
Is College Working? - peter123
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/hbreditors/2009/01/what_is_the_future_of_the_work.html
======
netcan
Well I guess if anything it's time to stop viewing college as an inevitably
great investment. If you feel that an English major college degree would be an
enriching experience, then treat it as such, not as an investment.

From this vantage point it's comparable to taking a year off to travel (except
4X longer) or taking a couple of years off to volunteer. The question then
becomes, can I afford it?

An interesting excercise is thinking about creative alternatives with similar
costs. Say a parent was willing to give their 17-18 yr old child 100k in
capital (maybe also help getting financed) + a 4 year stipend to start a
business. Every cent must be reinvested. I'm not saying go start Microsoft.
Maybe buy an ice cream franchise, mobile dog wash or double up & spring for an
existing small business. Would they emerge 'more likely to succeed' at 22 then
they would have otherwise?

~~~
wheels
All of these things seem to focus on skills. For better or worse, college is
one of the rites of passage to being part of the economic elite – doubly so at
institutions like Harvard – membership in which tends to be a better predictor
of weath than practical skills. That's why it's really seen as an investment;
for most degrees awarded it's been poor vocational training for a long time.

~~~
gasull
Mostly because of:

\- The rolodex factor.

\- The fact that people that go to Harvard are already smart, and they would
be successful anyway.

~~~
akd
mostly the second. A study showed that people who get into
Harvard/Yale/Princeton and instead go to state school make almost as much
money as they would have otherwise.

~~~
paraschopra
Do you have a link? I would love to read the study.

~~~
akd
Ask and ye shall receive.

<http://www.nber.org/papers/w7322.pdf>

I'm not sure if this is a generally available link; I am using it from a
Stanford IP which may have purchased access. The paper is Dale and Krueger,
"Estimating the Payoff to Attending a More Selective College: An Application
of Selection on Observables and Unobservables."

------
dangrover
As someone who's currently taking a break from school and doubting the value
of it, I keep seeing these articles and thinking "Sweet! Maybe I'm right, if
$publication is saying it!"

But then I read the article, and it's always some sob story about average
folks who went to college in a liberal arts field while making absolutely no
attempts at establishing an independent career in the field or working outside
of class on their trade. Then they get out, and they're a convenience store
clerk or something.

They end up having the opposite effect on me, rather than confirming my
biases.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Why don't you focus on education, instead of schooling?

Pick the things you need to learn to reach the goals you want. Go learn those
things. Repeat and rinse. That may or may not mean formal schooling. It could
mean mentoring, hands-on work, lots of book-reading, long seminars. There are
lots of ways to learn.

Schooling is where they pick those things for you. What I keep getting from
these articles is that most major institutions aren't very good at picking
those things for you. That the selection of things to pick from are driven
more by politics and happytalk than practical results for most of the students
participating. There's no feedback between what defines a degree and what the
actual perceived value is from those receiving one.

If I were you, I might go back, and I might not. That's kinda the point --
you're supposed to take ownership and actually do something. Failure to take
ownership of your education is what leads to working at the chicken-plucking
factory, not a lack of a degree.

~~~
trjordan
I agree, the primary focus of school should be learning. However, just because
somebody is smart and motivated does not mean they'll learn on their own. For
somebody like the GP, a college education can provide access to a huge number
of resources that you simply can't find anywhere else. There are some people
for whom the combination of great professors, literary resources, and a focus
on learning for 3.5 months at a time will provide a better and more
concentrated education than anywhere else. Outside of college, you have to
spend at least some of your energy on acquiring those opportunites,
necessarily making it less effective.

That said, I don't think that college is this way for everybody. If you're
disengaged in classes and primarily linked in to the social scene, then the
value you get out of college is less clear. A degree is socially necessary for
some jobs, so it's not entirely wasted time, but the price is steep.

Point being, college is like everything else: you get out what you put in. I
wouldn't trade my college experience for anything (especially that $160k).
Nothing is a panacea.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
_just because somebody is smart and motivated does not mean they'll learn on
their own_

How would you demonstrate being smart and motivated _without_ learning on your
own? I mean, when I say "hey look at that smart and motivated person!" I'm
saying that they're demonstrating learning new things to reach goals -- that
they are motivated. Motivation doesn't exist without some kind of action to
show for it.

