreams. Don’t rely on friends or family to open doors and take care of you. Only you can be master of your own destiny, and you need the proper preparation and tools to master it. A solid education is one of those tools.

===
[FONT=&quot]Bob Hubbard is an administrator of the popular martial arts portal site MartialTalk.com and president of SilverStar WebDesigns Inc., a web site design and hosting company specializing in affordable solutions for martial artists. A student of all the arts, he is currently studying Modern Arnis. Bob can be reached at [email protected]. More of Bob's articles can be found at rustaz.net. Please contact Bob if you would like him to review your martial arts product.[/FONT]

 

[Don Roley]

I think that you don't need the explination in the first paragraph. The article stands on it own and you don't need to explain why you wrote it. In fact, it kind of distracts in that it makes me want more information and juicy details.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

First paragraph removed. You're right....didn't belong there....

 

[Makalakumu]

In this country, 50% of high school graduates attempt college. About half of this group obtain a four year degree from a university. The other half move into the technical/community college realm. About half of the group that is left recieve some education of some kind...ie apprenticeships, certification programs, etc. The last quarter of high school graduates receive no more formal education.

I think that it shows how our society is cognitively stratified. We are looking at a distribution of education based on a number of things, primary among them would be intelligence. Everyone isn't capable of obtaining a college education and I think that perhaps we are hyperfocused on trying to get everyone a degree.

 

[Kacey]

I agree that, in many instances, a college degree is needed; in many others, it is over-rated. It depends on what you want to do with your life. Many employers used to look for a degree or experience - the idea being that, if you either completed college or gained experience shortly after graduating from high school, it showed that you could begin something significant, and stick with it - a significant achievement for any employer to look for. Historically, having a high school diploma met that criteria; as earning a high school diploma became more common, it shifted to a college degree - any college degree - instead.

Then began the cycle of being unable to gain experience without a job, and being unable to get a job without experience, leading many people to college for the degree that would give them the foot in the door they needed to obtain the job they wanted that they could no longer get without a degree. For jobs in which any degree is appropriate, I think that the ability to complete something you've started is the only thing employers are really looking for, and I think that experience would serve just as well; for jobs in which a specific degree, or a degree from a specific and related set of possibilities (e.g. any degree in business, any degree in the social sciences, etc.), when the in-depth knowledge of a specific body of information is required, then a degree is more important than experience, and is truly a reasonable requirement.

All students need, and deserve, to be taught to read, write, do math, and problem-solve at a certain level, to provide them the skills they need to live their lives - but college is not the only way to gain those skills.

For students who are not interested in college, for any of a wide variety of reasons, such as interest in a career that does not require a degree (most of the service industry, as well as skilled technical fields such as carpentry, plumbing, and electrical work), cognitive inability caused by developmental delay (formerly known as mental retardation), illness (physical or mental), lack of interest, etc., then other forms of training and/or gaining experience should be available. One of the unfortunate cutbacks, in the quest to make all students 'college-ready', has been public school-based vocational education. It still exists, but has fewer slots than previously, and is available in fewer locations - often, in only one school in a district.

 

[lonecoyote]

I don't think intelligence, or the lack of it, is the primary factor in whether one gets a college degree or not. The primary factor is motivation. I dropped out of high school in the 1980s. It just wasn't important to me. Years later, after hitting brick wall after brick wall career wise, and feeling as though I had cheated myself, as well as being held up as the family bad example, I started at a community college. I earned an associates, went on to a university, and graduated summa cum laude with a 3.997 GPA. My degree is in History, which does me no good whatsoever, career wise, but I am forever changed by the journey I undertook, having to do it all the hard way, taking all the remedial classes in order to get up to college algebra, and having quite a few people in my life not get why I was doing what I was doing. I missed one class in my whole college career. Whatever I do, or whatever happens to me, my accomplishment can not be taken away. I saw a lot of people, who were a lot smarter than I fall by the wayside because of lack or maturity, or not feeling the same need to get that diploma that I did. Having a degree does not prove you're more intelligent, it simply proves you can attain a degree, and for some, that's one heck of an accomplishment.

 

[Makalakumu]

I don't think intelligence, or the lack of it, is the primary factor in whether one gets a college degree or not.

There is a wealth of data that shows a direct correllation between "that which is measured by intelligence tests" and whether or not one has a college degree. People two and three standard deviations above the norm overwhelmingly have degrees, while people at the mean or two or three standard deviations beneath the norm do not.

