Are You Offended by the Idea of Going to College to Be "Educated"?

[Holocene]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

 

[Evo]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

Probably because in the working world a degree is a sign that you know at least some minimum level of knowledge in a subject. Yes, there are a lot of self educated people out there that have more knowledge than the guy with the degree, but it's no different from getting a paper peer reviewed. You may have more knowledge than the person that got their paper into a peer reviewed journal, but no one is going to pay attention to your paper.

Also, it is highly unlikely, in most fields, that a person would have the opportunity to know more.

 

[berkeman]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

I think my experience with college must have been different from yours. I went to college to gain advanced knowledge that I could not get outside of college -- my education was not general, it was focused on math and physics and engineering. No, I could not have learned all that material and gained the practical lab experience on my own, certainly in nowhere near the 4.5 years it took me to get my MSEE.

I do a lot of studying and learning still, outside of the university environment. But a lot of my ability now to learn things on my own, is based on the knowledge that I gained in working my way to my MSEE. You need a certain technical baseline, and you need to have learned how to learn, before you can self-study advanced topics, IMO.

 

[WarPhalange]

Depends. Most people can sit down in front of books and learn. I would think that the thing that college does that self-education doesn't is exposure to other people who would have other opinions than you. You learn to live and work with others, meet people from other places, etc. You can do that in other places, too, like the military, or just traveling by yourself, etc.

So to answer your question, I don't know.

 

[G01]

I kind of agree that there are certain things that, at least, would be incredibly hard to learn by yourself from a book. One would be laboratory/ research experience. It is impossible to get these skills from books in your living room..

 

[Evo]

It depends on the subject. Could you learn as much or more about English literature or history on your own? Maybe, if you have access to the right resources. Science? Probably not. You don't have access to labs and to the people doing research.

 

[Jordan Joab]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

Offended, no. Embarrassed, yes.


~J

 

[rootX]

I never understood why some most successful people dropped out of colleges/schools.

But, colleges != self learning.

If we start giving degrees to self learners too, this place would be a mess! I am only talking about math/science.

 

[lisab]

No, I'm not the least bit offended!

I had an upbringing a bit different from most people. I, um, basically didn't go to high school ...well, I went from time to time, and after flunking so many classes they sent me to a high school that specialized in vocational education.

After growing up I realized I had to get an education. I literally had never heard of 'trigonometry' when I started taking classes at the local community college. I was forced to take classes in subjects I would have NEVER considered learning about on my own (cough - upper division E&M -cough). I simply would not have known what to study, and if I were trying to educate myself I would have ended up taking the path of least resistance - like most people. Human nature, you know.

Fast forward many years...I have BS in physics, I work in industry as a scientist. I would never have been hired if I entered "Self Educated" on the job application.

I meet people all the time who grew up on the path I started out on. I know they aren't dumb, but so many have read "A Brief History of Time" and think they know physics. LOL, give me a break!

 

[rewebster]

I never understood why some most successful people dropped out of colleges/schools.But, colleges != self learning.

If we start giving degrees to self learners too, this place would be a mess! I am only talking about math/science.

that's more of a rarity and that's why you hear about those that DO make it


A normal 'successful' person goes to college, and reads and studies a lot on their own at college and all through life

 

[Moonbear]

I kind of agree that there are certain things that, at least, would be incredibly hard to learn by yourself from a book. One would be laboratory/ research experience. It is impossible to get these skills from books in your living room..

I agree. This weekend, I'll be running a review session for students doing a distance learning anatomy course. This is one of only 3 times they come into a lab for hands-on experience. I wasn't there the last two times, but the people who ran those two sessions have forewarned me that they will be absolutely clueless in the lab. Book learning on one's own is NOT the equivalent of classroom interaction with faculty and laboratory experience.

The whole point of a classroom education is to learn the things that are NOT easily grasped by just reading a book alone. As berkeman put it so well, the idea of going to college isn't to just get an education, it's to get an advanced education beyond that which you can teach yourself (and you certainly are expected to do a lot of self-learning in university as well).

 

[DaveC426913]

This weekend, I'll be running a review session for students doing a distance learning anatomy course.

Moonbear's giving anatomy lessons?

Colour me there!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I think my experience with college must have been different from yours. I went to college to gain advanced knowledge that I could not get outside of college -- my education was not general, it was focused on math and physics and engineering. No, I could not have learned all that material and gained the practical lab experience on my own, certainly in nowhere near the 4.5 years it took me to get my MSEE.

