
If high school was better, would we need college? - danielvnzla
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/success-on-these-m-a-deals-appears-on-a-report-card/
======
InclinedPlane
The recent increase in reliance on college as a prerequisite for many office
and knowledge worker jobs is more of an indication of the failure of the
public K-12 education system than of the beneficial qualities of college. It's
no longer feasible to assume that the holder of a high school diploma
possesses a basic level of proficiency with the English language (written and
verbal), mathematics, reasoning skills, and basic computer systems (use of the
internet, email, word processors, etc.). Thus many jobs have increasingly
found it beneficial to use the filter of a college degree in order to avoid a
flood of unsuitable applicants, even to entry level jobs.

~~~
joshfinnie
I agree 100% with your comment. I think it was incredibly frustrating going
through college in classes where people were there just since it is a
requirement for basic jobs today. University should not be forced upon these
people who want a four year party away from their parents... let it be for
people who want to do something more focused than a general education.

The mandatory college experience has to be stopped or I fear the race to the
bottom of higher education much like what has happened in the K-12 education.

~~~
theclay
Just imagine how it feels to teach in such environments.

------
Tycho
I think about 98% of the population are what I'd call statistically and
economically illiterate. Basic economics should be a mandatory lesson at
school, but unless you picked the class you can leave without even
understanding the law of supply and demand. And then politicians, whose job is
mainly to interfere with economic activity, blast these people with statistics
(the significance of which they barely understand) about the economy, in order
to secure their votes and Run the Fucking Country.

Meanwhile, people leave school and, regardless of profession, find themselves
doing largely the same thing: sitting in front of a computer in an office. The
productivity of virtually every job in the country depends in part on the
employee's ability to use a computer. But unless they picked computing as a
class (and, hell, even _then_ ), they'll have absolutely no clue how to
_really_ use a computer to your advantage, ie. to program it.

My suggestion: teach maths (which is already a mandatory subject) using
computers and scripting languages. Let students practice abstraction to make
computation/calculation easier; and then get them to model tougher problems
and tackle them. Pick these problems from the realm of economics and finance,
thereby building knowledge of another domain simultaneously (the only reason I
understand what 'hire purchase' is is because my textbooks used it for
exercises).

By the time they leave school, these kids will be no strangers to writing
macros. In their further education and in their desk jobs, this will prove
enormously convenient. Single handedly it could boost the GDP by a % or two
(ok, I just made that figure up, but having worked in offices you all must
have _seen_ how inefficient the workflows are, and how one whizkid can make a
big difference). It would even be useful in totally different disciplines. For
instance in the study of literature, textual analysis by computer can prove
very useful - finding all the references to a certain thing or instances of a
certain word often shows deep patterns in the text. On my literature course
only one professor/lecturer was doing this (he said it was particularly useful
for Dickens), but he was definitely one of best in the department.

~~~
fecklessyouth
>The productivity of virtually every job in the country depends in part on the
employee's ability to use a computer.

Don't you think that's somewhat of an overstatement?

~~~
SupremumLimit
I also thought it's somewhat of an overstatement, but having worked on
software for the construction industry (for the operators of paving machines
and the like), I think we will eventually end up in a situation where most
jobs involve computer use.

------
citricsquid
Why is nobody questioning the "need" for college.

This is a huge problem too, the idea that college is _needed_.

~~~
beaumartinez
You don't think college―further education―is useful?

Are you as good with code as you are in catering for thousands?

It's impossible to be an expert in multiple fields. Specialized further
education is essential―otherwise, we'd all be have the same small, limited,
"high school" set of skills.

When you develop a pill that can give every human all discovered knowledge,
then there will be no need for further education.

~~~
rgraham
Further academic education is useful for a subset of individuals. Many people
would have a larger positive effect on themselves and others with the addition
of skills (a trade, electrician, plumber, mason, ...) and experiences you
rarely see in a four year higher education institution. Most academic learning
can be gained with a library card and a discussion partner. This leaves aside
the question of financial value to the type of education they are pursuing.

