5 ms·

Even though this incident sounds more personal than idealistic, it keeps bringing back up the question of the purpose of universities. I am okay with universit

by iridium 11y ago

Even though this incident sounds more personal than idealistic, it keeps bringing back up the question of the purpose of universities. I am okay with universities being a medium of education, where one can take any courses they want, and passing and failing is irrelevant (MOOCs?) I am okay with universities being a place to enjoy four years of camaraderie and self exploration before committing to life or career goals. I am okay with universities being a stamp of selection, i.e you were good enough to get into harvard so you must be smart. However, universities try to be all three and fail miserably at all of them, while leaving students in a large debt that most are unable to reconcile with what they got out of it, along with a life-long 'average gpa' that barely reflects abilities.

probably_wrong 11y ago
I think you are confusing "universities" with "USA universities", specially when it comes to debt and GPA.
- iridium 11y ago
  I'll agree on the debt side. The grade issue is infinitely worse in a lot of competitive cultures. Even if you take the money factor away, Have non-US universities really figured out higher education? Most of them tend to either be a lot more rigid in structure, or they copy from the US system.
  - arethuza 11y ago
    Personally, I'm much happier I went to a UK university where the final degree "class" was based almost entirely on what you did in the final year (I think it was 80% fourth year and 20% third) as I was a terrible student in the first year, average in the second and did really well in the final two years and got a first. Not saying that this approach is "better" - just that it suited me!
- nailer 11y ago
  Most USA-people do this, and they're aware of it: when they talk about 'universities', or '[some class of] people', or 'VC' or whatever else. I think the reasons they do it are a combination of efficiency and a feeling that the rest of the world isn't always necessary to the discussion. Those of us outside the US may feel it's naive, but it's unlikely they'll change. The simplest thing for us to do is to assume they always mean USA-[topic].
  - ajcarpy2005 11y ago
    US citizens may be less cultured.
    - virmundi 11y ago
      Define cultured? Say you're an average European. Hop into your (rented) car and drive 4 hours in any linear direction? Who are you going to see? Chances are someone from a different culture and history and probably one who once warred with you. I jump in my car and drive 4 hours, I'm at my state capital. I drive another 4 hours, I'm in Georgia. America is a huge country. We were the EU before unioning was cool. The "countries" (states) we interact with are all the same. Nothing but Sun Glass Huts and McDonalds coast to coast. Does that make us uncultured? No, it makes us so cultured that we can get along with 25% of the worlds economy. Just some historical things to think about.
      - lfowles 11y ago
        > probably one who once warred with you On the other hand, in the US if I drive 4 hours south, I'm firmly in Confederate states.
        virmundi 11y ago
        You are, but you're still fundamentally in the US. The system of government is the same, the general ideas are the same. Heck, most of the people that fought in the South weren't really pro-slavery as anti-federalist. Anti-federalist isn't original to the those states, Jefferson, the 3rd president, was anti-federalist. Even more to the point it was a civil war. Most Brits can drive around and find that. Heck, they might just have to cross the street for that.
- rmc 11y ago
  Or even "one can take any courses they want"
- dunmalg 11y ago
  >I think you are confusing "universities" with "USA universities" When the thread topic title starts with "Texas College Professor" on a US hosted web site, in English, not appending "in the USA" to every single assertion is not unreasonable.
StillBored 11y ago
The idea that a student can be educated in 4 years is a factory mentality. It completely ignores people who want the education but are unable to commit the required time in a given semester (aka people with jobs instead of loans). It also ignores the fact that a pretty high percentage (based on people I knew in college) didn't really know what they should major in immediately. Changing majors three years in, is a good way to extend 4 years into 5. Or for that matter, four years of taking classes in one major provides a similar level of competence to four years of another major. It also assumes that everyone learns at the same rate, maybe some people take a little longer in $SUBJECT does that make them inferior? This whole graduate in 4 years idea, is primarily driven by the college rankings. The lack of a good metric for post college "success" or information learned, means the rankings rely on feel good metrics like the average number of years to graduation.

by iridium 11y ago

probably_wrong 11y ago

I think you are confusing "universities" with "USA universities", specially when it comes to debt and GPA.

iridium 11y ago
I'll agree on the debt side. The grade issue is infinitely worse in a lot of competitive cultures. Even if you take the money factor away, Have non-US universities really figured out higher education? Most of them tend to either be a lot more rigid in structure, or they copy from the US system.
- arethuza 11y ago
  Personally, I'm much happier I went to a UK university where the final degree "class" was based almost entirely on what you did in the final year (I think it was 80% fourth year and 20% third) as I was a terrible student in the first year, average in the second and did really well in the final two years and got a first. Not saying that this approach is "better" - just that it suited me!
nailer 11y ago
Most USA-people do this, and they're aware of it: when they talk about 'universities', or '[some class of] people', or 'VC' or whatever else. I think the reasons they do it are a combination of efficiency and a feeling that the rest of the world isn't always necessary to the discussion. Those of us outside the US may feel it's naive, but it's unlikely they'll change. The simplest thing for us to do is to assume they always mean USA-[topic].
- ajcarpy2005 11y ago
  US citizens may be less cultured.
  - virmundi 11y ago
    Define cultured? Say you're an average European. Hop into your (rented) car and drive 4 hours in any linear direction? Who are you going to see? Chances are someone from a different culture and history and probably one who once warred with you. I jump in my car and drive 4 hours, I'm at my state capital. I drive another 4 hours, I'm in Georgia. America is a huge country. We were the EU before unioning was cool. The "countries" (states) we interact with are all the same. Nothing but Sun Glass Huts and McDonalds coast to coast. Does that make us uncultured? No, it makes us so cultured that we can get along with 25% of the worlds economy. Just some historical things to think about.
    - lfowles 11y ago
      > probably one who once warred with you On the other hand, in the US if I drive 4 hours south, I'm firmly in Confederate states.
      - virmundi 11y ago
        You are, but you're still fundamentally in the US. The system of government is the same, the general ideas are the same. Heck, most of the people that fought in the South weren't really pro-slavery as anti-federalist. Anti-federalist isn't original to the those states, Jefferson, the 3rd president, was anti-federalist. Even more to the point it was a civil war. Most Brits can drive around and find that. Heck, they might just have to cross the street for that.
rmc 11y ago
Or even "one can take any courses they want"
dunmalg 11y ago
>I think you are confusing "universities" with "USA universities" When the thread topic title starts with "Texas College Professor" on a US hosted web site, in English, not appending "in the USA" to every single assertion is not unreasonable.

StillBored 11y ago

The idea that a student can be educated in 4 years is a factory mentality. It completely ignores people who want the education but are unable to commit the required time in a given semester (aka people with jobs instead of loans). It also ignores the fact that a pretty high percentage (based on people I knew in college) didn't really know what they should major in immediately. Changing majors three years in, is a good way to extend 4 years into 5. Or for that matter, four years of taking classes in one major provides a similar level of competence to four years of another major. It also assumes that everyone learns at the same rate, maybe some people take a little longer in $SUBJECT does that make them inferior? This whole graduate in 4 years idea, is primarily driven by the college rankings. The lack of a good metric for post college "success" or information learned, means the rankings rely on feel good metrics like the average number of years to graduation.