I do a lot of studying and learning still, outside of the university environment. But a lot of my ability now to learn things on my own, is based on the knowledge that I gained in working my way to my MSEE. You need a certain technical baseline, and you need to have learned how to learn, before you can self-study advanced topics, IMO.

My stepfather is an engineer. He got his first job when they were accepting applicants that didn't have a college degree. He had plenty of hands on experience through actual work in the field but one day his bosses started hiring outside people over promoting him because they had degrees and he didn't. They had no idea what they were doing though and he always had to clean up their messes and train their replacements. And still they would not promote him because he didn't have a degree.

 

[Monique]

I'm often offended by how narrow minded people are. They judge you on a particular degree and don't look at your actual achievements. I attended a 'applied sciences University', the people who attended University look down on an education like that and think you are not competent to do a PhD. Not even with a GPA of 4.0 and your own first-author paper Ok, they will take you serious with the last, but they remain ignorant in their opinions.

I know University students who have no business doing a master program and I know people who never attended University who are really knowledgeable. I agree you do need formal training, but you also need to look at the person to see what they actually did with the training that they received.

 

[September]

There are some cases when degree may not mean anything.
For example, a person learns to be a psychologist, and he reads about some methods and tests, but if he doesn't have this inborn ability to see through people and "feel" the situation, he won't be a good specialist while a person without education but with this ability may become much more successful.
But this is an exception to the rule!

 

[September]

Another side of this problem (at least in my country) is that there are some colleges and univercities with the main aim to get fees from students, not to grow knowledgeable specialists, and lecturers are not interested in the results of learning process, so when students graduate with a degree their knowledge and skills are close to zero

 

[arildno]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

Ask yourself:
Compare the percentage of those with a formal engineering degree who are competent at engineering, and the percentage of people without a formal engineering degree who yet are competent at engineering.

1. Which percentage do you think is highest?
2. Given that you have two applicants to an engineering post, one with an engineering decree whose content is relevant to the work you wish to be performed, and the other applicant having no such degree. Who are you going to hire, say on basis on your answer on 1.?

 

[maze]

Thats just because people who are interested in becoming engineers tend to get degrees, not because they couldn't have learned it on their own if they tried.

 

[radou]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

If someone is not "smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself", it's not really a shame.

There are a lot of people who are not fit to go to college (at least in my country), but they still do, because they think they "have to". The output is that they study a long time, and are later on (not always, but in many cases) below average in their job.

It's no shame if you don't have a wide education. It's a shame if one doesn't have the courage to start working and admit that college is not for him.

 

[Chi Meson]

I meet people all the time who grew up on the path I started out on. I know they aren't dumb, but so many have read "A Brief History of Time" and think they know physics. LOL, give me a break!

This seems to be the source of most crackpottery. Even if a guy reads through, let's say TEN books, on advanced science topics. There is no one around to check to see if he is "getting" the material. Guy thinks that since he has read the books, then he must be an expert, and is entitled to publish his theories.

There's an interesting article in http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200806/college" last month on the "everyone must go to college" myth.

 

[Moonbear]

I'm often offended by how narrow minded people are. They judge you on a particular degree and don't look at your actual achievements. I attended a 'applied sciences University', the people who attended University look down on an education like that and think you are not competent to do a PhD. Not even with a GPA of 4.0 and your own first-author paper Ok, they will take you serious with the last, but they remain ignorant in their opinions.

I know University students who have no business doing a master program and I know people who never attended University who are really knowledgeable. I agree you do need formal training, but you also need to look at the person to see what they actually did with the training that they received.

I agree, though I think it's a separate point from the original one. I don't run into it quite so often in academia, because I think the places I choose to work recognize that it's not about where you got your degree, but about what you've done with it. However, my boyfriend runs into it often (mostly because they have an idiot from MIT as a hiring partner who thinks only big name schools provide a good education, and keeps hiring incompetent attorneys over ones from lesser-known schools who can dig in, do the work, and fill in their knowledge gaps as they go). My boyfriend is one of the top-billing associates in his firm, and the partner who he works with most closely brings in the biggest accounts, and both of them came from the same law school, which is relatively unknown. They joke that if they applied now with the current hiring partner, neither of them would ever get hired.

