souldoubt
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 11:57:14 GMT -5
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by souldoubt on Nov 15, 2019 16:04:04 GMT -5
I frankly don't think a good chunk of people supporting it are doing so because they think the system is being ruined it's because it's easier to be sold on someone making their lives better rather than having to do it themselves while they're just going through the motions. In 2016 a family friend told me his son/daughter in law were supporting Bernie because he was talking about paying off student loan debt while they didn't seem to understand that money would come from taxpayers. 3 years later they have a kid, a house, careers and now they don't want to pay more than they already do in taxes. I realize that's only one example and I'm not saying it applies to everyone or even a certain percentage of people but most of us are young, idealistic and looking for the easy way out at one time or another.
There was a poll during the 2016 primaries among Bernie supporters and they overwhelmingly supported more tax dollars going towards ____ then when the wording was changed to include "funded by higher payroll taxes" suddenly the support dropped below 50% because those working didn't actually want to pay for it. That's nothing ground breaking but it's always easy to support something when someone else is paying for it. I don't believe any politician who tries selling some new tax revenue stream because projections come up short, funds get mismanaged, funds used for something else and what's left of the middle class usually bears the brunt of it. Frankly I think the talk of any new taxes should scare everyone because both sides have shown zero ability to live within their means and even right now I haven't heard anything about cutting from the budget.
As far as preying on kids I don't get it because I never felt that way when I graduated high school. I knew that if I signed on the dotted line and used school loans for school, fun, whatever that I would have to pay it back. I'm all for finance/life classes in high school to teach kids this but I'm not in favor of bailing out people when they make that decision. The outstanding student loan debt has increased 250% since the mortgage crisis in 2008. How many people were out of a job and just decided to go back to school, use that money for something else and so on we'll never know but I don't think that's on taxpayers. Obviously prices have gone up but no one forces you to go out of state, go to a university or even a state school as JC is a better way for many people to go especially if you don't know college is for you or what you want to major in. I'm all for doing something to address the cost of college but even that's not being talked about right now it's simply trying to buy votes.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 24, 2024 20:50:12 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 16:06:38 GMT -5
If you believe that the problem is "these people are ruining the way the system itself works" then isn't one of the most impactful ways of changing things to support politicians you think will change things? Isn't that really the complaint, not that "things are just different" but that "these folks are ruining the core of the system". I think both pieces of advice have merit. On the one hand you have to make your own personal decisions based on today, but you can still work to fix a system in the long term. Like I don't see anyone saying "the system is broken, so don't try to get a job, just hope that Bernie (or whoever) will institute a plan to give us all free housing, food, etc...don't do anything, just hang out and wait for it to happen". I also think a lot of the "don't rack up 100k in debt" counter-argument goes a lot like "you're basically preying on kids and roping them into a lifetime of financial difficulty". Why do we think that 18 year olds can make lifelong financial decisions but they can't drink alcohol because of their decision-making?The flip side is, if not for student loans I would not be where I am today in life. Even though I worked full time and went to school full time, I still had to take out student loans. Should kids like me be penalized because some kids are stupid and just take out massive loans for worthless degrees? If an 18 year old can sign up with the military and risk their life to protect our country, they should be held accountable for student loan debt. Maybe instead of teaching to the test in school, kids should be taught some financial skills. I know we didn't have that when I was in school and my mom was an idiot with money. I truly think I was born an accountant!lol The kids CAN'T take massive student loan debt. They need their parents to do that for them, either by cosigning or taking out Parent Plus loans...often times with the "You're going to be the one paying this," agreement going on behind the scenes.
Unless they're over 24 or emancipated, students only qualify for 27K total for undergrad. So, it's the stupid parents.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 15, 2019 16:40:45 GMT -5
The flip side is, if not for student loans I would not be where I am today in life. Even though I worked full time and went to school full time, I still had to take out student loans. Should kids like me be penalized because some kids are stupid and just take out massive loans for worthless degrees? If an 18 year old can sign up with the military and risk their life to protect our country, they should be held accountable for student loan debt. Maybe instead of teaching to the test in school, kids should be taught some financial skills. I know we didn't have that when I was in school and my mom was an idiot with money. I truly think I was born an accountant!lol The kids CAN'T take massive student loan debt. They need their parents to do that for them, either by cosigning or taking out Parent Plus loans...often times with the "You're going to be the one paying this," agreement going on behind the scenes.