I work with people who have varying degrees, from no college at all to PhDs.

What I find is that once you've spent that $160K, there is a tendency to feel
like it was worth it. This is the same thing that happens during hiking: the
goal seems completely pointless until you've spent all day (or multiple days)
reaching it. At that point, you wouldn't trade anything in the world for it. I
see the same thing from people with military experience, and I imagine the
same thing happens for people who work in the Peace Corps.

There's nothing wrong with not knowing what you want and having somebody else
pick it for you, aka schooling. But in that case, there should still be
foundational goals: ability to survive in the modern economy comes at the top
of the list. Any formal schooling that doesn't meet those needs fails, in my
opinion (tying this back to the topic of the article)

~~~
trjordan
First point: consider that if the only people that are smart and motivated
have something to show for it, then there are vastly fewer smart, motivated
poor people than there are in the middle and upper classes. Intelligence and
motivation may be necessary to learning, but they are certainly not sufficent.

It's hard to say objectively whether anything is worth it. However, I don't
think that hiking and paying for school are that similar - with hiking, you
put the work in up front, and with school, you receive the diploma (and
ostensibly the benefits of 4 years of learning) before you even have to start
paying back your student loans. That said, doesn't it say something if all
those who have done it say it's valuable?

In any case, I guess the fundamental issue that I see is the relationship
between learning and applicable skills. Picking up skills is certainly
learning, but learing is not always economically valuable. Schools do not
exist to create wealth in their students - they exist to pass on knowledge. If
schools are not passing on real-world skills, they are not intrinsically
failing, nor is the real world somehow broken. I value learing for its own
sake and am actually willing to forgo some matarial comfort for it. I suppose
it all depends on your definitions of success.

I will admit that if people are going to school with no clear path and no
motivation, and expecting to come out on the other side more employable,
that's a problem. But again, it's a problem of expectations, not institutional
reality.

------
electromagnetic
I think the biggest thing college and university do is force people to do work
who likely never did any work in their life.

I understand the premise of college, however except for certain highly
specialized or certified jobs I don't really see the value for money in it. I
see the value of going to law school to get a law degree and help in passing
the bar, but I don't see the value in taking English if you plan to get a
career out of it... unless perhaps you desire to teach English.

I mean I'm working to become a novelist, and the best advice I ever saw was to
find something that interests you and then write about it. I mean all my
favorite writers come from such bizarre fields like a ESA scientists, Cops,
Soldiers, Forensic Investigators, Physicists, Economists, Mathematicians, etc.
Not a single one (that I'm aware of) even touched English, yet all are full
time writers.

I mean a perfect example of this is Cory Doctorow. He dropped out of four
universities, became an electronics right activist and worked for the EFF
before quitting and becoming a full-time writer. No degree in english, no
creative writing in university.

IMO I see this happening in IT. The classic path to money was joining the
economic elite, however 2/3 of the biggest names in IT never graduated
university. Dell dropped out of University of Texas; Jobs I believe dropped
out of Reed College and only Gates actually graduated, however from what I
remember his path through Higher Education wasn't typical of the economic
elite as he got fascinated by computers and did his own thing instead of what
his parents planned for him.

~~~
vlad
Gates did not graduate, he got an honorary law degree.

Wozniak went back to finish his degree, and Ballmer did not join Microsoft
until after he finished his.

~~~
electromagnetic
Oh I didn't know that, I just read he had a law degree... I guess I assumed
wrong.

------
jaspertheghost
I think the higher education market is in for a reality check just like what
the credit market is going through right now.

1) Because of the deluge of college students. Many college educated people get
jobs at Best Buy and retail outlets. Some of my high school friends are in
situations like that. They assumed they would get a good job out of college,
but that's what they get by getting a liberal arts degree and partying for 4
years. A 30,000-40,000 per year tuition, all down the drain.

2) Because a lot of job performance is measured by the market (i.e. startups).
Getting a prestigious college degree doesn't necessarily get you the job
needed and a lot of times you'll get beaten out by someone at a "less
prestigious" school.

3) Many people getting a college, medical, or law degree should realize that
if they're not at the top of their class, it's not necessarily guaranteed for
them to get a great job. For a less prestigious university, it's even more so
the case.

4) All of this will lead college counselors and the next generation of parents
to advice people to get the most value for their money: i.e. a good education
for a good price (i.e. not going to Harvard for Engineering, etc).