The primary factor is motivation.

If people were all born equal, then I would agree with this...but they are not. We measure differences in all biological traits...including cognitive abilities. To say that someone with a low cognitive ability "lacks motivation" disempowers that individual. They may not be able to get a college degree, but that does not/should not prevent them from doing something with their lives.

I dropped out of high school in the 1980s. It just wasn't important to me. Years later, after hitting brick wall after brick wall career wise, and feeling as though I had cheated myself, as well as being held up as the family bad example, I started at a community college. I earned an associates, went on to a university, and graduated summa cum laude with a 3.997 GPA. My degree is in History, which does me no good whatsoever, career wise, but I am forever changed by the journey I undertook, having to do it all the hard way, taking all the remedial classes in order to get up to college algebra, and having quite a few people in my life not get why I was doing what I was doing. I missed one class in my whole college career. Whatever I do, or whatever happens to me, my accomplishment can not be taken away. I saw a lot of people, who were a lot smarter than I fall by the wayside because of lack or maturity, or not feeling the same need to get that diploma that I did.

There are probably a variety of reasons that you dropped out of high school. I suspect that intelligence was not one of them. People can make decisions to not live up to their potential. They can choose to sit on the couch and smoke pot. They can choose to mooch of their parents. They can choose to do...whatever. Having low or high cognitive ability isn't something that writes a person's life in stone tablets. It only provides upper limits. The fact that I could never become an olympic weightlifter because of my genes does not/should not prevent me from going to the gym and trying to be as strong as I can be.

Having a degree does not prove you're more intelligent, it simply proves you can attain a degree, and for some, that's one heck of an accomplishment.

Actually, getting a degree indirectly measures one's intelligence. If one were to measure the mean of the population of folks who attain a college degree, one comes to a figure of about 115. This is well above the norm for everyone...which is 100. There are people who are below this number who receive college degrees...and for them, it really is quite an accomplishment. In a way, I have more respect for a person on the mean who gets a degree then the validictorian...because that is pretty much a given.

 

[lonecoyote]

I am not going to argue with your numbers, I will only say that while statistics have value, they do not tell the whole story. I do not want to write a long and lengthy post about the problems concerning statistics and their interpretations and social sciences. Here is what I am saying. While I understand personal experiences, in much the same way as statistics, may be of limited value depending on the scope and purpose they are used for, it has been my experience that I have seen a lot of very intelligent people drop out of college, due to many factors. College is perhaps in part a measure of intelligence, but also many other things as well. The ability to adapt. The ability to learn from ones mistakes. The ability to understand that one does not know it all. While I have seen intelligent people drop out, I have seen some disadvantaged, but extremely determined individuals, one with a pretty severe learning disability (dyslexia) get their college degrees. I suggest you speak with some people on the front lines, those teaching college classes, and get their take on it. I saw a lot of people wash out because they didn't show up, many quit because they couldn't handle being on their own for the first time, not many at all because they simply couldn't handle the work. Now, lets talk about your figures, I hate to, because I don't want to get into this, but go ahead and give them to me, the figures and your sources. On second thought, don't. Just post again, with lots of quotes, and make sure that we understand that you know it all, we will all be very impressed.

 

[lonecoyote]

I apologize for that last. That's the reason I need to stay out of this place. I like and respect you and your opinions, upnorthkyosa, I just don't have the temperament for the study.

 

[Makalakumu]

I am not going to argue with your numbers, I will only say that while statistics have value, they do not tell the whole story. I do not want to write a long and lengthy post about the problems concerning statistics and their interpretations and social sciences.

I understand where you are coming from with this, however, I think that if one really gets into this subject one can find that the scientists really are measuring something...

Here is what I am saying. While I understand personal experiences, in much the same way as statistics, may be of limited value depending on the scope and purpose they are used for, it has been my experience that I have seen a lot of very intelligent people drop out of college, due to many factors.

I have a simple question. How did you know that these people were intelligent? Why would you think that what ever you were sensing about this or that person correlated to success in college? Again, I think the literature is very clear. A high score on an intelligence test strongly correlates with success in school. I would wager, based on the data, that these folks, would have scored right around the mean in regards to intelligence. Their cognitive ability was high enough to allow the attempt at college, but the effort it took to actually get through was more then they wanted to apply.

College is perhaps in part a measure of intelligence, but also many other things as well. The ability to adapt. The ability to learn from ones mistakes. The ability to understand that one does not know it all.