Unless they're over 24 or emancipated, students only qualify for 27K total for undergrad. So, it's the stupid parents. The subsidized limit (where the dept of education pays your interest) is much lower than unsubsidized. That is the loan where interest accrues and that is what got my niece in trouble. Interest was accruing and she was clueless. If the info in the link is correct, the subsidized limit is $23k while the unsubsidized limit is $31k. But the interest is accruing while in school and when in deferment. www.discover.com/student-loans/college-planning/how-to-pay/loans/estimate-loan-amount
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 24, 2024 20:50:12 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 16:56:43 GMT -5
The kids CAN'T take massive student loan debt. They need their parents to do that for them, either by cosigning or taking out Parent Plus loans...often times with the "You're going to be the one paying this," agreement going on behind the scenes.
Unless they're over 24 or emancipated, students only qualify for 27K total for undergrad. So, it's the stupid parents. The subsidized limit (where the dept of education pays your interest) is much lower than unsubsidized. That is the loan where interest accrues and that is what got my niece in trouble. Interest was accruing and she was clueless. If the info in the link is correct, the subsidized limit is $23k while the unsubsidized limit is $31k. But the interest is accruing while in school and when in deferment. www.discover.com/student-loans/college-planning/how-to-pay/loans/estimate-loan-amountThe 31K limit is subsidized and unsubsidized combined.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,388
|
Post by thyme4change on Nov 15, 2019 20:06:43 GMT -5
I agree. I've known plenty of boomers who were lazy, good for nothing people, and plenty who worked hard and accomplished a lot. It so happens that all the millenials I know are very smart, hardworking and successful, so I have a warped view of them. I'm sure there are plenty of them who are wasting oxygen every minute of the day. There are good and bad in every generation. It does seem, though, that the millennials are looking for a lot of free stuff. The boomers didn't ask for taxpayers to pay for their college. Gen-x didn't ask for the taxpayers to pay for their college. The millennials have latched onto socialism like no one's business. It is hard not to think of that generation as entitled...entitled to taxpayers money! On the flip side, I have worked with some millennials who are extremely bright and hard working. But these are not millennials embracing socialism as they have busted their ass to climb the corporate ladder. Maybe they are latching on to socialism because they see how so many are being left behind by capitalism. You and I were raised in a time that the middle class was still a thing. Millennials see the divide between the very rich and the average, and are thinking there must be a better way. Socialism isn't it, but we can't seem to get any other controls passed, either.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,388
|
Post by thyme4change on Nov 15, 2019 20:09:54 GMT -5
Millenials and Zoomers are having to pay a shit ton more for college than the Gen X'ers and definitely way more than the Boomers did. Not to mention, in Boomer time you could get a good job right out of high school without college much, much easier than you can now. For comparison. I paid $38/credit for tuition in 1987, and was making $6/hour. I paid as I went. I even bought a house while in college. If my son were to go to the same school right now it's $292/credit! He's making $11/hour working at the exact same place as I was in 87 for $6/hour. Nearly 8X the tuition and not even twice the wage. There's no way in hell he could pay as he went like I did.
