 |
| Harvard Yard, Cambridge, MA |
"None of us ever questioned the importance of what we were doing."
--Louis Menand, "Live and Learn"
When I first read through Louis Menand's article "Live and Learn" I thought it made an interesting point, and looked at an institution we take for granted from a unique perspective. But after going back through it again recently, I realized that I don't like where Menand is coming from when he begins his article.
I believe that while Menand's arguments may be valid, his initial premises are untrue and therefore his whole point is unsound. Menand makes the claim that what he was doing is important. To whom, I ask. It is certainly not important to me. I would like to discuss Menand's careless assumptions, first from the viewpoint that maybe college isn't important, and then from the perspective of one who does not like Menand's academic background.
Menand deals with the philosophical question of why we go to college, but what about the question, should we go to college? Menand says that, depending on your view, college can be good for actually learning things, for preparing one for an occupation, or for achieving good marks in order to demonstrate aptitude. Let's take a step back. Maybe college isn't good for any of these things. Some of today's biggest corporations, such as Facebook and Microsoft, were started by people who never even graduated college. Others were founded by people who didn't even finish high school. Its a fact that you don't need a degree to be a CEO.
 |
| Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, Harvard dropout |
You don't even need to start a Fortune 100 company to be successful without a degree! Many studies have shown that taking out students loans isn't worth the extra income gained from earning a college degree. The loan debt makes it harder to pay other bills, and is structured in a fashion that works against the borrower.
Menand's theories are very compelling, but perhaps we should't even have to think that far into it. We should stop, and prior to deciding why we go to college, we must ask ourselves, is college really a good choice? There's a distinct possibility that what Menand though was extremely important, actually matters very little in today's world.
"My first job as a professor was at an Ivy League university." This is how Menand starts his article. I have a bone to pick with Menand in that he assumes that there are differences between Ivy League students and students at public universities without having a basis for his postulations. Menand says, in regards to the public school students, "many of them worked, and some had complicated family responsibilities." I'm almost positive that students at Ivies work as well. And even private school preps can have complicated home situations. These comments by Menand are nothing other than classism, something I see far too often in Ivy League graduates. Menand says the public school students "would not be as well prepared." Does the inability to pay for an overpriced Ivy education affect one's preparedness? There are students at public schools who are just as qualified as those at private schools.
Perhaps, seeing as I attend U of M (obviously a public university), I am biased. But so is Menand. I wonder how or if the article "Live and Learn" would change if it had been written from an impartial perspective. What do you all think: should we attend college? Is Menand at all prejudiced?
While I do agree with some of your points (students at Ivies do work, and can have complicated family lives), I think you are missing some of Menand's point when he talks about public universities. He is not referring to schools such as the University of Virginia, the University of Michigan, or UC: Berkeley, he is referring to the masses of students in community colleges or public universities such as Florida Atlantic University, California University of Pennsylvania, and Appalachian State University. These "no-name" schools are factories for students who come out job-less and with mountains of debt. (Hopefully, at least) this category does not include TIer I research universities like ours.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with some of your points. I think there are definitely some blind assumptions Menand makes about students at both public and private schools. I do think though that you fail to recognize the people who have earned money because of their college education. The majority of us will not come up with a new brilliant social media outlet or create a huge corporation on our own. I think college is important inside and outside the classroom. College is an experience and there is a lot of value to the experience itself. As a whole society, we are too quick to place monetary values on everything and I think in that sense we are undervaluing college. Although I'm only a freshman and have not experienced a ton of college, I do think I have learn a lot whether it's in the classroom or not. I do recognize that it's a bit easier for me to say it's undervalued because I don't personally think so much about the money spent, but I do think it's worth it.