I also disagree that you can't be an expert in multiple fields. People that
love learning can advance to that status in several fields in a lifetime if
they wish. Expertise is also somewhat relative and often quite limited.

I think a highly specialized society has great benefits for economies of scale
and intense utilization of comparative advantage, but I also think a lot of
people would be happier if they slowed down and had greater breadth. Physical
work and tangible achievement through self reliance is phenomenally rewarding.
Much freedom is gained in breadth of experience.

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a
hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a
wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act
alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization
is for insects." \--Robert A. Heinlein

~~~
noblethrasher
I work at a university and that quote has adorned my office door for few
years. I love the quote. However, I've learned to be wary of 'ought'
statements. The quote is really saying that humans _ought_ to be different
from insects but that doesn't mean that we, as a society/species, can be.

------
cmpeck
If high school _were_ better.

Perhaps we still need college?

~~~
moblivu
Let's start by removing the CEGEP system here in Quebec...

~~~
warwick
Could you elaborate on what's wrong with the CEGEP system? If you're planning
on going to University, it doesn't add any additional time to the end of your
degree (since you don't do grade 12 and you only do a 3 year degree if you've
done CEGEP), and it seems like it makes education more accessible.

------
burgerbrain
Perhaps you could cram a liberal arts or business education into a highschool
format, but there is no way in hell that you're ever going to be churning out
physics or mathematics PhDs from anything that can be realisticly called a
"high school".

~~~
splat
That's true, but you also can't, in general, churn out physics or mathematics
PhDs from anything that can realistically be called a four-year undergraduate
program.

~~~
burgerbrain
I would object to the mere suggestion that a "highschool" could possibly turn
out even physics or mathematics undergrads. The best you're going to do is end
up with a situation where realisticly all you've done is had the students skip
highschool and go straight to college.

"Highschool" implies a lot more than just _"that place you went to for the
last 4 years of a 12 year education"_ ; or perhaps more accurately: "college"
implies a lot more than just _"that place you went to after highschool"_.

~~~
Lost_BiomedE
"...realisticly all you've done is had the students skip highschool and go
straight to college."

I regret not doing this. I have talked to a couple people who have done it by
taking community college classes part-time and transferring into state full-
time.

I think the rest of the world's model is better than what we do. Separate
those that will learn to work with their hands and those that will work with
their mind and train them respectively in high-school.

~~~
burgerbrain
I had the benefit of being able to take a 50/50 mix of highschool classes, and
classes at the local branch of my state college.

Highly recommended in situations where it is at all possible, and it makes a
ton of sense, since there is often so much overlap between the last two years
of the one and the first year of so of the other.

------
rdouble
The editorialized headline might also make for an interesting article, but the
actual title is:

"Success in These M.&A. Deals Appears on a Report Card"

------
njharman
The TA teaching Calculus at college, learned that and the follow on Calculus
II at his (european country I forget) equivalent of HS. He was amazed it was
"college level" maths in USA. This was early 90's Univ Kansas.

The entire US education system, 1-12 through 4yr, is fucked.

------
fleitz
The primary problem is the economics of school and the perverse incentives of
public funding / private benefit. People view schooling as an entitlement and
when the price becomes 'free' more is demanded than can be supplied, since the
essential product of schooling is a piece of paper the quality of inputs can
be greatly reduced with out affecting the quality of the final product. Only
once people learn to educate themselves will the problem be fixed. We need a
much bigger focus on learning and education and much less focus on attempting
to make schooling deliver education.

Schooling is not designed to educate, it's designed to prepare people for
factory work, military service, and obedience to authority via nationalism.
Just like startups the whole system works much better when fueled by
productivity and bootstrapping (working through school) rather than large
capital injections (loans, parents, etc). If you go to school with a mind to
be educated you can learn a lot, if you go to school with a mind to graduate
you've mostly already lost.

------
Wikiboris
We've needed to restructure the college system for a long time now. It's moved
far from it's original goals as being specialized for a small subset of the
population while everyone else received a high-school diploma, learned on the
job skills and did rather fine for themselves. Unfortunately, there are too
many people who benefit from the current system in order to rework it and the
rapid change of a system usually causes a lot of chaos.

However, I see no reason why we need 12 grades of school. In the European
countries, they only have 10 and they seem to do alright. Add in two-years of
some type of advanced English, Psychology and classes for a concentration of
choice and students can be well-educated by age 18 to go into the workforce.
It will require them to gain knowledge through searching and an auto-didactic
method rather than being spoonfed, but if they don't learn that skill now,
then when?

------
stretchwithme
I think there are probably a lot of fields where the knowledge needed can be
covered in a lot less time with the right software designing the curriculum,
It always seemed to me that certain course were specified for a program even
if you only needed part of what was covered.

And then there's the need to make these programs all come out to exactly 2 or
4 years in length. I suspect there's a lot of padding going on.

------
jhuni
If our colleges were better, would we need high school?

