World's smallest violin

My but Ken is a real jerk isn't he.

The part that got me was his preening about his superiority to accounting majors with cushy jobs.

Since I'm attempting to be more loving and understanding today, I will defend the kid. There are very few professional jobs out there anymore. College used to be that dividing line. Now almost everyone is a blue collar worker with an expensive tie. We can't even maintain a long enough attention span in the arts to sustain MTV as a "music" channel. We collectively disdain anyone having a cultural knowledge deeper than a kiddie pool. Chesterton would not approve.

Anonymous carping. I'm even more impressed!

Why can't he teach? That would be a noble use of a history degree.

But, yeah, you are limiting yourself by going that route. I love the history of Byzantium, but I can't imagine trying to make a living in the field. In fact, the most famous holder of a doctorate in Byzantine history writes sci-fi: Harry Turtledove.*

If you don't want to teach, your history degree is going to be of limited practical application.

------
* Useless fun fact: Turtledove did a superb partial translation of Theophanes the Chronicler, which remains in print and I recommend heartily, as it is an important primary source for the "Byzantine Dark Age" of ca. 610-800. It sells a lot less than his alt-hist, though.

Oh, for heaven's sake. The point of a liberal education is to learn how to LIVE, not how to make a living. And making a living just isn't that hard when you have an education. I majored in philosophy and music, one sister majored in theatre, and another in sculpture. We all managed to make decent livings; just not in the fields we studied.

I trade forty hours a week of my time for money. Because of that, I can afford the books and music that I love. I live modestly and have time to sing in my church choir and discuss books and ideas with friends and family (often accompanied by a fine cigar and decent port!). I have time to do volunteer work.
Did I dream of working for an insurance company? No. But my life isn't defined by my job--the job makes the rest of it possible.

Ken might just be a happier guy if he manages to learn that. I hope he does. The "oh, waah, poor me" schtick just doesn't work.

As a classics professor, I often encourage students to major or minor in classics *in addition to*, not *instead of* the practical things their parents want them to major in. The plus side is that having an additional major or minor in classics or Latin or Greek will set them apart from the pile of other resumes on the human resources director's desk.

Of course, people who have an interest in the classics have often already decided that they plan to go to graduate school in something, anyway.

I'm going to have to defend Ken, a little, myself. First, it may come across to some of you that living with ones' parents is degrading. I say, family is family, and when you're in a bind you stand with each other. If it's for a short transitional period between jobs, between college and job, or when you fall on hard times, there is no shame to "mooching" off your parents. As long as you return the favor by taking care of them when they need it, and being there for them in their old age. If you are working, and contributing towards household expenses, there is nothing in the world wrong with living with your parents. Extended families living in the same building, or collection of buildings, is for the vast majority of the human race, and for most of history, the norm. It is economical, and emotionally supportive, and even better for the environment (shared resources and less driving for instance.) Our fractured and scattered lifestyles are the exception. But maybe that's just my half-Mexican cultural outlook.

Okay, that was an aside. Maybe the kid was naive when he chose his course of studies. Maybe his parents were. For generations, you could work your way through college, if you had the opportunity to go. Since the GI Bill, college education became much more common for the middle class.

Then two trends started: EVERYONE wanted in on social mobility. Everyone wanted to be middle class, or to at least look like they were living this dream. This unleashed our consumerist debt-ridden economy, as people began to live beyond their means, or give ungodly number of hours to achieve the living standards they thought they merited. You know the drill, new car every other year, huge house, walk-in closets and etc. College education became a given, though in our delusion, we didn't think too much more about how to foot that bill than we did how to foot the bill for our endless supply of new cars. I'm not saying everyone fell into this trap, but it's a hallmark of our society today.

Second trend is that costs of tuition, room, and board have grown at a far higher pace than inflation. Just this past year the figure is something like 6.4%. Add the economic mindset of your average American to the equation, and really it's no wonder so many young people end up in over their heads.