Incidentally, all of these correlate with intelligence scores.

While I have seen intelligent people drop out, I have seen some disadvantaged, but extremely determined individuals, one with a pretty severe learning disability (dyslexia) get their college degrees.

Terms like "intelligent" and "disadvantaged" can be really hard to measure unless one has a standard in which to compare. Often people confuse the two because humans are very complex creatures. In High School, the administration thought that I was disadvantaged because my family was poor, yet I scored high on all intelligence tests, I graduated in the top 10% of my class (in a large, rich, suburban high school) and breezed through the Honors program in my undergrad without too much sweat. My point is that, yes, there are numerous external factors, but the correlation between success in school and that which is measured by intelligence tests pales in comparison.

I suggest you speak with some people on the front lines, those teaching college classes, and get their take on it. I saw a lot of people wash out because they didn't show up, many quit because they couldn't handle being on their own for the first time, not many at all because they simply couldn't handle the work.

Incidentally, colleges have done many studies on student success. All of this correllates with intelligence scores. This is why tests like the SAT and ACT are presented as hurdles for students before they enter University. They may not be always right, but they mostly always right.

Now, lets talk about your figures, I hate to, because I don't want to get into this, but go ahead and give them to me, the figures and your sources. On second thought, don't. Just post again, with lots of quotes, and make sure that we understand that you know it all, we will all be very impressed.

Hey, don't sweat it. High five. We're just casually discussing someting of interest.

:asian:

upnorthkyosa

 

[Carol]

If people were all born equal, then I would agree with this...but they are not. We measure differences in all biological traits...including cognitive abilities. To say that someone with a low cognitive ability "lacks motivation" disempowers that individual. They may not be able to get a college degree, but that does not/should not prevent them from doing something with their lives.

LoneCoyote never said that having a "low cognitive ability" is someone that "lacks motivation". He simply said that there was a lot that could be had for setting one's mind on a goal, and achieiving it.

There was one point in our history when a large numer of Americans couldn't get cars. Henry Ford made them more accessible. There was a point in recent history when cell phones were an expensive item. Giving the phones away made them much more accessible.

To me, education shouldn't always be about status. If differing congnitive abilities was all that was keeping a large number of Americans from attending college, that is a problem that could be fixed...if "big education" wants to fix it.

Scarcity can fuel desire. Colleges play on "scarcity" to charge big money for their tuition. I'm not convinced that Academia truly make a 4 year education to people of all cognitive levels. For, once it's possible that nearly everyone that wants to attend college can go...it will be harder and harder for the highbrow schools to charge exhorbitant tuitions.

There are probably a variety of reasons that you dropped out of high school. I suspect that intelligence was not one of them. People can make decisions to not live up to their potential. They can choose to sit on the couch and smoke pot. They can choose to mooch of their parents. They can choose to do...whatever. Having low or high cognitive ability isn't something that writes a person's life in stone tablets. It only provides upper limits. The fact that I could never become an olympic weightlifter because of my genes does not/should not prevent me from going to the gym and trying to be as strong as I can be.

But UpNorth, focusing on the limitations (instead of the potential) has very little positive outcome. When you meet someone, how do you describe yourself? As someone that just couldn't hack being on the olympic team? When you joined your gym, did they tell you that their staff did not consist of olympic weightlifters, but that's OK because you will never be one anyway?

When I met the couple that ran my school, they didn't say that their staff were people that never earned a 10th degree black belt, and likely never will in their life, yet that is a reasonable upper limit.

They never told me "We'll train you, but you will never be a professional martial artist," yet that is a reasonable upper limit.

I don't konw of many parents that tell their kids that they will not grow up to be President, yet that is a reasonable upper limit.

I'm guessing you joined a gym because of your own desire to be in better shape, and you found a gym that is willing to take your training as far as you want it to go.

My school told me about how my instructors had experience training lots of students, including older beginners like me, and people that were out of shape, like me, and how many of those had gone all the way to earn their black belt...and were still training for their next degree.

My sister told her kids that anything is possible, if they set their mind to it. My niece, who has some staggering learning difficulties, has her sights set on college. My sister and I both know it will not be easy for her.

I know from first hand experience what kind of hell a student goes through once they start failing classes, and how even people in one's own family starts saying things like "Maybe you should think about something else." If she needs us, we will be there. I had a couple of good professors that wouldn't let me fall.