I don't think taxpayers should pay for college. That said, it makes a lot more sense for people to want that when college is now FAR less affordable than it was back then, and also far more necessary to get a job in the current economy than it's ever been. Ignoring that I STILL don't think taxpayers should be forking over money for college, I think the argument is much stronger today when you take an 18 year old with no money who "needs" college and has no viable way to pay for it in the moment (I would say loans are not paying for it in the moment). But let's also not forget, boomers, and the elderly/older folks in general, ask for taxpayers to pay for LOTS of things for them. The taxpayers paid for my college. All the state schools got a shit ton of funding from the state when I attended. It wasn't free, but it was way, way more affordable than it is today. I can't fault the next generation for wanting to do what I did - go to a subsidized school so it would be a reasonable cost.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 24, 2024 20:50:12 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 20:54:57 GMT -5
The Pell grant covered 100% of my tuition. I never would have qualified for a Pell today, but back then if your parents didn't claim you on their taxes, you could claim you were independent. Today, it's damn near impossible for a kid under 24 to be declared independent and all their parents financial info is used to determine aid. So, if they make decent money and don't want to help you out, you're kind of screwed unless you do something like marry a friend in a similar predicament.
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,766
|
Post by jerseygirl on Nov 17, 2019 13:29:58 GMT -5
When our sons were in HS the counselor said private college costs were always about the cost of a new Cadillac. Problem is most people won’t spend or cant afford the cost of a new Cadillac every year or even ever but with loans they can for private college. If most can only afford to buy a Toyota why do people think taking out huge loans is a good idea? Parents need to make decisions, not 18 yr old kids
Why should taxpayers take over huge loans for kids going to expensive college that they can’t afford? A degree from a state college will most likely allow the same career as a degree from most private colleges at a fraction of the cost
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Nov 18, 2019 8:42:20 GMT -5
If you believe that the problem is "these people are ruining the way the system itself works" then isn't one of the most impactful ways of changing things to support politicians you think will change things? Isn't that really the complaint, not that "things are just different" but that "these folks are ruining the core of the system". I think both pieces of advice have merit. On the one hand you have to make your own personal decisions based on today, but you can still work to fix a system in the long term. Like I don't see anyone saying "the system is broken, so don't try to get a job, just hope that Bernie (or whoever) will institute a plan to give us all free housing, food, etc...don't do anything, just hang out and wait for it to happen". I also think a lot of the "don't rack up 100k in debt" counter-argument goes a lot like "you're basically preying on kids and roping them into a lifetime of financial difficulty". Why do we think that 18 year olds can make lifelong financial decisions but they can't drink alcohol because of their decision-making?The flip side is, if not for student loans I would not be where I am today in life. Even though I worked full time and went to school full time, I still had to take out student loans. Should kids like me be penalized because some kids are stupid and just take out massive loans for worthless degrees? If an 18 year old can sign up with the military and risk their life to protect our country, they should be held accountable for student loan debt. Maybe instead of teaching to the test in school, kids should be taught some financial skills. I know we didn't have that when I was in school and my mom was an idiot with money. I truly think I was born an accountant!lol My point isn't that student loans are bad, or that they shouldn't exist. It's the idea that the amount of student loans is potentially a lifelong commitment (as opposed to say a 5-10 year commitment). The flip side would be that if signing up for the military was for life, with no way out once you've signed up. I think student loans are fine, I think the length of time you might be committing yourself too is potentially a lot for 18 year olds.
|
|
t-dog
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 17, 2011 13:46:06 GMT -5
Posts: 2,016
|
Post by t-dog on Nov 18, 2019 14:05:39 GMT -5
Yes, but what about the kids who aren't as smart as your kid? Alabama has a 4X4 curriculum, which means 4 years of all of the 4 core subjects--English, math, social studies, and science. But the math is a problem for many. The state's solution was to also offer Algebra and Geometry as a two-year course for those who needed it. So same requirement as you had--just spread over 4 years. I think they got rid of the Geometry A and Geometry B course in favor of just geometry and now those kids take Algebraic Connections as their fourth year course. phil5185 , you will appreciate this. My 76-year-old husband always credited his high school geometry teacher for his success as a young pool hustler when he joined the Navy at 18. It's all about the angles. But this is specific to your state. Here in CA, they start preparing for high school Math from middle school. You have to have a Math track as part of both middle and high school and you cannot take the same class twice. You can take it during summer if you fail it during the school year. So I am in northern California. My son failed Math 1 first semester of his freshman year. He repeated it his sophomore year, he DID NOT have to take it in summer school. Graduation requirements are 2 years of math here but to get into a UC or Cal State you need 3 years. Math instruction is HORRENDOUSLY POOR in our school district. So many kids I know have failed at least one semester. Its truly horrific what "they" have done to math instruction now a days.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Nov 19, 2019 13:46:04 GMT -5
My area has a much more common sense approach to education. Kids who are academically inclined can do concurrent enrollment a graduate high school with two years of college credit under their belts. The community colleges and four year colleges work together, so that everything dovetails perfectly. The classes even have the same course number between the colleges, so there is no confusion or lost credits. At the local commuter university down the road, the tuition is six grand a year. And since most of the professors there have day jobs in the field, you don’t have programs being created by a bunch of ivory tower eggheads that waste the students time and money teaching them skills that nobody wants.
