Live data from Hacker News

Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

wsj.com

61–70 of 328 posts

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#61
post #14
post #4

I went to Boston University for undergrad. When I went, tuition and board were 46k, which I thought was absurd. Fast forward a decade and it's 70k. At this rate, in less than 10 years it will be 100k per year. How does any of this make sense?!?!?!?

Most students aren't paying that much. Sticker prices are often much higher than what students actually pay. The sticker price at Harvard is around $60k, but 70% of students receive financial aid from the University and of those students the average paid is actually only about $12k per year. Some quick googling reveals that 52% of Boston University students receive financial aid, and the average award is about $30k p…

> What's happening is that only students from wealthy families are paying $70k a year, and they are basically subsidizing everyone else.

Not just students from wealthy families, but wealthy alums- the Ivies and other top schools have gigantic endowments. The annual returns on the endowments of Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, etc. are more than enough to fund tuition for every single undergraduate at those schools.

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#62
post #34
post #2

I've taught college. This study is wildly unsurprising. I've written about this in various places (e.g. https://jakeseliger.com/2014/04/27/paying-for-the-party-eliz... ), but most colleges have evolved majors and paths that are designed to move students through the system, collect their tuition money, and graduate them. In re-reading the previous sentence, I think I sound opposed to this. I am a little bit, maybe, bu…

"Paying for the party" is amusing. "Pledged: The Secret Life of Sororities" covers much the same material. The importance of drinking didn't happen by accident. The alcohol industry promoted it heavily.[1] Two out of five students in the colleges studied are now binge drinkers. I got critical thinking early because I was brought up by a lawyer. There were always briefs around the house, and I could read the briefs fo…

[deleted]

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#63
post #40

The mandatory Jordan Peterson link: "Why You Go To College" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANtPUg37f04

I mostly agreed with what he was saying until he made that non-sequitur about "postmodern neo-Marxism." Universities are just giving the students what they want: a piece of paper that allows access to the job market. Most modern university students do not appear to want an education and neo-Marxism has nothing to do with that shift.

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#64
post #36

Lots of reasons for this. Actual generally-applicable critical thinking ability is an exceptionally rare skill. So rare that I think it'd be damn difficult to find faculty who could even start teaching it. I don't think most faculty come close to being solid critical thinkers. Whereas most beliefs are life-long emotional self-indulgence parties (my tribe good! their tribe bad!) critical thinking is a life-long strugg…

Every(?) top-level comment in this thread calling for reformation of education through te tech and decentralization is being downvoted.

Many invested in academia here on HN, and "it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it. "

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#65
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, these exact things are what's on the SAT. I don't mean to debate its qualities as a test or whether these are things one should be testing but the notion that they are somehow not the focus of primary and secondary education while also being a key factor in college admissions doesn't quite add up.

I think it's unfortunate that people wont argue their point with you and are only downvoting. I think a lot more of the SAT is about gaming their system these days. You could argue that making an "educated guess" by eliminating clearly wrong answers is useful maybe...but i dont think it really stacks up to what their hoping for. I dont think eliminating obvious bad choices is critical thinking, or if it is then it's…

Right, but as I said, I'm not talking about whether the SAT is a good test or not. Just that the fact it explicitly tries to test precisely reading comprehension, basic writing, 'practical' mathematical skills belies the notion these are not goals of primary and secondary education. If they weren't, this wouldn't be a test for US college admissions.

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#66
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a sense, yes. What I'm getting at specifically is that: - Although we teach people to read, we don't necessarily put enough focus on comprehension and understanding. - Although we teach people to write, we tend to focus on mechanics rather than on writing clearly and in a way that emphasizes our meaning. - We don't just focus on functional math, but teach much more complex math to virtually everyone that goes thro…

> Although we teach people to write, we tend to focus on mechanics rather than on writing clearly and in a way that emphasizes our meaning. That's not really true; the five-paragraph essay form and it's fractal expansions that dominate grade-school writing is all about clarity and focus on meaning. It's a horrible as a model for anything other than persuasive writing for a number of other reasons, and given the way t…

YMMV, but only in the last two years of high school do I recall these five-paragraph essays being a substantial part of classes. We certainly did them from time-to-time before that, but we also did a lot of other writing of many different forms, and in the last year or two also did a couple "research papers" (in the classic sense, not in the grad student moving a field forward sense).

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#67

Every time a college sucks article gets published I think the same things: Look at the college enrollment rates since the 1960's. Look at the tuition rates since the 1960's Look at the distribution of majors since the 1960's Then precede to look at the labor market. It all becomes very clear. There's millions of great young people roaming the halls of colleges who are not engaged in higher learning. Great young peopl…

> Had I gone right out of high school I would have wasted a lot of time and money.