~~~
tokenadult
_a good education for a good price (i.e. not going to Harvard for Engineering_

Do you seriously think going to Harvard for engineering is a bad idea? Why do
you think so? Would it still be a bad idea if the student enjoys Harvard's
financial aid and is paying just a few thousand dollars a year (earned through
part-time work) to attend Harvard?

(I'd really like to know, so I'm inviting any onlooker with knowledge of this
issue to reply.)

~~~
smanek
The SEAS (School of Engineering and Applied Science at Harvard) is a actually
surprisingly decent. The one thing that gets some people is that CS is taught
from a very mathematical bend - about a third of the CS classes don't require
any significant work on a computer (besides typesetting the problem sets in
TeX). I actually prefer it that way - I'd rather focus on theory in class, I
can pick up the idiosyncrasies of the tools and languages on my own time.

I understand that Harvard's Math department is pretty impressive too (near the
same level as MIT/Princeton/etc).

~~~
tokenadult
_I understand that Harvard's Math department is pretty impressive too_

Many people think that Harvard's math department is the best in the world.

~~~
Xichekolas
If you defined 'many people' I'd be much obliged.

(Not challenging the assertion, just curious who.)

~~~
tokenadult
The sample I hear from about Harvard's undergraduate math program consists
largely of participants on the Art of Problem Solving forum

<http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/index.php?f=143>

and those participants include many young people from various countries who
have participated in the International Mathematics Olympiad.

------
vitaminj
Woodrow Wilson was basically arguing the same point in 1909:

“We want one class of persons to have a liberal education. We want another
class of persons, a very much larger class of necessity, to forego the
privileges of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific
difficult manual tasks.”

------
ryanwaggoner
Surprising and encouraging to see this kind of critical questioning coming
from Harvard, even if it just a blog.

------
madmanslitany
I don't know, but I think this is really just another iteration of the debate
over how much college should be vocational training and how much it should be
devoted towards building minds. My greatest regret towards the way I
approached some of my college course selections was to worry too much about
how useful it would be to my career/how it would affect my GPA, since I needed
to make sure my resume was competitive enough to get a job. I should have
taken more classes that were just challenging and interesting for their own
sake.

Then again, I got, and at least for now, am still holding a job, so, hindsight
20/20, neh?

~~~
fhars
Does the US even have a system for vocational training? Over here in germany
we have this system where you go to a university if you want an academic
education, but if you want vocational training you go to a company and then
get an accredited vocational degree after two or three years where you work at
your company like 80% of the time and visit a specialized public school for
the rest of the time. So if I want to be a computer scientist, I go to the
university, but if I want to be a carpenter or network admin, I just get a
vocational degree in carpentry or network administration. The system has some
problims with things like adapting to change, but still seems better than a
college or nothing approach.

~~~
RK
The US has different levels of degrees. Most of the colleges and universities
that you hear about offer bachelors degrees as the first degree (generally a
four year degree). Other colleges, especially so-called community and junior
colleges will offer 2 year associates degrees in more vocational subjects such
as nursing. And then there are other purely vocational schools that offer
training that lasts less than a year (usually for-profit schools).

One of the biggest differences between the US and German system is that almost
all American students attend the same type of high school, which theoretically
should prepare you to go to a university and the curricula are usually
general. Also it's important to know that the US system is mostly controlled
on the local level, rather than the federal level for public schools, so a
school in one city can be very different than a school in another city or
state.

------
jyothi
A BA in creative writing. That could be of tremendous help to lot of
businesses worldwide.