For the kids were not so academically inclined, the high schools have partnered with businesses to create programs that give student skills employers actually want. We have kids graduating high school and walking into a job making 50 grand a year.
I think college is great if you are academically inclined and have a certain degree of maturity. But forcing a kid it was unlikely to succeed in college to piss away four years in high school doing nothing but college prep, and having them graduate with no marketable skills, is a really shitty thing to do. A smart kid who didn’t do well in high school can always go back to school later, and it’s a heck of a lot more likely to happen if the kid isn’t starving.
|
|
gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Nov 19, 2019 13:57:16 GMT -5
My area has a much more common sense approach to education. Kids who are academically inclined can do concurrent enrollment a graduate high school with two years of college credit under their belts. The community colleges and four year colleges work together, so that everything dovetails perfectly. The classes even have the same course number between the colleges, so there is no confusion or lost credits. At the local commuter university down the road, the tuition is six grand a year. And since most of the professors there have day jobs in the field, you don’t have programs being created by a bunch of ivory tower eggheads that waste the students time and money teaching them skills that nobody wants. For the kids were not so academically inclined, the high schools have partnered with businesses to create programs that give student skills employers actually want. We have kids graduating high school and walking into a job making 50 grand a year. I think college is great if you are academically inclined and have a certain degree of maturity. But forcing a kid it was unlikely to succeed in college to piss away four years in high school doing nothing but college prep, and having them graduate with no marketable skills, is a really shitty thing to do. A smart kid who didn’t do well in high school can always go back to school later, and it’s a heck of a lot more likely to happen if the kid isn’t starving. I do like this idea in theory but I was chatting recently with a professor and she said that they've been finding students who come in with these college credits are very often unprepared for the higher level classes and find themselves in trouble quickly. There is a vast difference between basic math classes at a community college versus a university. So, you have kids that now have a GPA that's in trouble who would have been much better served by simply completing high school and then taking their foundation courses at the university.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,450
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 19, 2019 14:03:59 GMT -5
Bisy Backson.
|
|
TheOtherMe
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 14:40:52 GMT -5
Posts: 27,157
Mini-Profile Name Color: e619e6
|
Post by TheOtherMe on Nov 19, 2019 14:49:46 GMT -5
My 3 nephews all entered college with a semester's worth of credits from community college. None of them had to retake courses that they had taken at the community college.
We are getting to the last one being out of college 9 years now so it may have changed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 24, 2024 20:50:12 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2019 15:09:27 GMT -5
I think for a lot of classes it wouldn't matter. If you're going into engineering and get credits for gen ed classes like History and Literature, then who really cares if the classes were less rigorous? I wish my son would have done more of that, but his school did not offer much in way of AP classes to begin with.
However, in our college visits, we heard repeatedly to think long and hard about using AP credit to get out of lower level Calc and Physics classes for an engineering major. That jumping into the upper levels of these classes in college could be a huge shock and it may be better to repeat the level you last took in high school.
|
|
gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Nov 19, 2019 15:15:38 GMT -5
I think for a lot of classes it wouldn't matter. If you're going into engineering and get credits for gen ed classes like History and Literature, then who really cares if the classes were less rigorous? I wish my son would have done more of that, but his school did not offer much in way of AP classes to begin with.