When you are applying to schools, it is often the private schools which give a better bottom line, up front. State schools, if you get a scholarship, are great. If not, the private schools often cover a lot more in financial aid, and you may very well end up owing less out of pocket. Out of pocket being the key. These schools make up for it by adding on lots of loans. And I can tell you from experience that they are quick to hand out private loans, with high interest.

I enlisted in the Army to pay back my school loans. I wonder just how desperate this Ken person is, and if I can get ahold of him. A nice job in military intelligence for four years would put him past entry-level, and that combined with a history major would secure him a good government job with great benefits. Military intelligence types dodge bullets less than your average soldier, so it won't be all THAT dangerous.

Maybe he would consider that selling out, though. :) I DO hear what he is saying about the insurance companies and the banks. You want your vocation to have meaning. You want to contribute to more than the voracious economy's bottom line. You want your work to MEAN something. This is a natural human desire. Pragmatism and time may fade it somewhat, but it is normal.

"Unfortunately, this idea that liberal arts prepares you for most anything is mortally wounded today, as evidenced by both Rod and the student in the article."

I think a liberal arts background is worthwhile, but to say that purely liberal arts classes prepares you for most things is a stretch to say the least. The people I met in college in liberal arts who didn't even have a basic understanding of business, economics, or accounting (but never failed to bloviate on those topics) was staggering. I highly doubt they could have performed my first jobs in insurance and tax.

I found many of my liberal arts classes interesting (in fact, my favorite was an ethics class), but to require four years for a college degree and then three for a law degree--there's a lot of excess fat that could easily be cut out. Either that or trim back on college tuition. [incidentally, if "Bait and Switch" is the book I am thinking of, such a reduction is the one proposal the author does not recommend].

The price of college has way outstripped increases in prices of almost everything else,and way beyond inflation. Nobody can explain it, and doesn't ever improve.All these goverment programs do very little good for students but do wonders for the endowments of big universities. NYU, my alma mater, is now 2nd only among private institutions to the Catholic Church in terms of land ownership on the isle of Manhattan. Some of those building-NYU Hospital, for example-are a great public service. But NYU is now more like a real estate holding company than a academy of learning.

A few things I learned by experience, my own and others, and not all of it good-

-if you really have no idea what you're going to do, go to a 2-year community college or go part-time or at night. Spending a full boat cost when you have no idea what you're going to do is a waste of money. Figure it out in those 2 first years.;
-do not, under any circumstances, put tuition and expenses on a credit card. In fact, other than things that require a credit card, pay with a debit card or cash. When ever you can, have a zero balance.;
-think of college as a credential and as the time when you sort out what you think you might like to do with your life. But remember, there's no reason to get too worried about it beyond seeing that you get a degree. Once you get out in the world, you need the credential of the degree, but practically most people will judge you on your work. And there are plenty of people who change careers in their 20s, 30s, 40s and even 50s. You can too.;
-above all , if you have children, open up 529 savings plans for them ASAP. Most states have good programs with solid rates of return with tax benefits state-wise. You can max out contributions at $5k per child, $10k total, per year.

One of the things I found annoying about government scholarships and loans is that they're not tied to any sort of market demand. You want the taxpayers' help getting an education? Then the taxpayers should be assured of some sort of return on their investment. Degrees in fields like math, hard sciences and engineering should be subsidized more liberally than those in fields where there's little to no demand. Further, the kid should be required to take some sort of finance class where he's confronted up front with the cost of his education, including the final debt obligation he'll have and the amount of time he can expect to pay it off in.

In fact, many kids should be steered away from college altogether. There are plenty of good trades out there that pay well and don't require nearly the excessive costly education that many bachelor degrees do. It'd probably be a good step for many kids, who could then come back to college when they can afford to pay for it themselves.

As for Ken here, he is a dinkwad. Not because he's living with his parents, but because he's sneering at those who've moved on with their lives and taken some responsibility.