ReplyDeleteI want to mainly consider your point about not needing a college degree to be successful. While it is true that a small handfull of people find success without attending college, it is slippery to suggest that everyone can operate under this assumption. Certainly, not many would venture to suggest that they are even a fraction as genius as Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg. Additionally, a book called "Outlier" taught me that there are reasons that underly successes such as these, namely, good timing and luck. Although some inherent intelligence and a LOT of hard work create success (the book says 10,000 hours is the magic number for mastering a topic- a number well-studied and backed up), the book also notes the importance of time and luck. That is, nearly all of the Silicon Valley executives of today were born between the years of 1953-1956: Bill Joy, Eric Schmidt, Steve Jobs, Steve Ballmer, Paul Allen, and Bill Gates. One needed to be old enough to participate in the technology revolution but ALSO could not be too old to have moved too far ahead in life to partake- building families, cementing oneself in a job, etc. Then, the existence of incredible circumstances, like Bill Gates' access to free computers during an age when computer access was a) hard to come by because time was limited and b) incredibly expensive, allowed him the opportunity to master technology at an early age, far ahead of many of his counterparts.
ReplyDeleteLong story short, just because some people make it big without going to college does not mean ALL people can do so. I think that college forms an important role in society, especially as roles have moved away from blue collar.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read through the article for the first time, I didn't get the feeling that Menand was biased. Instead, I feel that he brings up the point about teaching in ivy vs public institutions to demonstrate how there are differences across the teaching spectrum. He later integrates this point into his argument regarding the theories of higher education.
ReplyDeleteEven after reading this article, I still think that people should go to college. In my opinion, the theories he proposes should be a motivational factor for people - a sign that they need to push themselves to achieve more in order to not be bulldozed by the system and labeled as something lesser than they actually are.
I agree with your points that it is not necessary to go to college and obtain a degree in order to be successful. However, when you look on the whole I believe it is obvious that obtaining at least a bachelor's degree will increase the job prospects for a person. Yes, it is true that if you have an extremely ingenious idea you do not need to have had four years of college to help you with your idea. But, college does still serve as a marker in society for people who do not have such powerful and innovative ideas which make a degree irrelevant. I would say for the vast majority of people, it is not going to be the case that they come up with ideas and have the ability to carry them out like Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates. For these people, getting a college degree serves as a fall back that will likely always give this person an advantage in getting a job over a person who only possesses a high school diploma.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you though that I do not think this is right. I do not believe a lot of the skills and literature you read in college will make you a more able worker in many industries. However, the fact of the matter is, unless you are going to start your own company you are going to work for someone else. And this company or person you work for will likely require that you have this degree even if you never use any of the skills you picked up in college. So I think the focus needs to be on the inefficiencies of the corporate system in picking out the best workers. Maybe it is true that college degrees do not mean anything in the end, but having one sure does make a difference in the average standard of living one can enjoy.
I'm glad to have generated so much response to this issue. I expected disagreement on this topic. You all decided to attend college, therefore it makes sense that there is some controversy over my opinions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of you when you say that it is obviously a good idea to go to college, seeing as companies nowadays require degrees. What I now challenge you to think about, is that if large corporations did not have this predisposition towards college graduates, would this lead to fewer students attending school, or would learning still be a priority. If a large portion of this countries youth used their time in order to educate themselves and work outside school instead of attending college, would they be able to achieve as much when they are hired by a company, as opposed to a college graduate.
Quickly, let me pose several more questions. You say that its difficult to believe everyone can succeed outside of college like Bill Gates, but isn't it also difficult to say that someone attending a very rigorous school will succeed. We've seen that not everyone does, however, where is the evidence that we all can't be successful without college? Do you only classify geniuses with billions of dollars of net worth as successes?
I also think it is insulting and ignorant to suppose that everyone attending college outside the top three public universities will be job-less. There are people at no-name universities who could think in circles around the average U of M student.
Let me know what you all think about these additional questions.
I think that your post is very interesting. I do believe that college is needed, there are a few acceptions to great success such as microsoft, facebook. etc. However, the economy is in ruins and there are not a lot of jobs available. Without proper education, how can majority of poor people survive? What employer will look at someone with little to no education to work high paying jobs? Having education is some what like having a skill. Without certain skills you cant get certain jobs. The better your skills are, the better chance you will have at getting a job. It doesnt matter at all what the process of going to college is, what matters is the rewards of going to college.
ReplyDelete