The best way that I can return that favor is to not let my niece fall when she goes off on her own.

There are a lot of people that pat Johnny on the head...or Lady_Kaur, for that matter, and say awww...you are just too stupid for college. That did NOT help.

Actually, getting a degree indirectly measures one's intelligence. If one were to measure the mean of the population of folks who attain a college degree, one comes to a figure of about 115. This is well above the norm for everyone...which is 100. There are people who are below this number who receive college degrees...and for them, it really is quite an accomplishment. In a way, I have more respect for a person on the mean who gets a degree then the validictorian...because that is pretty much a given.

What is the goal of our educational system? Is it to educate the intellectual elite? The average American? As many people as possible?

Should Americans be pigeonholed based on an test score? Or, should the educational system change to fit a wider range of abilities and learning styles? I think it's the latter.

 

[lonecoyote]

Thank you. You are truly a great poster. Good points and well said. Still don't believe in a cognitive elite, don't believe you've factored in some of the inherent problems with all these wonderful tests (SAT, ACT, and "intelligence"). Still believe more in people and their individual determination to succeed or fail, which speaks more to what they have in their heart than their test scores. But I am certainly willing to admit that on the whole one might say that perhaps people who graduate from college, or who might be considered more able to do well in college are on the whole more "intelligent" (but only as measured by a test) I do believe that sometimes those tests are wrong, they don't measure what we're capable of, at the university and elsewhere, and you might well have been an olympic weightlifter (they have weight classes) , except that you might have told yourself you couldn't. Anyway, great talk and lots of respect from me to you. Agree to disagree. Shake hands. I'm outta here.

 

[Makalakumu]

LoneCoyote never said that having a "low cognitive ability" is someone that "lacks motivation". He simply said that there was a lot that could be had for setting one's mind on a goal, and achieiving it.

This is true, but I was only pointing out the fact that no matter what the goal set or the motivation, if the individual does not have the ability reach that goal, it is impossible. We all know this to be true, despite our ideologic efforts to deny it.

To me, education shouldn't always be about status. If differing congnitive abilities was all that was keeping a large number of Americans from attending college, that is a problem that could be fixed...if "big education" wants to fix it.

There was a time when education was about status. Three generations ago, I would never have gone to college. In fact, the only way you could get into a school was if you were part of some elite family. In the last 50 years, these walls have been broken down. Now, if you track the intelligence scores of the most elite schools, you'll note that they have risen dramatically. Why? Because they no longer care who you are, as long as you have the ability that is tested by these tests. "Big Education" fixed a problem of wasting resources because of familial status and now provides education to a wider variety of people then every before...like myself.

There are different types of status. There is the artificial, "my daddy is important" type of status and then there is that which is determined by genetics. I prefer the latter because it is something no one can control.

Scarcity can fuel desire. Colleges play on "scarcity" to charge big money for their tuition. I'm not convinced that Academia truly make a 4 year education to people of all cognitive levels. For, once it's possible that nearly everyone that wants to attend college can go...it will be harder and harder for the highbrow schools to charge exhorbitant tuitions.

I agree that there is inequity in education among people of various cognitive abilities, however, I disagree that the solution is a four year education for all. Top schools will continue to charge top rates for services because on average only the most competitive and intelligent parents can have children with high enough cognitive ability and afford to put them through those schools. High paying careers are cognitively stratified in this country...and that is a fact. Take the MCAT and see what I mean.

But UpNorth, focusing on the limitations (instead of the potential) has very little positive outcome. When you meet someone, how do you describe yourself? As someone that just couldn't hack being on the olympic team? When you joined your gym, did they tell you that their staff did not consist of olympic weightlifters, but that's OK because you will never be one anyway?

I work with inner city youth. Many of the boys I work with look at basketball as their only way out. They practice ceaselessly. It's all they think about. They get on the high school team and play their hearts out. Yet, they just aren't good enough to get any real attention from pro scouts...

I never wanted to be an olympic weightlifter, however, I was a wrestler and my weight training coach was an olympic weightlifter. He was adament that all of his peers poured every ounce of their being into competing and for that they deserved respect. What was the only thing separating them. Genetics and luck. Genetics made the final cut to cull the best of the best and luck determined first from second place.

If you've ever competed at the top, you know that this is true. Why is it so hard to apply this same idea to the mind? Especially when the evidence shows that this same idea applies.

