Oh come on. I just feel like this is another in a series of "let's indict education" posts. I take issue with everything in here.
$44,000 a year for tuition, why? Why did you choose that school if you had no intention of studying? You can teach yourself more in an afternoon than in a 10-week class? Really, let's prove it. I want to see it.
You made basically all Fs but yet you can teach yourself more in an afternoon ... because you're better than others or something?
You happen to have chosen a field in which it is very easy to make a modest income, $60K, without actually having very much knowledge (not saying you didn't have x knowledge).
I mean, sure anyone that is not slobbering on themselves can probably follow a RoR YouTube and make a blog engine and then know enough to convince someone to pay them >$50K. I don't know how long this is going to last though. But this is not much a real recipe for success in my opinion.
The idea that everyone can just teach themselves everything and that no one is actually learning any content in college, at best they are just learning "life skills" is just completely ridiculous.
I don't know, not to make another anecdote and I don't have hard data, but I have probably "self-taught" a lot more subjects than most that claim actually have and I wouldn't say I didn't learn any content from CS in college, not even close. In fact, I don't know any PhDs that would say they didn't learn any content (not just this life skills stuff) in college; I think it is just a fanciful notion and probably makes people feel better about themselves: "I'm Srinivasa Ramanujan, I don't need college to teach me anything."
The autor is clearly talking of his own experience. He is not generalizing and trying to convince everybody to drop out of college.
My experience is that after 5 years of professionnal activity college is not relevant anymore as long as one kept learning and gaining experience.
It is what you've done and accomplished that will make the difference and get you closer to success.
Beside 44k$/year + interests is far too expensive for what cellege gives you. I fully agree with the OP. This puts you in the rat race from the start. It will be very hard to get out of it. That's not a path to success.
The idea that a college degre is a step closer to success is plain wrong.
I am European, so I really don't get that. Why don't you try to make education cheaper? Why are you taking it as granted that university must cost x 10000's dollars a year? Out here outside of UK it is mostly around 1000 Eur max a year.
Having free higher ed changes the picture. When you are from a middle class family it is your ticket to maintain or even climb the social ladder. Even if for some people, the education content is less useful, then you get a huge lots of social interactions that you don't get elsewhere, and probably not out of a online learning offering.
European universities are cheap because they are government subsidized. The US has state schools that, once upon a time, were partially subsidized and cheaper, but not quite free. State governments have stopped giving money to these universities forcing them to raise tuition. This is a political decision, is what the voters want, even though it might not be in their best interest. It would be nice to have low cost universities in the US but is not going to happen in the near future.
That's true... and at least in my area (Colorado/New Mexico) that cost for a resident is currently between ~3.1k and 5.2k per semester, a far cry from the 22k per at RIT. And that is without scholarships. A full four years at that price is about one year at the original article's cost at RIT.
We don't know what the true cost of going to college is. There are plenty of prices, but there are few places in the world where the student pays 100% of the actual cost of their education. But I can tell you, the cost of a college education is NOT 1000 Eur, anywhere. That's heavily, almost completely, subsidized by the government.
1) Most tuition is posted at a higher sticker price with merit and need scholarships lowering the price for many.
2) Most state schools are government subsidized to some extent.
3) Most schools have some form of endowment (i.e. giant pot of cash donated by alumni) that they invest and sometimes pull cash out of for scholarships and capital projets.
4) The schools vary in price quite a bit based on their standing and whether or not you live on campus. The $35-55k numbers thrown around are top tier private schools including living on campus, i.e. the most you could possibly pay. Many people are getting solid college degrees from state schools (including room & board) around $30k per year. Many more are commuting and paying $20k per year. Community (2 year) colleges are on the order of hundreds or thousands of dollars a semester.
I know that European universities are subsidized a lot. I also think this is right, because it creates an incentive to study - price is low and reward is high. The graduates consumes more afterwards, and pays also more taxes. That's what you call a win/win.