 

[Moonbear]

This seems to be the source of most crackpottery. Even if a guy reads through, let's say TEN books, on advanced science topics. There is no one around to check to see if he is "getting" the material. Guy thinks that since he has read the books, then he must be an expert, and is entitled to publish his theories.

There's an interesting article in http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200806/college" last month on the "everyone must go to college" myth.

Yes, a good part of the college experience is having someone around to tell you, "You're wrong." (In nicer ways...usually.) Reading a textbook doesn't mean you understand it correctly, realize the limitations of what it presents, or appreciate the applications of the material. If it were so easy, everyone would get 100% on their university exams.

 

[f95toli]

Also, few people have the time, opportunity and motivation to study 50-60 hours a week for 4-5 years on their own. "Reading books" is usually a very small part of an education.
Going to college is also about being able to spend time in an environment where you can really focus on studying.

 

[neu]

University IS independent study. Its a question of context, resources and money.

 

[Kurdt]

It doesn't offend me but even if you are offended by it, then so what. Nobody has the right to not be offended.

 

[Borek]

If I am offended by anything is the fact that many people with so called formal education are genuine idiots, with a degree instead of a real knowledge. I am a genuine idiot too, I have just found I deleted an important file two weeks ago , but at least I don't have formal education

 

[BobG]

The vast majority of people contend that one must go to college to become "educated".

Whether you're in college or not, doesn't such a mentality offend you?

As if you just aren't smart enough to sit down with some books and learn some material for yourself?

If you aren't smart enough to figure out what you need to know for a project and smart enough to figure out how to learn it quick, then you aren't going to do all that well in a lot of jobs. The ability to do some research and learn on your own is a pretty essential skill.

That said, if you're still researching the fundamentals and trying to cram two years worth of college class material into one weekend, you might have a little problem there. It can be done, but not in one weekend. You better be willing to put in a few months of 70 hour weeks with no overtime pay and be really, really good at getting extensions or have some other way of cushioning the schedule.

Experience still counts for a lot and there's a lot of other places to learn material besides college. The military was always very good at creating (or buying) classes for specialized jobs and a lot of civilian companies do nearly as well. It's not as if a person with 20 years experience is clueless when compared to a 22-year-old college graduate. But it's also not as if the person with experience received no formal training, either. So, comparing a person with experience and no degree to a person with a degree and no experience isn't exactly a comparison that would prove a point one way or the other.

The experience and whatever non-college classes you've taken are why you might also get away with cramming fundamental knowledge into a short time span with enough extra work. You're usually learning knowledge directly related to your job and you're not really going into the subject with 0 knowledge. The end result of your learning might be good enough, but it's always a little stilted. You never really got the full picture and if you later take a real class on it, there's always something that totally shocks you, as in "Duh! How in the world did I not see that?!"

 

[Evo]

My dad learned everything he needed to be an electrical engineer through hands on experience during WWII. But he also recognized that to not be stuck in a rut he had to get his degree. I remember when I was very little my dad was working full time as an engineer while he went to school at night to get his degree. His degree combined with his experience made him very desirable.

 

[Crosson]

Yes, I am offended that society is so poor at measuring competence! Unlike the other posters in this thread, I strongly believe that my education in physics, mathematics, and philosophy is hardly the better for having earned university degrees in these subjects.

After reading textbooks in the second year, I essentially had all the knowledge of a physics and math undergraduate. The next two years were essentially spent proving this to everyone else, even though I already knew it for myself.

Please stop perpetuating the 'science is too hard to learn on your own' myth, using words in this thread like 'impossible', when I am personally at least one clear counter example to the claim. I did the learning on my own, guiding myself through library books, and then when it was finally time to take tests years later I got a 100%.

What is the solution to this problem? Like with so many other of the world's problems, the solution is to pay more attention to each other. As Evo said early on in this thread, the reason that a college degree is so important is because it is a quick way to check that a person meets a minimum level of competence. The reason that child prodigies are not impressive is that a large part of their success comes from people simply paying attention to them.

It doesn't offend me but even if you are offended by it, then so what. Nobody has the right to not be offended.

This is a very strange response that could just as well be offered for any offense whatsoever e.g. Your family was tortured and killed? So what, nobody has the right not to be offended.

 

[Kurdt]

Its not an odd comment at all. I was merely pointing out that whether one is offended or not is besides the point. You can't legislate against people being offended by peoples opinions and comments no matter how ignorant they may seem to you without infringing on civil liberties.