What's wrong with this guy's parents for allowing him to sponge off them at home instead of getting a job?
It's their co-dependency that has probably resulted in his narcissistic complaining.
He needs to get a job and find value in whatever work he is doing for himself and society, even if it doesn't seem like it's nourishing his soul. And he should read St. Therese.

I accrued $90K in debt to get my undergrad at UofC and would do it again in a heart beat.

A few thoughts:

1) I'm a Ph.D. religion student. If I did not have full funding, I would not have done this degree. If I would not have had to pay tuition for my master, I would not have gone. You do have to look at your earning potention. But ... I was lucky to have parental help with undergrad and was probably not savvy enough to see all this then. I did get a journalism degree, though -- and, unless you're Rod, that doesn't pay a hell of a lot better than history. Not that Rod is rich either, from what he says.

2) I absolutely wish there had been required finance courses at my undergrad U.

3) Some schools will mark up tuition prices to give more aid. They do this because an expensive school looks more prestigious.

4) This is my biggest point: My generation (I'm 30) is one that got a lot of "follow your dreams" type advice. I have since come to question this, and wonder why the hell I didn't go to med school. I had the grades. The bottom line is that being an idealist means sacrifice, and that sacrifice hurts - especially as all your college friends buy nicer houses, have more posh lives, etc. I love what I do, but I work longer hours than my lawyer friends for less money - I will never have their standard of living, their retirement accounts, or their ability to pay for their kids college (if and when I have kids).

Is this sacrifice worth it? Who knows. But no one is telling these kids (or they didn't tell me) that all this follow-your-dreams stuff has this underlying assumption that you'll "be successful if you do what you love." And that, for most folks, is not quite true.

I promise I spell and proofread when not blogging. Hopefully you'll get what I mean. But I left that one open for snark.

I am finishing up at a co-op marketing conference in Austin, TX. Marketers from about 60 natural food co-ops all over the country, and to a person we are liberal arts majors. All of us are living our dreams by making a modest (but survivable) living furthering organic agriculture, etc.

I remember thinking, back in the 70s, that working for a big company was "selling out." So I lived the life I could afford working at the co-op, and eventually natural foods turned in to something that pays a mortgage (okay - home purchased at late-80s price).

Our stores are full of vital young people in or just out of college, with art, music, English, history etc. majors. Mine was anthropology back in the 70s. They all work a few years, get some experience, and move on to interesting lives.

This Ken needs a few years in retail or a restaurant to straighten him out. He could also go back to school for a teaching certificate and teach in inner city schools for a few years. Or he could live his dream, live on what it pays him, and grow up.

Joseph, thanks for the best laugh I've had all day!

Grumpy, I was an English major too, the wholly impractical sort (I didn't even minor in education). When people asked what I was going to do after college, I answered, "Marry wealth." (Luckily for my husband whose economic background is exactly similar to mine I was kidding.)

But I knew that my college years were unreal. The professor who was almost mad at me because I refused to consider grad school had no idea that I was working all sorts of unpleasant jobs just to get the bachelor's degree in the first place. I wish someone would have encouraged me early on to take classes in the communications department; by the time I did so in my senior year and found out how much fun they were, it was too late to do much but settle in and enjoy the heck out of them.

I think both Bugg and Ben have realistic advice. I've already told my kids that if they want to go to college, they have to know why, and what they plan to do with that education. In my ivory tower years that was the heresy of utilitarianism; education was supposed to be pursued for its own sake, for the pure joy and virtue of learning, and in an ideal world all those grungy practical "majors" wouldn't even exist.

But unless you are wealthy enough (or have wealthy enough relatives) to drop staggeringly large sums of money into the study of the humanities, divorced from any practical concerns whatsoever, you really do have to find a different way. Minor in the classics, perhaps, and major in something that will help you get a job. Or double major, if you can work that out around work-study schedules. Whatever you do, don't listen to the people who tell you not to think about any of that--the longer you live and work in academia, the greater your disconnect from reality becomes.

