My sister spent four years at an expensive college, getting a degree that gave her no skills. She expects to die before her debts are paid off, and before you get worried, she's a young woman in excellent health. Now, that's probably a bit of hyperbole on her part, but the simple fact is that she shelled out big money to become an expert at something she'll never use in a productive capacity. The worst part? It was kinda necessary.

Now, Exorince's experiment shows that, at least in Iceland, it is possible for a confident young fellow to land a job without flaunting his education, but statistics, conventional wisdom, and my sister's experience say that getting a BS in BS is a big help in getting a job over here in the US. Many listings will list "college degree - any" as one of their requirements. The value of a college education is often described as a "signaling" device, valuable because it shows that you were smart enough to pass your courses at the college you attended.

Let's take a closer look at that statement, because I've seen it repeated often enough that, at least for me, its absurdity isn't always obvious at first glance. Some forms of education in the US derive their primary value from source source other than the education they impart upon students.

That's absurd.

And, really, if getting a degree is about "signaling" and not "educating", perhaps we should more closely examine what a degree signals. Well, for one thing, it signals that you could pay for college. This means that you either came from a wealthy background and will maintain your family wealth with your job, or you did not come from a wealthy background, and will spend your life saddled with huge student loans.

It also signals that you were willing to play ball. That, for many colleges, you gave up your car for a year, and lived in a cramped hall full of randomly asserted freshman. That you signed up for the mandatory meal plan, and couldn't use that money to feed yourself in the way you chose. That you fit neatly into the college system.

That's not a good set of job requirements.

Now, especially in the United States, there's a whole host of issues with the educational part of the educational system, but to me, the most obviously ridiculous part of it is the way it intersects with our employment system. I have no idea how we can back down from this, but I think we should be trying to find a way.

The system is broken in that they must not teach you much in high school, other than what you've already learned, since I tested out of many college level courses despite dropping out with an 8th/9th grade education. I say middle & high school are more about conditioning you to be a decent member of society than educating you - likely why I couldn't handle it!

Could you elaborate? Are you stating that some colleges are just "diploma mills", or that they are in business to keep students in college, thus keeping their revenue stream going?

I'd argue that this is exactly what employers are looking for. Someone who IS willing to play ball. Is the candidate willing to give up a portion of one's life for the company; can the candidate work within an instituional setting?

Also, what you consider to be signals, or not education, I consider as just another form of education: the life skills and ability to learn aspect rather then the book smarts. This part of education can be learned outside of the formal setting...I think we agree.

I think college should be more for the professions you absolutely must have an education for (medical field, law, the sciences to an extent) but for the other topics, like you said, determination and self-education can usually suffice, especially in terms of nailing a job that requires skills to perform. Trade schools should be more popular than 4-year schools, for this reason.

In Australia there is TAFE for that, it's like University where you take courses that are cheaper and only take a few months to complete.

Obviously not for law and medicine and the like.

Instead of colleges I like the trade school idea. You get enough general knowledge in high school, after the it should be about specifics. I'm not saying do away with college because there are people out there that want to
Learn a little about a lot, I just think specializing is the way to go. I think that when ou apply for a job the employer should hire someone go went to a trade school before a general college.

Resume and perseverance (aka: annoying the crap out of someone) land you an interview

Attitude and first impression land you the job

Skills related to the job keep you from getting fired

Experience and education determine how much you get paid and help beat the automated resume systems.

EDIT: Oh, the one thing I overlooked: Networking, very important as well. I've completely skipped the resume spot for almost all work I've done simply because of networking.

Education especially the public forms of it is severely overrated, I've learned more outside of those systems then within.

This reminds me a lot of the Tafe concept in Australia

I wasn't sure if it was still possible to write a huge wall of text on a serious subject and get more than a couple of replies, but you've proved me wrong. BSF 1 - Me 0

The views and opinions I expressed in the OP are not set in stone, and I'm definitely thinking about what you guys said. Higher education is very important in many fields and it's extremely difficult to land a high paying job without formal education.

I'm just questioning the purpose of the "middle" education, like college. Isn't it just a preparation for higher education? I always thought so but if that's true then the teaching methods are completely wrong.

TBH, I haven't read it yet, just skimmed it

Gonna read it while at work though -- I MEAN I HAVE HARD WORK TO DO SO MAYBE I"LL BE ABLE TO READ IT DURING MY LUNCH BREAK

For landing a job ? *shrug* Here, kids that get solid practical formation toward a manual job find a place much easier than university kids. And frankly, even in the highly specialized high degrees, it's not that great : companies are happier to underpay people, can't less easily happen if your candidates are overqualified.

Jobs aren't the point of education anyway. The point is developping curiosity and the ability to understand things, even if you didn't actually learnt them at school. Whiiiiich can be a bit of a hindrance if you want to run a society smoothly. This explains that.

I'm sure the fact that you are a monkey that looks like he belongs in a Tarantino film has nothin to do with it.

I got a fairly good job, but a local company is hiring 10 people for 50-60 hours a week, company trucks you can drive home. Starts at $22 hourly, then if you make it a year it goes to $25, and from there higher.
Entry level job, clean driving record and valid D/L, nothing else required.

A person with valid CDL here can earn big money too, $1,200 to as high as $2,500 a week depending on if you want to stay local or go long haul.

My uncle has enough land to raise cattle, and the prices of beef (non altered) raised naturally is amazing. He has a small heard and already has most of the heard sold once they get to the age and weight to be shipped off.

Plenty of jobs out that that pay good and require nothing more than a clear history and a way to work, me personally (at work atm) I am gonna stay right here.
8-5 / M-F with lots of benefits paid for at no cost to me. My sister (not counting benefits) was making really good money working at lowes.