Why is that, if I may ask? For me personally, my goal was to graduate with a CS degree as soon as possible right after high school so I could start my much higher paying full time engineering job as quickly as possible. I noticed you also majored in CS, so I wonder what I might have overlooked?

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#69
post #36

Lots of reasons for this. Actual generally-applicable critical thinking ability is an exceptionally rare skill. So rare that I think it'd be damn difficult to find faculty who could even start teaching it. I don't think most faculty come close to being solid critical thinkers. Whereas most beliefs are life-long emotional self-indulgence parties (my tribe good! their tribe bad!) critical thinking is a life-long strugg…

Our education system isn't perfect, but I'd prefer it endlessly to whatever it sounds like you want to do with it.

>Actual generally-applicable critical thinking ability is an exceptionally rare skill.

This isn't really a statement that can be attacked, nor a statement that can be defended - it's a non-sequitur. Clearly you are defining "critical thinking" however you'd like, and clearly you have some standard that determines whether someone has "that skill", but none of that is relevant or even worth discussing unless it can be defined, quantified, and your extraordinary statement backed up by some sort of testing. Until then it's just a nonsense phrase that belongs on r/IamVerySmart.

>Another big impediment is that teaching critical thinking would go directly against many professors' big goal, which is to spread whatever memeplex controls their mind, because they think that's the biggest moral command for an educator.

I'm sure if you major in political science or sociology, you will encounter some professors who have some sort of overarching political agenda and hope to convince students to agree with them on it. Whatever. This has no relationship to the actual experience of actual students in the real world. You live in an Internet dream world where kids go to college and talk politics 24/7 with marxist faculty. This isn't the truth for 95% of students.

>e.g. In the social sciences, professors lean the same direction politically in a ratio of 15 to 1 now.

What is the solution to this problem besides extreme affirmative action for conservatives? In my STEM field I know that finding a conservative faculty candidates would mean passing up 10 more qualified liberal faculty candidates. If you want to find a faculty member who is actually representative of American conservatives as a whole (doesn't believe in evolution or climate chnage), you would likely not be able to find one at all. It's difficult to see this as anything but an attempt to decimate the quality of university education while simultaneously forcing institutions to promote whatever your whacky ideology is.

>People notice when the purity spiral goes totally insane like at Evergreen recently, but this is a universal phenomenon at this point.

No, it is not - there have been too politically extreme - students at universities are more apolitical than ever. It makes it extraordinarily obvious that you live in an Internet bubble where you read a few too many articles about how awful liberal kids are these days and constantly circlejerk about it instead of paying attention to any real political issue of our day.

>They'd be better served with a pile of books and an anonymous Internet forum.

Nobody with a pile of books and an anonymous Internet forum is going to succeed in most fields. These don't teach how to interact with people in the real world. These don't teach networking, bench lab work, practical engineering design, or presentation skills - in other words, they won't prepare people for biology, chemistry, most engineering, business, law, medicine, or politics.

>And the final reason that seems obvious is that most of the people in university these days just shouldn't be there. They're not mentally prepared for higher education; they don't have the IQ.

This is absurd. A positive of the college system is how it is academically tiered - the lower level and community colleges exist for people who "aren't as mentally prepared" (won't even get into how ridiculous it is to say "they don't have the IQ"). I don't think it is an unreasonable goal for a society to expect 60-80% of its young people to spend 22 years learning instead of 18.

I'm just going to say it: nothing you said was of value. Your issues are completely detached from what it is actually like to be a student and go to university and learn the basics on the path to become a doctor, engineer, scientist, entrepreneur, or lawyer. You present a fictional universe that has nothing to do with the reality of universities today. It is clear that you are extremely upset that a large number of people who work at universities have different political beliefs than you, and that you want to either cripple academia and/or force universities to promote your political ideology as a solution.

Re: Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills

#70
post #2

I've taught college. This study is wildly unsurprising. I've written about this in various places (e.g. https://jakeseliger.com/2014/04/27/paying-for-the-party-eliz... ), but most colleges have evolved majors and paths that are designed to move students through the system, collect their tuition money, and graduate them. In re-reading the previous sentence, I think I sound opposed to this. I am a little bit, maybe, bu…

For what it's worth, the fact that I'm the only one in my circles who didn't figure this out put me in a wayyyyy better position than most. If you think that college is for learning instead of just being present until they give you a degree, you spend a hell of a lot more time and effort figuring out what you want to study, where you'll learn the most, etc etc. All of my friends who treated college as "probably the best opportunity for concentrated learning in your life" instead of "conveyor belt with degree at end" are the ones doing extremely well in their careers, financially and in terms of self-actualization.

I came from a not-great home environment and it was a blessing in disguise that I was at such a "disadvantage" when it came to understanding the college admissions, attendance, and graduation process. Everyone who was savvy to the way college "actually" works ended up with just a relatively worthless piece of paper.

Post reply on HN