However, in our college visits, we heard repeatedly to think long and hard about using AP credit to get out of lower level Calc and Physics classes for an engineering major. That jumping into the upper levels of these classes in college could be a huge shock and it may be better to repeat the level you last took in high school.
Perhaps I should have mentioned that the woman I was chatting with is a professor at Georgia Tech .
|
|
teen persuasion
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,039
|
Post by teen persuasion on Nov 19, 2019 15:25:28 GMT -5
I think for a lot of classes it wouldn't matter. If you're going into engineering and get credits for gen ed classes like History and Literature, then who really cares if the classes were less rigorous? I wish my son would have done more of that, but his school did not offer much in way of AP classes to begin with.
However, in our college visits, we heard repeatedly to think long and hard about using AP credit to get out of lower level Calc and Physics classes for an engineering major. That jumping into the upper levels of these classes in college could be a huge shock and it may be better to repeat the level you last took in high school.
Yeah, my kids that took calc in HS deliberately retook it in college -they knew the version they saw in HS wasn't as thorough as the engineering college version would be. In fact, DD1 did a 6 year Gifted Math Program thru Jr/Sr HS at a university. I drove her for math classes at the university instead of HS courses, and they accelerated to college level courses by grade 10. She took calc AT THE UNIVERSITY (but thru GMP), and still opted to retake it in college (different university) despite having earned 22 college credits in math.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 24, 2024 20:50:12 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2019 15:33:18 GMT -5
I think for a lot of classes it wouldn't matter. If you're going into engineering and get credits for gen ed classes like History and Literature, then who really cares if the classes were less rigorous? I wish my son would have done more of that, but his school did not offer much in way of AP classes to begin with.
However, in our college visits, we heard repeatedly to think long and hard about using AP credit to get out of lower level Calc and Physics classes for an engineering major. That jumping into the upper levels of these classes in college could be a huge shock and it may be better to repeat the level you last took in high school.
Yeah, my kids that took calc in HS deliberately retook it in college -they knew the version they saw in HS wasn't as thorough as the engineering college version would be. In fact, DD1 did a 6 year Gifted Math Program thru Jr/Sr HS at a university. I drove her for math classes at the university instead of HS courses, and they accelerated to college level courses by grade 10. She took calc AT THE UNIVERSITY (but thru GMP), and still opted to retake it in college (different university) despite having earned 22 college credits in math. Well, that makes me feel better about encouraging DS to do the same. The frugal part of me is thinking "skip it", especially if the placement tests put him above that level because part of me thinks the school is just trying to squeeze out every dime. However, I'm part of a parent group from one of the schools and they are chanting the same thing...TAKE IT OVER.
|
|
aricia
Junior Member
Joined: May 18, 2011 13:36:32 GMT -5
Posts: 151
|
Post by aricia on Nov 19, 2019 16:49:35 GMT -5
Just providing another perspective, I received college credit for multiple classes based on my AP test results. I went on to take higher level math and science classes with no issues. I never regretted it and fully intend to encourage my kids to do the same.
In my possibly outdated 😉 experience, the AP tests are a good measure of your knowledge on those subjects. Taking calculus in high school is not the same as passing the AP test. Personally, I would trust my kids had the necessary knowledge if they passed the AP test much more than if they passed a class at our local community college.
If you’re worried that your child will have a rough transition and slack off, then having them repeat a class where they know the material will be an easy way to get a good grade and boost their gpa. If your child is motivated and studious, I think it’s ok to let them move on!
|
|
teen persuasion
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,039
|
Post by teen persuasion on Nov 19, 2019 22:30:40 GMT -5
Yeah, my kids that took calc in HS deliberately retook it in college -they knew the version they saw in HS wasn't as thorough as the engineering college version would be. In fact, DD1 did a 6 year Gifted Math Program thru Jr/Sr HS at a university. I drove her for math classes at the university instead of HS courses, and they accelerated to college level courses by grade 10. She took calc AT THE UNIVERSITY (but thru GMP), and still opted to retake it in college (different university) despite having earned 22 college credits in math. Well, that makes me feel better about encouraging DS to do the same. The frugal part of me is thinking "skip it", especially if the placement tests put him above that level because part of me thinks the school is just trying to squeeze out every dime. However, I'm part of a parent group from one of the schools and they are chanting the same thing...TAKE IT OVER.