Erin: But unless you are wealthy enough (or have wealthy enough relatives) to drop staggeringly large sums of money into the study of the humanities, divorced from any practical concerns whatsoever, you really do have to find a different way. Minor in the classics, perhaps, and major in something that will help you get a job. Or double major, if you can work that out around work-study schedules. Whatever you do, don't listen to the people who tell you not to think about any of that--the longer you live and work in academia, the greater your disconnect from reality becomes.

That's such great advice. Once as an undergraduate I was complaining to a high school friend home from his college that we didn't have enough courses at LSU mandating that we read this or that. He said, sensibly, "You know, nothing's keeping you from reading those books on your own."

One great thing about being in the working world -- this is BEFORE you have children, mind you -- is that suddenly you have a lot more time in the evenings to read the things you want to read. It's not like when you leave college, your education ends, and you are not allowed to pick up Plato or Shakespeare ever again.

Anyway, let me double-plus underscore what Erin says: as an undergraduate, you really cannot afford to listen to people who tell you to follow your bliss, and let the rest take care of yourself. That won't pay the bills after graduation. If you're smart, you can study what really interests you, but also take some courses in finance, marketing, or something that gives you practical knowledge that you can put to work in non-academic work. My humanities minors helped me, and do help me, do better work as a journalist. My journalism training gave me a way to support myself and integrate my interest in politics and philosophy into my job. It doesn't have to be an either/or. But you have to take control of your education, and not assume that everything's going to work out.

College is useless Go to trade school or be an apprentice and learn to work for yourself. To keep yourself learning, join a book club, go to the library, local theater group, community band and chorus, or take college classes a la carte.

I got a music degree, but "sold out"-worked at a bank, stock-brokerage, and even did a year of law school to climb the economic ladder. There were some good times, and I made lots of cash, but overall I was not happy. Currently, I am trying to make my living farming, and I work odd jobs to keep paying the bills. Its hard, but I am getting closer to farming full time.

I think it depends on the person. If you are extroverted and high energy, liberal arts is fine. You will be fine in sales. Ditto if you have management skills. Otherwise, I would advise that you get a skill. You can still get a liberal arts degree. I got a BA in Economics, minor in Spanish, but took 15 hours in Accounting. I got a job in accounting, and now do production planning and teach Government at a local community college. Do what you love, but also cover your bases. A skill is worth so much, and you can use that to develop your soft skills.

I am in awe that anyone believes going to a university means getting educated.

If you want to learn something, read one good, classic book. Look up every word or idea you can't understand. Then read another one, and another...after you have read 500 classics in depth, you will know more than 99.9% of all the Ivy grads who have been cranked through the big U assembly line, getting a smattering of this and that but never really learning much besides how to take tests and cram. Sure, we all got a lot of booze, dope, and sex on the way; but you can do that at home nearly as well.

"Going to school" to get educated is simply a joke. A bad, expensive joke. Going into debt in order to learn something is the ultimate IQ test: anyone dumb enough to do so deserves to have their money taken from them. It's Darwinian.

To go to school to get the paper needed for your dream job, great! Go for it, do the cost-benefit analysis and have a wild ride. But don't think you are getting an education. You are jumping through hoops to get a piece of paper. The "Ken" types actually believe all that jumping "educated" them and they have something of value to offer the world. Pah. Coldfoot is too good for Ken and his type. I once packed a whole caribou over 5 soggy miles near Coldfoot - but that's another story.

The only reason companies want a degree is because it is illegal to give IQ tests for job interviews. Demanding a degree is a safe way to get smart people. After working several jobs in engineering I can safely say I could have learned what I need to know about engineering on my own far better than I did at the university. Heck, all the smart engineering profs can't speak English anyway, so I used the books. Cost: $500. A hellva lot less than the degree cost!