When I met the couple that ran my school, they didn't say that their staff were people that never earned a 10th degree black belt, and likely never will in their life, yet that is a reasonable upper limit.

They never told me "We'll train you, but you will never be a professional martial artist," yet that is a reasonable upper limit.

I don't konw of many parents that tell their kids that they will not grow up to be President, yet that is a reasonable upper limit.

Is it really that disempowering to acknowledge one's limitations? Couldn't this be a freeing experience? Like a said before, I see so many kids that play their hearts out on the courts, hoping to get a break, but they just don't have it in their genes. There are other things besides basketball that this person may excell at. College is no different.

My school told me about how my instructors had experience training lots of students, including older beginners like me, and people that were out of shape, like me, and how many of those had gone all the way to earn their black belt...and were still training for their next degree.

My sister told her kids that anything is possible, if they set their mind to it. My niece, who has some staggering learning difficulties, has her sights set on college. My sister and I both know it will not be easy for her.

I know from first hand experience what kind of hell a student goes through once they start failing classes, and how even people in one's own family starts saying things like "Maybe you should think about something else." If she needs us, we will be there. I had a couple of good professors that wouldn't let me fall.

The best way that I can return that favor is to not let my niece fall when she goes off on her own.

There are a lot of people that pat Johnny on the head...or Lady_Kaur, for that matter, and say awww...you are just too stupid for college. That did NOT help.

You may be right. I don't know if there is any easy way to acknowledge one's own limitations...especially considering the dogma that has built up to protect the realm of the mind. However, I think the fact remains, that people are different. Each of us is good at different things and our abilities with these things directly corresponds with any other biologic feature of our bodies. Pragmatically, we all know that not everyone can be a doctor, or an engineer, or a scientist, etc.

However, if daddy's got a billion bucks, a crapload of oil, lots of well connected WASPs and a big name you might just be able to be President!

What is the goal of our educational system? Is it to educate the intellectual elite? The average American? As many people as possible?

Should Americans be pigeonholed based on an test score? Or, should the educational system change to fit a wider range of abilities and learning styles? I think it's the latter.

Who are the intellectual elite? How did they become that way? Are they they only ones who get educated? Do tests pigeonhole people or are people pigionholed based on their own abilities? Does our education system fit a wider range of abilities and learning styles?

All of these questions are extremely valid. I'll give you my short answers for all of them...

Who are the intellectual elite?

Increasingly, these are people who have demonstrated high cognitive ability.

How did they become that way?

Controversial. Part of it is genetic and part environmental. How much of each? I've read the genetic contribution is between 40% and 80%. Regardless of the amount, the genetic contribution is something one cannot change.

Are they they only ones who get educated?

Sometimes, because our education system focuses funding on them. However, when one considers the actual numbers involved, a gross inequity is revealed.

Do tests pigeonhole people or are people pigionholed based on their own abilities?

I think that the data shows that people live up to their abilities and that tests show their abilities (in school related things at least). There is alot of good info on Wiki regarding this.

Does our education system fit a wider range of abilities and learning styles?

Absolutely not.

 

[Carol]

Very interesting discussion John, I appreciate you indulging me

This is true, but I was only pointing out the fact that no matter what the goal set or the motivation, if the individual does not have the ability reach that goal, it is impossible. We all know this to be true, despite our ideologic efforts to deny it.

What does that point serve? Does it mean that if a test says that a person doesn't have what it takes to graduate college then they shouldn't bother trying?

There was a time when education was about status. Three generations ago, I would never have gone to college. In fact, the only way you could get into a school was if you were part of some elite family. In the last 50 years, these walls have been broken down. Now, if you track the intelligence scores of the most elite schools, you'll note that they have risen dramatically. Why? Because they no longer care who you are, as long as you have the ability that is tested by these tests. "Big Education" fixed a problem of wasting resources because of familial status and now provides education to a wider variety of people then every before...like myself.

There are different types of status. There is the artificial, "my daddy is important" type of status and then there is that which is determined by genetics. I prefer the latter because it is something no one can control.

OK, now that we have all these tests that tell us all these things, pigionholing people to me seems to be of dubious productive value. Why not focus on the limitations of the educational system that is not maximising the potential of our citizenry, and make institutional improvements that will last for generations?

I agree that there is inequity in education among people of various cognitive abilities, however, I disagree that the solution is a four year education for all.

Why?