I think you definitely have to figure out which column an AP class fits into: is it A) going to cover a gen ed course (tick the box, never touch that subject again), or is it B) a foundational course in your major where you will build on the concepts in future courses? A) column courses are fine to get credit for in HS; B) courses are probably best taken in college, taught by the profs in your department. Even in the same college, some versions were considered more rigorous. Business calc covered the same basic concepts as calc for science, with different problem sets, but calc for science was the gold standard. Calc for science met the requirements for both science and business majors, but business calc wasn't good enough for science majors, only for business majors. Working in the math lab, I learned that the more rigorous calc for science was taught by the tenured profs, but the business calc was taught by adjunct faculty. The weaker math students struggled with these less experienced/available teachers (though those who utilized the math lab for tutoring learned in spite of them ).
|
|
dannylion
Junior Associate
Gravity is a harsh mistress
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:17:52 GMT -5
Posts: 5,195
Location: Miles over the madness horizon and accelerating
|
Post by dannylion on Nov 20, 2019 15:34:43 GMT -5
My area has a much more common sense approach to education. Kids who are academically inclined can do concurrent enrollment a graduate high school with two years of college credit under their belts. The community colleges and four year colleges work together, so that everything dovetails perfectly. The classes even have the same course number between the colleges, so there is no confusion or lost credits. At the local commuter university down the road, the tuition is six grand a year. And since most of the professors there have day jobs in the field, you don’t have programs being created by a bunch of ivory tower eggheads that waste the students time and money teaching them skills that nobody wants. For the kids were not so academically inclined, the high schools have partnered with businesses to create programs that give student skills employers actually want. We have kids graduating high school and walking into a job making 50 grand a year. I think college is great if you are academically inclined and have a certain degree of maturity. But forcing a kid it was unlikely to succeed in college to piss away four years in high school doing nothing but college prep, and having them graduate with no marketable skills, is a really shitty thing to do. A smart kid who didn’t do well in high school can always go back to school later, and it’s a heck of a lot more likely to happen if the kid isn’t starving. I do like this idea in theory but I was chatting recently with a professor and she said that they've been finding students who come in with these college credits are very often unprepared for the higher level classes and find themselves in trouble quickly. There is a vast difference between basic math classes at a community college versus a university. So, you have kids that now have a GPA that's in trouble who would have been much better served by simply completing high school and then taking their foundation courses at the university. It probably depends on the individual community colleges and the academic rigor they provide in their curricula. There are community colleges that offer excellent programs on a par with the best 4-year colleges and universities in their states, then there are community colleges that are nothing more than third-rate diploma mills.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,450
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 20, 2019 16:09:55 GMT -5
I do like this idea in theory but I was chatting recently with a professor and she said that they've been finding students who come in with these college credits are very often unprepared for the higher level classes and find themselves in trouble quickly. There is a vast difference between basic math classes at a community college versus a university. So, you have kids that now have a GPA that's in trouble who would have been much better served by simply completing high school and then taking their foundation courses at the university. It probably depends on the individual community colleges and the academic rigor they provide in their curricula. There are community colleges that offer excellent programs on a par with the best 4-year colleges and universities in their states, then there are community colleges that are nothing more than third-rate diploma mills. My ex was told by a parent that students from the high school where she taught would take English at the local community college because it was an easier class to pass than her class.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Nov 24, 2019 21:14:33 GMT -5
I think for a lot of classes it wouldn't matter. If you're going into engineering and get credits for gen ed classes like History and Literature, then who really cares if the classes were less rigorous? I wish my son would have done more of that, but his school did not offer much in way of AP classes to begin with.
