31–40 of 59 posts
I'm still amazed at the cost of a college education in the US. My computer engineering degree in Australia cost $15k total, then a PhD was free (with many, including myself, getting a scholarship to pay for living expenses).
Only because of HECS. I'm a full fee paying computer science student, and it'll cost me upwards of $60K
I'm still amazed at the cost of a college education in the US. My computer engineering degree in Australia cost $15k total, then a PhD was free (with many, including myself, getting a scholarship to pay for living expenses).
Only because of HECS. I'm a full fee paying computer science student, and it'll cost me upwards of $60K
Theology is a science now?
You're probably referring to this quote: "Particular congratulations are due to aerospace engineers, who top the list, with a starting salary of just under sixty thousand dollars—a figure that, if it is not exactly stratospheric, is twenty-five thousand dollars higher than the average starting salary of a graduate in that other science of the heavens, theology." The author doesn't mean "science" in the literal sense…
But theology isn't the study of the heavens, it's the study of religious doctrine. I get that the author is trying to use poetic license, but describing theology as a science of the heavens is kind of alarming. Maybe I'm just a little on edge because three different people tried to convert me to their religion tonight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you'd be surprised. Maybe it's the company I keep, or the college I go to, but hell if not at least 90% of the kids who go here think they're "enriching their lives".
No. I am a grad student teaching first-year calculus. 90% are getting a chance to party and maybe 10% are the idealists.
Depending on the out-of-state costs, it might be worth moving to that other state and working for the minimum amount of time to be considered a resident of that state, then go to college at the resident rate. The difference between resident and out-of-state can be very high!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am an engineer. Being five years removed from undergrad, the most valuable parts of college were not electives in mechanics or control theory. They were the professors I interacted with, the football games I attended in the student section, the liberal arts and writing classes I was required to take, and the friends I made.
Really? I never would have learned the math on my own, and liberal arts could cost you $1.50 in library fees. I grew up reading for fun though, perhaps that facet of education is harder for some people?
Many subjects cannot really be learned from books. Regardless of how many history books you may read, for example, it will not shed the same insight as a profound discussion with a highly-experienced academic in the field. This is true for many aspects of the humanities.
Which isn't to say self-study is worthless, but rather that it is a poor substitute for interaction with your professors. IMHO to claim that liberal arts can be just as well studied by oneself is myopic and tunnel-visioned, and about equivalent to me claiming that aspiring nuclear engineers should pick up some textbooks instead of going to school.
IMHO the whole topic of the monetary worth of schooling is an interesting and worthwhile one - but discussions on it on forums such as this one is invariably tainted by the fact that many people in our field have incredibly arrogant and misguided superiority complexes about technical degrees over the arts. I personally tend to think that one ought to be responsible for their own academic spending, and that studies of the arts is a luxury that not everyone can afford - but I hesitate to voice this often, since many of my engineering peers hold this opinion out of disdain and trivialization of the humanities, and I really don't want to be associated with that kind of ignorance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? I never would have learned the math on my own, and liberal arts could cost you $1.50 in library fees. I grew up reading for fun though, perhaps that facet of education is harder for some people?
> "and liberal arts could cost you $1.50 in library fees." Many subjects cannot really be learned from books. Regardless of how many history books you may read, for example, it will not shed the same insight as a profound discussion with a highly-experienced academic in the field. This is true for many aspects of the humanities. Which isn't to say self-study is worthless, but rather that it is a poor substitute for i…
My undergrad humanities courses were 100+ students packed into a giant lecture hall listening to a professor talk. There was essentially no interaction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of my work is on avionics software. As far as programming knowledge goes, I've learned most of what I need to do my job before college, or at least outside of college. As far as avionics goes, I've learned most of it on the job. My college education has been at best marginal with respect to the work I actually do. However , it would have been at best very difficult for me to cut through the red tape to get the…
However, it would have been at best very difficult for me to cut through the red tape to get the work I have without a college degree. The sorts of people who do hiring in this industry seem to really want to see that. Put yourself in the place of a hiring manager, or, better still, the person setting hiring policies for large companies. You have hundreds or thousands of people competing for jobs, sending you resumes…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "and liberal arts could cost you $1.50 in library fees." Many subjects cannot really be learned from books. Regardless of how many history books you may read, for example, it will not shed the same insight as a profound discussion with a highly-experienced academic in the field. This is true for many aspects of the humanities. Which isn't to say self-study is worthless, but rather that it is a poor substitute for i…
>Many subjects cannot really be learned from books. Regardless of how many history books you may read, for example, it will not shed the same insight as a profound discussion with a highly-experienced academic in the field. This is true for many aspects of the humanities. My undergrad humanities courses were 100+ students packed into a giant lecture hall listening to a professor talk. There was essentially no interac…
That's the trick with the humanities - they are not hard sciences, there is no canonical body of knowledge to be passed on; This isn't a straight download. Many things are a matter of perspective, of experience, and of particular schools of thoughts - all of the above poorly communicated via mere books.
That's the difference between a history book vs. a good history professor. Even without the (invaluable) ability to interact directly, it's the difference between a dry recounting of facts vs. more profound linkages into other areas of the field, or entirely other fields of study altogether. Sure, by reading books you will make some of these connections yourself, but it's hardly as good as what you'd get in classes.
That being said, there are certainly bad profs who do just do the dry recounting of facts, in which case you are basically better off reading the textbook at home. The presence of these should in no way discount the enormous positive influence of college educations done right.