Of course everyone likes to worry but what about all the human interaction at U you need to learn? Please. Go online. Read reviews. Write to authors. Talk to your mother. I repeat: the university is the best scam going. And with all those cute young things running loose away from their parents for the first time, they have good advertising! The university system is simply the best method ever invented to transfer wealth from the young and dumb to the folk in power - and the victim is even proud of it! Can you beat that?

I did the liberal arts thing at Hillsdale College, majoring in art, minoring in Latin. Now I am getting a Master's degree in Medieval Studies. I am the most impractically educated person on the planet. You know what I do for a living? SCULPTURE. Plus, I was a slide curator for several years for a university. I've had plenty of family and now spousal support. (I never did move back in with the folks, but they had to pay the rent for a few months.) I hate that our culture rewards bankers and football players instead of historians or artists. I'm not really cut out for anything else, so I make sculptures.

Shameless plug: www.HempelStudios.com

I did the liberal arts thing--BA from Great Books school and PhD (History). I was lucky enough to graduate without a penny of debt, but as I finished my thesis last year I had to face the fact that I would never get a job in my field. So, I left. After four months of a rather exhausting job search, I have a job, not a job I want to hold forever, but something that will pay the bills while I look for something better.

My advice to liberal arts folks would simply be to get job experience now. Most employers and HR folks are simply looking for some skills, whether it be accounting, computer skills, people skills, a language (Spanish would be very helpful in Texas). They aren't necessarily hostile to a liberal arts degree but need you to make an obvious connection with what they do. So, while you are in college doing your liberal arts work, get an internship, volunteer, talk to adults (usually your parents and their friends) about what they do. Most people don't end up earning their livings in the exact field they studied in college anyway.

Regarding, Rod's advice to continue your education by reading outside of work and school, I just want to say (without sounding condescending) that it isn't what you think. Really educating yourself in Plato and Shakespeare is work, hard work, and that is why people spend their lives doing it and you need teachers to help you along with it. By all means, read serious books, but don't think that you are going to necessarily plumb their depths.

Ben (and everyone):

Another book that needs to be added to the mix in discussing this topic:

www.amazon.com/Generation-Americans-Confident-Assertive-Entitled/dp/0743276981/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-8233925-5846342?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193451651&sr=1-1

Dr. Twenge echoes Rod's hard advice, but with a lot more compassion (and understanding) for why people like me make such decisions in the first place.

(As if we could change them now, anyway!)

"Ask Carly Fiorina, who majored in both (she says they taught her how to think and analyze),"

Which is why if you make the mistake of buying H-P hardware, when you call customer service/technical support for H-P, it's some guy in Bangalore claiming his name is "Rick" in a heavy subcontinental accent. Yes, we really need to emulate that kind of corporate leadership for our country. Another day, another thread.

H-P opened their Indian call center the year she left H-P, btw.

This guy's problem is not his debt, and it's not what he chose to major in, it's that he refuses to take decent jobs. Business and insurance are good jobs. Sure they might not change the world or be as engaging intellectually as college, but college is a rarefied atmosphere; you probably can't replicate it after you do it.

I graduated a year and half ago with a degree in history. I'm doing to law school thing, but that's not the only path. My wife graduated with me with a degree in English; she works an office job at a school. I know who people who work in publishing, at libraries and in theaters, all with liberal arts degrees. It's not hard to find a job, assuming you realize your limitations, and don't think any job is above you. Will you be directly using what you learned in your job? Of course not, but you will probably find a job that requires you to read, write and think a bit, which is what you really learned to do, assuming you got a good education.

Related to that, I think another important factor is the quality of the university you attend. I was fortunate enough to attend a top school that has a reputation for bright, intellectually adept students(The University of Chicago). In this context, a degree in history is pretty marketable, especially if you supplement it with a few practical courses. Without meaning to sound elitist, if you need to realize what your degree says. If you're not at a school with the right reputation, a liberal arts degree doesn't necessarily say very much about you. On the other hand, it's not that hard to market an English degree from Harvard.