Not everyone is a special snow flake, most people will have to (regardless of education/history) settle for a "normal" job.
I know people who rushed out of high school and into $50,000 or more in debt for education. Me and my wife might not have much, but before this year is over I won't owe a dime to anyone. We both work "normal" jobs.

A person has to find the a place or way of life they can afford and still be happy with.

I've used a lot of what I learned in school outside of it, but only because I choose to. I keep my mind keen, and shaprned. Though it's debatable how sharp it is. One could say it's a matter of life and death for me, hahahah.

Edit
No jobs in my town, they all require the mythical 2 years of experience. But there's no way to get hired for jobs. So the only route I can see is community service for two years, just for a CHANCE at a minimum wage entry level job.

I'm at work, so all I could do was read it, but I agree with a lot of your points (almost all of it) and what you say could be a strong argument towards the support of homeschooling, which I'll explain in my post when I make it tonight after work.

In the US, at least, you may be hired for a job that is not in the same field as your degree but you will be paid significantly less. I have an uncle who is an environmental assixr. He has a degree in geology. He's been doing the job for 35 years. He's given the hardest work, yet he's paid significantly less than newbies who have a degree in engineering.

If you have no degree at all, you'll never make what you could have with a degree. When I worked as a temp, I made $12 an hour at my job while other people made $8-$10 merely because I had a degree, and that was for passing out fliers. At some point, your experience and skills may mitigate your lack of a degree, but maybe not.

Why risk it?

I think the problem is far greater than "diploma mills." The problem is that because college degrees are so common, many employers can easily set "college degree" as a job req. and still get enough applicants, so college degrees are commonly and arbitrarily required for good non-technical jobs, so people commonly spend enormous amounts of money to get an education with very little intrinsic value.

No doubt about it, you're right in the general. Employers do want someone who will play with their rules, but they probably don't care much about many of the rules of college, such as: you must abandon your car for a year, you must tolerate widespread drunkeness, you are required to pay for (though not required to eat, I will admit) meals from our meal program. Most of the common "play along with it" requirements for college and work are also shared by college and highschool.

But (1) does college actually teach any of these things, or does it simply prove that you have them? Does college teach you to, say, be able to tolerate the loss of your car for one year, or does it simply weed out those who cannot tolerate the loss of their car for one year? (2) Is it intrinsically worth the high cost of college to learn to, for example, tolerate the one-year-long loss of your car?

Definitely true for the jobs that young candidates tend to apply for, such as retail or basic bank apprenticeships, since there is often little experience that you can go on, and attitude tends to show that the person would be good at selling, and things you don't really need an education to do.

But I think that once you get past those jobs to most managerial positions or jobs that are usually occupied by older advlts and those in the peak of their careers, companies look more at experience instead of education. Obviously your attitude is still important.

Most specific jobs, that lets be honest, most people aim for, ask for an education. I'll let you know that the job I want when I leave University, requires a degree, just like many other jobs.

And that how I got my job. A friend of mine somehow manage to arrange me an interview with a job. The said interviewer told me I got the job but said it straight in my face that if I screw up, I'll be fired. A year have past and I still have that job.

And that how that friend that got me a job got his job. Company were firing people because they were too expensive to keep (they have degrees, you see) but hired my friend because he basically has the same skillset and experience as the degree holder but never finish college at all. He was the cheaper alternate.

Thats why i volunter and learn from experience at things that may be helpful in the field I wish to get into.

I mean I'm in college but that alone won't get what In want.

People you know, your ability to learn the said task.

Just because you learn well in the classroom doesn't mean you learn well in the real world.

I'm sure with engineering, teaching, and the like definately require such things but overall many blue collar jobs its all about your compliance and that you get **** done and do it right.

Not so sure on the white collar end, but I never want to be caught working in an office......>.< I like working with my hands so to speak.

Education is never useless, it keeps people asking questions and learning news things and all that jazz. When it comes to finances it depends on what field your in mainly.

Well, I certainly would disagree to the statement, "education is useless in the general society," due to its literal and obvious consequences and I guess personal opinion.

But, I do think I have some opinion along the lines of yours. For example, I often complained about elementary and secondary school when I was in it. Similarly, I didn't really have an interest (and I still don't, really) of going into post-secondary schooling (i.e. university, college) after leaving secondary school. (The major reason why I am indeed in university is because the career I want to be in has this as a prerequisite. However, I am enjoying my stay, for the most or a good part.)

Yea, I also think a lot of education nowadays is just memorization, which is trivial and silly, for the most part, I think. Emphasizing on how to learn, like you said, sounds good and reasonable, but also centring on learning the concepts of things, and why facts are facts, would be good too, and I think you said that. As an illustration, I remember being annoyed and disinterested in learning things like biology or mathematics because noone ever really told me why these things were so, so I wonder wonder how do I even know these people telling me they are indeed so are correct, and so forth.

So, I'm pretty sure I think that the method of education in at least the 'Western world' could use a overhaul, but that's without saying that I think its completely ineffective or anything.

I've been saying this for years. I just wish I had the job to prove it.

Exorince,
I may be young, and not have much in the way of life experience, but I agree with you 100%.
My whole family comes from very high education and doctors, lawyers, and whatnot. I am considered "advanced" (relative to others) in my ability to learn new things, but I do not see it as much of an advantage.
What you said about learning versus memorizing has always been something I believed in. My teachers would say "go home and memorize this or that" and I would say "no, but I'll try to understand it." I've gotten into trouble for this, but I stood my ground.
I think education holds a big part in civilized society, but it isn't a necessity. I liked your way of putting things, where education is NOT the most important thing. I firmly believe you are right, and that your attitude is what makes you. Because not everyone can get the same education.

That would be a good argument, except for the fact that other than Maths most of the developed world doesn't teach via memorisation