English is the international business language but unfortunately at least two-
thirds of the world struggles to communicate correctly. Just as US outsourced
mundane work in operations and computing, US & UK can support businesses
elsewhere with their spoken language at home. There is a huge opportunity
here.

~~~
fhars
But there is a downside, too. I have read statements from the field of high
energy physics that everybody understands everybody else _except_ the native
english speakers because they tend to use the whole english language and not
just the globally comprehensible subset. So hiring a creative writing major to
do your international correspondence might be the wrong choice, you want
someone who predictably writes simple english .

~~~
jyothi
Interesting point on the "globally comprehensible subset". I agree with you
completely for international correspondence.

What I had in mind was more of messages and docs required for a product
itself.

I had a personal experience building this quite successful app iRead on
facebook and I would most always mess up the grammar or the tone in the news
feed, which would then go through repeated corrections from people in the US.

People who have formally studied creative writing with English being their
mother tongue would be able to message better.

------
psyklic
The article's point: The job market is flooded, disadvantaging recent
graduates without experience. Hence, we need to give newcomers more experience
so they can compete.

This doesn't seem to help the situation. (1) Now, experienced people with
families to support will (theoretically) be out of work longer, and (2)
Raising the bar on "practical" experience raises it for _everyone_ , still
making jobs hard to get.

~~~
yters
One thing British schools do is have a year interning inbetween the rest of
the years for the degree. This both gives the student real world experience
and helps them get their name out. Plus, it encourages businesses to invest in
the students, since they have the opportunity to hire a good candidate in a
couple years.

------
bfryer
Hi, I'm the HBR editor who wrote the original blog. This is a fascinating
conversation! I invite you all to contribute your comments directly at
[http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/hbreditors/2009/01/what_is_...](http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/hbreditors/2009/01/what_is_the_future_of_the_work.html)
The more the merrier!

------
LostInTheWoods
Like many things in life ... you get what you put into it.

------
DanielBMarkham
_Is it time for the U.S. to rethink it's educational model?_

No. We do not have a model for all education. That's centralized planning,
which doesn't work. What we need to re-think is what activities we encourage
by financing. We heavily finance 4 years of student activity that, by this
author's account, does not prepare students for providing for their own needs
after school. In short, we're creating 22 and 24-year-olds without the
chutzpah that a common street hustler has at age 15. And we're paying lots of
money to do it.

Education has always been about goals. I love the fuzzy goals like
appreciation of arts, understanding of various philosophical schools,
sensitivity to world cultural differences -- things that you absolutely need
but are hard to measure. Problem is, you can subsidize things that are hard to
measure. There's no quality control. There's no standard to say whether
institution X is doing any better or worse than institution Y.

People, young or old, need to be able to adapt to find a spot in a complex
society where they can provide value to the rest of us in such a fashion that
we formally thank them -- that is, we give them money. That's job #1. That's
something we have a public interest in advocating.

More worrisome is that groupthink that colleges instill. It's always there
under the surface, as in this quote from the article:

 _One newly-minted MBA said that if worse comes to worst, he'll stay at home
and look after the baby he and his wife are expecting...."provided," the
reporter remarked, "his wife still has her job."_

If worse comes to worse he'll actually raise his own kid, instead of having
somebody else do it for him. The sacrifices we must make.

------
revelude
Is Working College?

------
petercooper
There's something we must ask before that. Rarely is the question asked, is
our children learning?

------
helveticaman
I have to say I have no idea how people decide to major in English. At my
school they have it made and they just fuck it up so badly! They're this close
to moving up in wealth and they decide to study literature...ouch.

~~~
unalone
Because literature's fascinating? I gave up an English major for something
more tech-related, because I read and analyze on my own - I don't need college
for that - but still, if I had a choice between a billion dollars and acute
understanding of every line of _Finnegans Wake_ , I'd take the latter.

~~~
fuzzmeister
Another great thing about life: a billion dollars couldn't buy you an acute
understanding of every line of Finnegans Wake.

~~~
theoneill
For the same reason that a billion dollars couldn't buy you a number that was
prime and factorable.

~~~
unalone
Finnegans Wake absolutely has meaning. It's just an abrupt pain that refuses
to go easy on you.

