Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If high school was better, would we need college?

dealbook.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

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

#51

Post by Lost_BiomedE »

burgerbrain wrote: post #31
splat wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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: "col…

"...realisticly all you've done is had the students skip highschool and go straight to college."

I regret not doing this. I have talked to a couple people who have done it by taking community college classes part-time and transferring into state full-time.

I think the rest of the world's model is better than what we do. Separate those that will learn to work with their hands and those that will work with their mind and train them respectively in high-school.

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

#52

Post by burgerbrain »

rgraham wrote: post #34
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 w…

As far as I can tell, this is an argument for sending children to vocational schools instead of to colleges. Not an argument for replacing college with more intensive highschooling.

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

#53

Post by Dilpil »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #14

The recent increase in reliance on college as a prerequisite for many office and knowledge worker jobs is more of an indication of the failure of the public K-12 education system than of the beneficial qualities of college. It's no longer feasible to assume that the holder of a high school diploma possesses a basic level of proficiency with the English language (written and verbal), mathematics, reasoning skills, and…

I might add: especially to entry level jobs. These jobs are hard to judge candidates for- you can't evaluate their past work, you have to evaluate their potential for future work.

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

#54

Post by yummyfajitas »

joelrunyon wrote: post #43
yummyfajitas wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Saying something is Overpriced (especially rediculously so) implies that it likely does not add enough value for the cost charged. Therefore, the more true your first statement is, the less likely your second statement is true.

You are confusing the term "value added" with "value for money" (or "a good value").

Value added = quality of students after education - quality of students before education.

The amount of money put in does not affect this.

Value for money = value added / money spent.

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

#55

Post by [deleted] »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #54
joelrunyon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying something is Overpriced (especially rediculously so) implies that it likely does not add enough value for the cost charged. Therefore, the more true your first statement is, the less likely your second statement is true.

You are confusing the term "value added" with "value for money" (or "a good value"). Value added = quality of students after education - quality of students before education. The amount of money put in does not affect this. Value for money = value added / money spent.

[deleted]

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

#56

Post by lkrubner »

blhack wrote: post #49
InclinedPlane wrote: post #14

The recent increase in reliance on college as a prerequisite for many office and knowledge worker jobs is more of an indication of the failure of the public K-12 education system than of the beneficial qualities of college. It's no longer feasible to assume that the holder of a high school diploma possesses a basic level of proficiency with the English language (written and verbal), mathematics, reasoning skills, and…

I wouldn't entirely blame the school system. While I absolutely agree that there are lots of kids coming out of high school who aren't ready for a job in an office, you can't discount the availability of money for prospective college students. Of course employers are using college as a filter now, "everybody" has a college education, which has driven the cost of labor low enough that they can afford to hire college g…

In the USA, only 26% of the adult population has a college degree. Some thought should be given as to how the other 74% should make a living.

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

#57

Post by burgerbrain »

Lost_BiomedE wrote: post #51
burgerbrain wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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: "col…

"...realisticly all you've done is had the students skip highschool and go straight to college." I regret not doing this. I have talked to a couple people who have done it by taking community college classes part-time and transferring into state full-time. I think the rest of the world's model is better than what we do. Separate those that will learn to work with their hands and those that will work with their mind a…

I had the benefit of being able to take a 50/50 mix of highschool classes, and classes at the local branch of my state college.

Highly recommended in situations where it is at all possible, and it makes a ton of sense, since there is often so much overlap between the last two years of the one and the first year of so of the other.

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

#58

Post by jacques_chester »

tokenadult wrote: post #24
Tycho wrote: post #19

I think about 98% of the population are what I'd call statistically and economically illiterate. Basic economics should be a mandatory lesson at school, but unless you picked the class you can leave without even understanding the law of supply and demand. And then politicians, whose job is mainly to interfere with economic activity, blast these people with statistics (the significance of which they barely understand)…

Basic economics should be a mandatory lesson at school But if it were, and voters and taxpayers actually entered adult life with a sound knowledge of economics, they would demand that the school system be radically restructured, which is why I don't think that this will happen. "The education system is a formalised, bureaucratic organisational structure and, like any bureaucratic organisational structure, it strives…

It's weird, seeing a link to a blog I administer (Club Troppo), on HN, that wasn't by me.

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

#59

Post by citricsquid »

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.

oh definitely, for the right person college can be hugely valuable. However that is not every person and that's my complaint. There seems to be the idea floating around that every person will benefit from college, at least enough to offset the cost of it, this isn't true.

Every person is different.

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

#60

Post by Wilduck »

fecklessyouth wrote: post #29
Tycho wrote: post #19

I think about 98% of the population are what I'd call statistically and economically illiterate. Basic economics should be a mandatory lesson at school, but unless you picked the class you can leave without even understanding the law of supply and demand. And then politicians, whose job is mainly to interfere with economic activity, blast these people with statistics (the significance of which they barely understand)…

>The productivity of virtually every job in the country depends in part on the employee's ability to use a computer. Don't you think that's somewhat of an overstatement?

I work for a company that grinds railroads. While 100% of the office employees spend more than half their time in front of a computer, none of the people in the shop do.

So, I'd say it's most certainly an overstatement. I'm not willing to exclude the large sections of the American workforce who still work in industrial production.

Post reply on HN