However, in our college visits, we heard repeatedly to think long and hard about using AP credit to get out of lower level Calc and Physics classes for an engineering major. That jumping into the upper levels of these classes in college could be a huge shock and it may be better to repeat the level you last took in high school.
Perhaps I should have mentioned that the woman I was chatting with is a professor at Georgia Tech . Well, that pretty much explains it. I doubt that the classes at most community colleges will be at the same level as those at a top college, and Georgia Tech is one of the best. But for those folks who aren't interested in going to a fancy college, getting some college credits in high school makes sense. When I went to high school, I was doing college work but not getting credit, so I ended up wasting a lot of time and money in college to get A's on papers that would have gotten me C's in high school.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Nov 24, 2019 23:54:24 GMT -5
There are good and bad in every generation. It does seem, though, that the millennials are looking for a lot of free stuff. The boomers didn't ask for taxpayers to pay for their college. Gen-x didn't ask for the taxpayers to pay for their college. The millennials have latched onto socialism like no one's business. It is hard not to think of that generation as entitled...entitled to taxpayers money! On the flip side, I have worked with some millennials who are extremely bright and hard working. But these are not millennials embracing socialism as they have busted their ass to climb the corporate ladder. Maybe they are latching on to socialism because they see how so many are being left behind by capitalism. You and I were raised in a time that the middle class was still a thing. Millennials see the divide between the very rich and the average, and are thinking there must be a better way. Socialism isn't it, but we can't seem to get any other controls passed, either. College was much more heavily subsidized by the taxpayers when the boomers went to school than it is now. And you also have the costs going up due to administrative bloat and other things that are not in the millennials direct control. I don't blame them for being upset about it. And the millennials have nothing to do with the fact that you need a college degree to do the kind of jobs that boomers could do with just high school.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,388
|
Post by thyme4change on Nov 25, 2019 9:35:45 GMT -5
Maybe they are latching on to socialism because they see how so many are being left behind by capitalism. You and I were raised in a time that the middle class was still a thing. Millennials see the divide between the very rich and the average, and are thinking there must be a better way. Socialism isn't it, but we can't seem to get any other controls passed, either. College was much more heavily subsidized by the taxpayers when the boomers went to school than it is now. And you also have the costs going up due to administrative bloat and other things that are not in the millennials direct control. I don't blame them for being upset about it. And the millennials have nothing to do with the fact that you need a college degree to do the kind of jobs that boomers could do with just high school. Boomers and Gen X. Anyone over 40 who claims "they did it, why can't kids today" are fooling themselves.
|
|
cronewitch
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:44:20 GMT -5
Posts: 5,974
|
Post by cronewitch on Nov 25, 2019 17:14:12 GMT -5
I don't either. I completely blame the easy availability of loans and the pushing every kid towards college as a lot of what's behind the increase in costs. Colleges can charge whatever and people keep paying it and the government lets them borrow as much as possible. There is literally NO LIMIT on parent plus loan amounts. I got offered 35K/year in "Financial aid" in the form of a Parent Plus loan for one school for my son. I make 45K. WTH kind of messed up borrowing practices are behind that being ok? The only credit check is that you have nothing like a bankruptcy or foreclosure. They don't care what your income is or your credit score for that matter. I agree completely. I also think we should stop frowning at trades people. I have rentals and know what I pay my plumbers, HVAC and contractors. I have no idea why parents aren't encouraging kids to go into those fields, other than people think they can brag about Johnny going to college and having an office job versus Jimmy who comes home dirty. Except Johnny is saddled with $50k in student loan debt while making a $45k salary, while Jimmy is bringing home $75k with no debt. Jimmy and Johnny are both boys. Trades are almost all done by males, some girls want to be steel workers but mostly it is males. I know one women who wanted to be a steel worker but ended up an RN. Females who do jobs that are mostly male sometimes can't while pregnant or they might not be strong or tall enough. One women I know was a telephone lineman but each pregnancy was put on desk duty not allowed to climb poles. Girls tend to go to college more and less into trades.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Nov 25, 2019 22:33:41 GMT -5
Personally, I think way too many people are going to college. The reason a college degree used to be valuable is because you’ve actually had to be smart to get a degree. That’s certainly not the case now.The fact that a college degree No longer means that a person is able to learn and think innovatively he has kept me employed for the last 25 years.
