@ Philip Brewer - I totally agree. Some (most?) universities have taken steps in this direction by offering Challenge for Credit options, where a student can take a test/ write an essay/ make a presentation to demonstrate they already know what is taught in a certain course. Most students don’t explore this option. Also, I’m not sure how many courses could be knocked off like this, and what amount of $$ would need to be paid. Could a person get an entire degree this way … doubtful.

@ Hannah - I like your perspective on financial literacy and meeting Maslow’s heirarchy needs.

I used to romanticize the university $ystem as a Gateway To Knowledge. Nay, fetishized. Like you wouldn’t even believe. Then over the years I realized that the university is a money-making enterprise just like any other business. Of course, it’s not considered “hip” in intellectual circles to expose this reality; in fact, it might get you bumped, so be careful (People with unmarketable degrees tend to be very touchy ) My disillusionment with the fantasy of academia was complete after realizing that a library card is free, and one can learn anything that is taught in any humanities classroom simply by picking up a book and reading. What a concept!

Thus, this leads me to ask, why then major in the humanities? Remember, this question is being asked from the perspective of a poor person who is just starting out in life. Well, unless you have a well-defined plan to teach at the high school level afterwards, there can only be one of two reasons.

Scenario one: you’re already wealthy. Spending $$$ on an unmarketable degree (a.k.a. status symbol) to frame simply for vanity’s sake is a conceit that can only be afforded by those who are not constrained by pressures to be employed after college. Scenario two: you’re a victim of your need to have a “cool and hip” major, i.e. lesbian underwater basket-weaving studies. You have the delusion that by virtue of holding an unmarketable degree you are somehow more “intellectual” than more productive members of society. Also, you beging to suffer from a persecution complex as it gradually dawns on you that you’ve been duped, and you angrily retreat into anti-capitalist rants and marxism-lite rhetoric.

My sentiment on this topic can best be summarized by this brilliant quote from Good Will Hunting:
“You dropped $150,000 on an education you could have got for a $1.50 in late charges from the public library.”

I’ve decided that I want to learn to become financially literate as a day job (meet physiological/safety needs), and pursue my love of reading and writing during the evenings and weekends (meet self-actualization needs). The knowledge that I gain from my day job will assist me in my goal of achieving financial independence (which I define as permanently securing one’s physiological/safety needs and thus shifting 100% of the focus to self-actualization needs). This way I am maximizing both my economic and personal potential, without the defeatist or snobby rhetoric of economically disadvantaged humanities degree holders.

My post was generally making the argument that I don’t want to see the US government in the business of social engineering in respect to college degrees. I do agree that some sort of grade minimums might be applied (but who knows whether Harvard’s grading on a curve and Yale isn’t). I also agree that there is no intrinsic value to college over self-education other than, frankly, a credential.

It’s certainly not going to change in the US, for the reason you mentioned. With the mutual fund industry invested in it (through 529s) and the “big business” of education making record profits there is little chance of any substantive change in the near future.

Good post.

The GRS post:
http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2008/01/10/the-value-of-a-college-education/

Unlike those GPA-chasers, I went into college hoping to learn. I didn’t get a 4.0 GPA but I took over 300 quarter credits in subjects ranging from anthropology to theater. The only thing I wish I did in college that I failed to do was take any practical classes. Well, my theater courses were practical, but I wish I took some courses in advanced web design or computer programming. That would have helped me advance and made the money the college degree cost pay off literally in the long run.

However, without my college education, my BFA, I would not be where I am today. I think college should be a time of exploring what you’re meant to do, not a time to focus on one area and close out all other options. I think it’s awful when people go from BA to MA to PhD without every experiencing the real world. Since a BA won’t get you a job these days, most people want to finish up their MA as soon as possible. But who does that help really?

I happen to make sure that the class is either required for my major or something I’ll enjoy before signing up for it, but I definitely haven’t taken any of the notorious “easy A” classes on purpose. Organic chemistry has been a huge detriment to my GPA, both this term and the previous. But it’s probably the class where I learn the most as well. Not that the other classes are far behind.

More to the point of this entry, I must say that I have definitely considered whether or not I would have been better off had I just gotten a job straight out of high school. Or whether or not my private liberal arts college was worth the tuition. To the latter question, I’ll let you know after I graduate and have been in the job market for a couple of years But in general, I think that outside of computer programming, it would be vry hard to work one’s way into the white collar world without college. That isn’t to say, of course, that you are wrong and the current mentality towards college is beneficial, but there’s little denying that the Bachelor’s Degree is now for job seeking what a high school diploma was in the first half of the 20th century.

I think college added a lot to my quality of life, but not much to the kind of job I have.

We need to take a serious look at how much we’re spending on college. In many instances, it really isn’t worth the high cost.

I have spent the past year on reaching the purported equivalent of an undergrad in economics to pursue a finance certification. For those who are interested in programming (another field that cares more about actual skills than sheepskin pedigree) Eric Raymond (open source linux guru) wrote a nice paper:

http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html

I’ve known quite a few people who taught themselves how to program between 12 and 18 and then went out and got good jobs right after HS.

I agree that money does not determine the importance of a field. For instance, trash collection does not pay well, yet it is very important. Also, I don’t think picking a subject for the income potential is necessarily a wise idea. However, it should not be completely ignored either. That said, money does indicate the demand/supply situation for certain vocations and thus if government is going to have any say at all, I think they should support fields where supply outstrips demand.

I think education was kinda cool too and I tended to pick the hardest courses I could find (to the detriment of my GPA) for the challenge of it. Yet, how is that different from going to curling camp for 4 years? Sports camps or meditation centers are also interesting or self-improving, so what’s the difference? I still think that what I learned did not really prepare me for my present job. Also if I had to do it all over, I would have gone with way less of it, but I used to have this dream of becoming a professor some day.

http://tinyurl.com/yvq9z6

It’s ft.com, so it may require free registration to read the content. I used my id to generate the printable URL, but if you still get asked for signin, create your own id, or try this to get one that’s already created:

http://www.bugmenot.com

(type in http://www.ft.com into the input field)