I work with inner city youth. Many of the boys I work with look at basketball as their only way out. They practice ceaselessly. It's all they think about. They get on the high school team and play their hearts out. Yet, they just aren't good enough to get any real attention from pro scouts...

I never wanted to be an olympic weightlifter, however, I was a wrestler and my weight training coach was an olympic weightlifter. He was adament that all of his peers poured every ounce of their being into competing and for that they deserved respect. What was the only thing separating them. Genetics and luck. Genetics made the final cut to cull the best of the best and luck determined first from second place.

If you've ever competed at the top, you know that this is true. Why is it so hard to apply this same idea to the mind? Especially when the evidence shows that this same idea applies.

Because the mind is not the only factor in success. There are also market forces. There are millions of kids around the world that shoot hoops, yet there are only a few handfuls of slots that open up each year for people that make money doing it.

Take Martial Arts. There are many instructors out there that have not been gifted with the genetics that made them amongst the world's tops. Yet, there are many of these less-than-ideal teachers that study their art, open up schools and teach. Why? Because the market for MA instructors does not demand such genetic exclusivity.

Is it really that disempowering to acknowledge one's limitations? Couldn't this be a freeing experience?

Is there a successful business model currently in practice that focuses on one's limitations, including yours? I don't hear Kia motors saying that they still aren't as reliable as Honda. I look at MySpace pages, and I don't see people acknowleging their limitations. The focus is on what one can do, not what one can't do.

Like a said before, I see so many kids that play their hearts out on the courts, hoping to get a break, but they just don't have it in their genes. There are other things besides basketball that this person may excell at. College is no different.

College is much different. For one, there are many paths in college that lead to a career with more than a couple of dozen openings per year in all of the country.

College is also a unique place to be. It brings students together with some of the most knowledgeable people in the world. It brings students together with other students. It's a place to think, to try, to learn, to do. Perhaps one may not achieve one particular goal. On their way to that goal, they may see another path, with another goal. Or they may see another way to achieve a different goal. One gets exposed to more areas of study and more career possibilities, more ways of doing things, and more ways of getting there in college than they will any place else in their life.

The benefits of college go beyond what one's particular major is. The reason why a college degree is attractive to employers goes beyond the course curriculum.

Basketball offers little more than fitness and teamwork skills. It does not compare.

You may be right. I don't know if there is any easy way to acknowledge one's own limitations...especially considering the dogma that has built up to protect the realm of the mind. However, I think the fact remains, that people are different. Each of us is good at different things and our abilities with these things directly corresponds with any other biologic feature of our bodies. Pragmatically, we all know that not everyone can be a doctor, or an engineer, or a scientist, etc.

What are the limitations of one that nearly flunks out of college? Not being an engineer, or a doctor, or a scientist?

What are the benefits of focusing on one's limitations, instead of one's capabilities and potential?

When I see your posts, you speak of your capabilities, your potential, your interests, your achievements. I have yet to see you focus on your limitations

 

[Makalakumu]

What does that point serve? Does it mean that if a test says that a person doesn't have what it takes to graduate college then they shouldn't bother trying?

In a sense, yes. However, it should never become a gatekeeper, because they can be flawed in some instances.

The problem, in my opinion, and this goes back to the article, is that we place such a high emphasis on a college degree in this country that our entire education system is geared toward getting people it. Everyone's dream is to go to college, yet it is increasingly apparent that only one in four actually make it through.

When the system is geared like this, the 75% of people who do not go or do not graduate from college are being shorted on resources and opportunities that could actually benefit them. Vocational education, tech school, apprenticeships, etc these are all valid avenues for furthering one's education yet we view them, value them, and fund them at a lesser rate then a four year degree. This is despite the fact that there are far more people who benefit from them.

I think that if we made more of an effort to track children based on cognitive ability and guide them along valuable and appropriate paths, we would waste far less money and time in education in this country. It would give all school more meaning and perhaps create an overall, more attractive system.

 

[Kacey]

So-called "gatekeeping" tests have been, increasingly, seen as insufficient when determining which students should attend college. True, performance on the SAT, ACT, or traditional IQ tests is correlated with success in school at all levels - but it is a correlation, not causative. Some IQ tests were originally designed to determine which students should be sent on to secondary school, back when 6th grade was as high as most students went; those who performed best on the IQ test were sent to high school, and potentially beyond.

Since that time, many other tests have been used for the same purpose, in both directions: students are identified for many special educations programs by demonstrating a discrepancy between their performance on IQ tests (supposed potential ability) and their performance on a standardized achievement test (demonstrated ability).