And there are a lot of jobs in the skilled trades that pay well. Not all of them require a strong back. For example, some of the trade school programs in my area focus on robotics.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Nov 25, 2019 23:57:28 GMT -5
Personally, I think way too many people are going to college. The reason a college degree used to be valuable is because you’ve actually had to be smart to get a degree. That’s certainly not the case now.The fact that a college degree No longer means that a person is able to learn and think innovatively he has kept me employed for the last 25 years. And there are a lot of jobs in the skilled trades that pay well. Not all of them require a strong back. For example, some of the trade school programs in my area focus on robotics. Your premise about too many people going to college seems to be confirmed by one of our friends, a recently retired accounting professor. She retired earlier than she had planned because she could no longer stand to deal with the number of under equipped students she was facing. And she taught the more advanced accounting topics, not entry level accounting. At our local university, reportedly the best university in the state, 20% of the student body is in some sort of remedial class to help them become capable of college level work. At the local CC, 70% of students are in remedial classes.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,299
|
Post by giramomma on Nov 26, 2019 1:37:29 GMT -5
Personally, I think way too many people are going to college. The reason a college degree used to be valuable is because you’ve actually had to be smart to get a degree. That’s certainly not the case now.The fact that a college degree No longer means that a person is able to learn and think innovatively he has kept me employed for the last 25 years. And there are a lot of jobs in the skilled trades that pay well. Not all of them require a strong back. For example, some of the trade school programs in my area focus on robotics. Your premise about too many people going to college seems to be confirmed by one of our friends, a recently retired accounting professor. She retired earlier than she had planned because she could no longer stand to deal with the number of under equipped students she was facing. And she taught the more advanced accounting topics, not entry level accounting. At our local university, reportedly the best university in the state, 20% of the student body is in some sort of remedial class to help them become capable of college level work. At the local CC, 70% of students are in remedial classes. So, did you look more closely at the demographics. I'm looking at a 2015 report on remedial classes for my state's university system. Not every entering freshman at my state's university system is 18. Here's a good stat: 44% of new freshman older than 20 needed remedial math courses; those 19 and under 20%. When you break that down even further, 51% of 24-35 year old freshmen are in remedial classes. 35 and older freshman 40% are in remedial classes. Let's look at race. 60% of AA freshman need remedial help with math. Poor and going through school on a pell grant-30% qualify for remedial math. Remedial English numbers are far better, but again, if you are poor, black, or old...you are in remedial classes more so than 18/19 year olds. So. I guess then, the way to limit class size is to tell folks they are only allowed to apply to college if they are white, middle class/upper middle class/wealthy, and can absolutely start college at 18/19. Want to take a gap year? Too bad, so sad. The answer should be no, if you want to go to college.
Ready for college at 30 even if you weren't ready at 20..Nope, too bad..Missed your chance.
Want to switch careers and start over from scratch at 35? Nope, too bad. Missed your chance. Next time don't be a dumbass and not have your life perfectly planned out from 15 on. ETA: The average age at my technical college system in town is 29. 29. One of the students they profile is a high school graduate that took four years off and then went back to school. If you haven't done geometry for 6-14 years, how well are you going to remember it? Should we really penalize folks for not remembering algebra and geometry if they haven't needed to use it for a long while? Of course we should, this is YM. So, if we hold up the 70's as the golden era of the number of educated folks, do we go back to all the social constructs during that time? Because that surely would reduce the number of folks (mainly women) getting college educations.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,388
|
Post by thyme4change on Nov 26, 2019 9:29:11 GMT -5
Only 30% have 4 year degrees, so it is still a special achievement.
Also, you can use some common sense when hiring people. If they are fresh out of Univ of Phoenix or some other for-profit low ranked school, you can discount their education.
It isn't like 60% now have degrees. They still show a work ethic and propensity for academics higher than average.
|
|