If high school was better, would we need college? • Hacker News Board

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#31

Post by burgerbrain » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 7:21 PM UTC

splat wrote: post #28

burgerbrain wrote: post #13

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".

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.

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".

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#32

Post by shantanubala » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 7:29 PM UTC

showsover wrote: post #25

beaumartinez wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There is a difference between needing something and finding something useful.

It's really up to the person. I think that if a candidate did not go to college, it would be interesting to see what they did instead. If they did something interesting or acquired new skills during that time, then it can possibly be equivalent to a college education.

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#33

Post by rgraham » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 7:50 PM UTC

beaumartinez wrote: post #23

citricsquid wrote: post #17

Why is nobody questioning the "need" for college. This is a huge problem too, the idea that college is needed .

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.

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

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#34

Post by rgraham » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 7:57 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #13

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".

I don't think there are a lot of these in the world nor is there room for everyone to devote themselves to something quite so theoretical. I'd probably rather go fishing with Joe the Plumber than Nigel the Physicist.

The point is that the world really needs essentially everyone to have a baseline education, the ability to contribute to their communities, and the skills to be gainfully employed or self-employed.

The world has a much smaller need in the grand scheme of things for advancement in theoretical astrophysics. As hackers, engineers, etc. I think we should take a lesson for ourselves and optimize education for the common case.

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#35

Post by sid0 » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 8:14 PM UTC

cmpeck wrote: post #2

If high school were better. Perhaps we still need college?

I'm going to post this as a reply to every nitpicker I see bitching about the subjunctive: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005515.h...

It doesn't matter. Get over it.

I also downvoted you for contributing nothing to the discussion.

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#36

Post by yummyfajitas » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 8:21 PM UTC

tokenadult wrote: post #26

yummyfajitas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/2011/01/how-well-do-above-... It's ridiculously overpriced, but the value added is very good.

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/…

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?

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#37

Post by noblethrasher » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 8:51 PM UTC

rgraham wrote: post #33

beaumartinez wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

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.

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#38

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 8:59 PM UTC

sid0 wrote: post #35

cmpeck wrote: post #2

If high school were better. Perhaps we still need college?

I'm going to post this as a reply to every nitpicker I see bitching about the subjunctive: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005515.h... It doesn't matter. Get over it. I also downvoted you for contributing nothing to the discussion.

[deleted]

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#39

Post by njharman » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 9:16 PM UTC

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.

Re: If high school was better, would we need college?

#40

Post by mkramlich » Sun, Apr 10, 2011, 9:21 PM UTC

beaumartinez wrote: post #23

citricsquid wrote: post #17

Why is nobody questioning the "need" for college. This is a huge problem too, the idea that college is needed .

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.

you can self-educate. you can educate in ways/venues other than college. further education is-not-necessarily-or-only college

however, college/university does typically take 4+ years, costs anywhere from USD$20-100k, and there's a lot involved other than actual learning. there are many ways in which we can improve upon it.