Still I am always surprised that Americans are so much willing to go into that game where the winners are mostly university workers and banks.
This is a bit like inflation in Germany, or housing in the US - you get burnt once and then exaggerate in the other direction.
For housing, these are people never wanting to buy a home again. Wrong reasons - there was a bad bubble until 2007, they just bought too high. Doesn't mean there won't be good deals anymore. Same for education - "it is overly expensive so I jump it". For me it is the wrong solution to the right problem.
Reread the article, it is exactly what you're telling me it's not (last paragraph). :(
Also, beside that point, this is thrice daily conversation, whether it's Peter Thiel, or KA, or whatever the "anti-college" hit of the day is.
As far as 5 years of experience ... It depends on what you spent 5 years doing.
The $44K/yr is a non-starter. Sure, it's a big waste of money if you get a .33 GPA, agreed. Big deal. That's so much higher than average that bringing this up is sort of a strawman; if that school is way outside of your budget and you're not just dead-set on that school, why go there. That's more than B.S. + PhD for many people. Give me a break!
As far as the idea of college being step closer to success being "plain wrong," this is just a naked assertion that is really generalized and kind of ridiculous.
My understanding is that being successful means reaching our life goal. If your goal is to make career in the academic or research domain, than a college degree is indeed a must have and a step closer to your success. Otherwise, it's not and a waste of time and money.
Especially, if you think that a college degree provides you a guarantee to get and keep an employee job, or being successful in it, you are plain wrong.
The opinion of Paul Graham or Peter Thiel about college make sense when considering the goal they are talking about for which a college degree is indeed a waste of time and money.
A college degree is good to become educated in some field, but you are spoon fed and you get all the constrains that come with it.
There is a world outside the software industry, a world in which a college education of some kind is necessary to get and keep a position or strike out on your own. Doctors, nurses, lawyers, accountants, and professional engineers are all required by law or regulation to obtain one or more accredited degrees. There are other fields, such as finance and some government-related positions (such as social work and child education and development) where degrees are not necessarily a legal requirement, but you will not be hired without one.
I know too many people get useless degrees. I know people get pressured go to college who should not be going. I know people have unrealistic expectations of what they are going to get out of it. However, software development is a unique case in the professional world in that you can develop significant skills and experience without a formal education, or even a formal job. That does not translate to other fields. Hell, it doesn't even translate to some parts of this field.
I found my undergrad to be a very valuable experience, despite not getting any of the "soft" experience. I was a commuter student at a public university in Florida who lived at home and did not spend any more time than necessary on campus. I did learn quite a bit once I got to my major classes (EE), and I got to experiment with multiple aspects of engineering in the presence of very knowledgeable people. I also had a $55k/year job on graduation in 2002. I would do things differently given hindsight, but I would still be going for an undergrad degree.
$44,000 a year for tuition, why? Why did you choose that school if you had no intention of studying? You can teach yourself more in an afternoon than in a 10-week class? Really, let's prove it. I want to see it.
You made basically all Fs but yet you can teach yourself more in an afternoon ... because you're better than others or something?
You happen to have chosen a field in which it is very easy to make a modest income, $60K, without actually having very much knowledge (not saying you didn't have x knowledge).
I mean, sure anyone that is not slobbering on themselves can probably follow a RoR YouTube and make a blog engine and then know enough to convince someone to pay them >$50K. I don't know how long this is going to last though. But this is not much a real recipe for success in my opinion.
The idea that everyone can just teach themselves everything and that no one is actually learning any content in college, at best they are just learning "life skills" is just completely ridiculous.
I don't know, not to make another anecdote and I don't have hard data, but I have probably "self-taught" a lot more subjects than most that claim actually have and I wouldn't say I didn't learn any content from CS in college, not even close. In fact, I don't know any PhDs that would say they didn't learn any content (not just this life skills stuff) in college; I think it is just a fanciful notion and probably makes people feel better about themselves: "I'm Srinivasa Ramanujan, I don't need college to teach me anything."