This is why many universities now use a multi-tier system, in which scores on a standardized test (usually the SAT or ACT) are compared to other factors, including GPA, extra-curricular activities, the number of advanced classes taken (AP or Honors classes), work history, application essay, life experiences, letters of reference, and so on. This recognition that not all students perform well on high-stakes, standardized tests is leading to a greater diversity among students, and is making it easier for many students who perform well in school and life, but not on tests, to enter college.

However, as I said in my previous post on this thread, college is not the be-all and end-all for all students, and should not be considered as such. Not all students are suited for college, and not all students who could benefit from college are ready to attend college immediately following high school, for a wide variety of reasons. Returing students, and older students who attend college for the first time, are an increasing percentage of the population of many colleges and universities - and they are, as a group, often more successful than the students who enter college as teens. As a group, their work ethic is better; they have more experience to compare to the information they are being provided; they are more able, and willing, to question the information they are provided when it disagrees with their experiences; they understand the benefits that education can bring them; and they provide a leavening of experience and maturity previously unavailable in many settings.

One of my coworkers, a paraprofessional in my department (we both work in special education) is currently in college, having completed an Associate's degree and working toward a BA in English, to be completed in conjunction with receiving her teaching certification. Due to the circumstances of her life, she was unable to attend college prior to this point in her life (she is 40) - and she is currently working full time, was raised in a lower class neighborhood where she was unusual for completing high school prior to having her first child, is raising two children as a single parent, and maintaining a 3.8 GPA, because she is motivated to do so. I am considerably more impressed with her efforts than my own (I earned a BA immediately after high school, then a teacher's certificate, an MA, and am working on an Ed.S. [Educational Specialist]), because the circumstances of her life make college so much harder for her than for me - I am single, have no children, came from a middle class background where college was expected, and make more money than she does - but she is not letting any of that stop her from achieving her dream, now that she is ready to pursue it... and yet, she still doesn't understand why I never object when she asks for help with her homework.

 

[still learning]

Hello, for specialize fields? College Degrees are important. At the same time, so is experience too.

Today most people are working in jobs that are not related to their college degrees, approx 70% has degrees for something else.

The most important thing here is? Companies look at College educated people as better risks to hire? Why? Anyone who can finish college are people who usually are more self-modivated.

If you can finish college than you will most likely be a better worker to train? vs high school diploma. The employer will be more willing to train you to move up the ladder too?

This is just a general census overall? on the theory college educated people make better workers for upper level positions.

Many companies require a College Degree as one of the things for promotions too!

and If a high school person cannot make the effort to get a college degree? Why? because of lack of modivation...think about it..If you wanted to improve yourself..why stop at High school?

Just my thoughts....later in life..everyone will know why? -- college degrees do pay off. (not always true for everyone).

Anyone can earn a Black Belt? Right? ....how many are willing?

 

[evenflow1121]

Bob, I must say I must commend you, it takes a lot to put your life out there, especially to help the younger crowd around here you are a top notch guy and what you wrote there was one of the best and useful articles I ve read in a while. The truth is I too have a lot of regrets, I regret making the idiotic mistakes I made early in life, sure I would lie to you and say I have no regrets, or I want to live my life without any regrets, but regrets are inevitable. The decisions I made that prolonged what I finally finished, I regret them all. Now you may say sure well at least you finished, true but I would have finished a lot younger, and would have been established by now, rather than starting out at 28, which in many ways sucks, but such is life.
Your college years are a time to plan your life; I know if you are in your teens and are reading this I prob sound like your dad, but it is not a time you should use to go out and get drunk and laid or whatever, its a time you should really focus on what you want to do for the rest of your life. Time is a very quiet thief, and it will steal your life away if you dont plan well for it. When I was in undergrad many years ago, I had a teacher that would say, in life you always have to pay the piper, you can either pay him now, or pay him later, but you are going to pay him; I think you should all pay him now and not later on.
Bob has done a great job at telling you why you should really consider what college to attend based on its oppurtunities and not on certain popular attributes, I will just add that when you choose a major, make sure you choose one that is effective, not something where you dont have to do too much work just for the hell of it, but something that you can use out there to get a job. So many people these days major in worthless stuff and walk out into the real world wondering why no one will hire them. Dont waste your money or your time, do some research, remember these are your planning years dont waste them.