~~~
borski
Yes. Colleges aren't free and a lot of people don't have the money to pay for
them. Public education is important.

~~~
burgerbrain
There are educational systems other than the current US one you know.

Presumably "better colleges" would include, among other things, better and
cheaper state schools.

~~~
borski
Cheap still isn't free. The idea of college, at least in its current
incarnation, is inherently non-free. Also, college during the high school
years, lessening the amount of "normal" schooling, leaves the formative years
usually spent at college totally free. This can be good, but it can also be
very bad; many people don't "find themselves" until those years.

~~~
burgerbrain
No schooling is free.

------
stretchwithme
I think its ridiculous that we think that all brains are on the same
development schedule.

Some people are ready for college level at 12, some won't be ready until
they're 25.

------
chopsueyar
Exactly.

~~~
chopsueyar
Strange that we say our public education system is in need of desperate help,
yet our colleges and universities are the best in the world.

[EDIT] To clarify, the sound bites I hear from politicians and university
administrators are that our colleges and universities are the best in the
world.

Personally, I do not agree. I could have written that better.

~~~
yummyfajitas
People who say our k-12 education system is in need of desperate help are
unaware of the facts.

[http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-
abou...](http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-about-pisa-
scores-usa.html)

[http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-
above-...](http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-
average-american.html)

It's ridiculously overpriced, but the value added is very good.

~~~
tokenadult
_It's ridiculously overpriced, but the value added is very good._

The first phrase makes the second less likely to be true.

On the basis of international comparisons, including comparisons with a
country outside the United States I have lived in for two three-year stays, I
don't think K-12 schooling in the United States offers good value added or
good value for the price paid by taxpayers.

<http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/48/37864432.pdf>

<http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/12/46643496.pdf>

After edit:

[http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/PEPG10-19_Hanushe...](http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/PEPG10-19_HanushekPetersonWoessmann.pdf)

Many of the comparisons of United States population subgroups to populations
of other countries ignore the serious issue of underperformance of United
States schools in serving students from the most advantaged subgroups. The
least advantaged subgroups of United States students can't be used as an
excuse for lousy performance of the whole national non-system when that non-
system also underperforms for the children of college graduates and for
children of "white" families and children in the wealthiest neighborhoods.

~~~
yummyfajitas
_The first phrase makes the second less likely to be true._

This makes no sense.

As for your links, they provide the same data my links provide, but with less
granularity. Why do you feel it is proper to ignore the ethnicity data? Simply
because this gives you a conclusion you want?

~~~
joelrunyon
Saying something is Overpriced (especially rediculously so) implies that it
likely does not add enough value for the cost charged. Therefore, the more
true your first statement is, the less likely your second statement is true.

~~~
yummyfajitas
You are confusing the term "value added" with "value for money" (or "a good
value").

Value added = quality of students after education - quality of students before
education.

The amount of money put in does not affect this.

Value for money = value added / money spent.