He needs to get a life and quit thinking like a liberal. If you have debt you do what you need to do to pay it off and move on. I agree with Rod. I was accepted at Notre Dame but my parents encouraged me to go to a state school where I had scholarships and they could help me out. I've been fortunate enough to be able to buy a house in a great school district and allow my wife to stay home with the kids. No need for lamentation but rather income generation.

I fully agree with (and enjoy!) your bashing of poor Ken, whose parents didn't do a good enough job of preparing him for the real world (a job at a bank! oh no!), but I don't think a high sticker price/debt burden should prevent people from seeking the best education they can find.

From an economic perspective, expensive colleges are worth the investment, because they open doors to more lucrative jobs. But more importantly, of course, a better college allows a better education. Of course you can still get a great education and meet exceptional teachers at a college that doesn't rank so high on the US News & World report, but I think most people, all else being equal, would think they'd get a better education at Princeton rather than Podunk Community College.

A great college isn't so much about the teachers or the libraries as it is about the people you meet there, the friends you make for life. And the odds are, the people and the opportunities at a great college will be more exceptional.

If you can, it's worth it.

I racked up a fair amount of debt between college, grad school, and law school, and wish I'd been smarter about that, but I don't regret my education. I went to a Jesuit university that taught a classical liberal arts curriculum, and got a lot out of the experience. However--I worked 20 hours per week in the library the entire time, and so when I took a year off after college I was able to get a job in a library, doing cataloguing. It paid peanuts, but I lived on the peanuts just fine (I was 21, with no dependents other than a plant). When I majored in history, I realized that it meant teaching high school, or more school for me. I was open to either, but eventually chose more school. I don't have as much debt as many of my peers, but I think all of us in the Society of English Majors (or history, philosophy, et al) could use a mandatory financial intelligence class. My partner (physics/math major, now teaches high school) and I are working on this "degree" informally now.

The National Guard offers full tuition at state colleges and substantial assistance for private ones in return for a six year enlistment. Unless Ken has a medical condition he chose debt.

I for one am a little annoyed at some of the snide comments made about banks and insurance companies, and the people who work in them. Do you people live in the real world?

Maybe I'm not reading closely enough, but I don't see that here. In fact, the origin of my anger at Ken was his haughty disdain for people who work in jobs he considers beneath him.

I don't know if I would go as far as M_David in condemning all higher education. I've got a BS in engineering and an MA in liberal arts, so I've seen both worlds. Even if the teacher is worthless (which does happen), the structure and tests give you the discipline you need to learn the stuff from the book. The labs and projects were also useful. One drawback to my engineering schooling is that the classes were more interested in teaching general theory instead of practical knowledge. I graduated capable of doing all sorts of heat transfer calculations on perfect black spheres but with no knowledge of what a UN thread or a GTOL was. I eventually picked that stuff up though OJT, but it's something that would be relatively simple to teach in a classroom setting (vocational schools do it), and it would be a better use of my time than a class like differential equations or certainly one of the idiotic multiculti requirements.

As far as choosing a career path, I'm coming to the conclusion that parents should encourage kids to do it as early as junior high. You don't need to pick a path then, but the search for general interests should start then. The sooner a person finds what he likes doing (and CAN do), the sooner he can start excelling at it and making it pay. Once an interest is found, a parent should then try to find some kind of work in that field for the kid, even if its as unpaid intern.

Armchair's comments reminds me of a similar remark a college of mine in graduate school made to me, to the effect that studying the classics (or, I suppose, liberal arts in general) best prepares you for a life of cultivated leisure. I hadn't thought of Russian landowners as the analogy, but then I haven't read as much 19th century Russian literature as I should. My thought was more of the characters in Jane Austen's novels, who draw a sufficient income from their estates in Devonshire, or wherever, to allow them to spend their lives attending concerts and balls, and to own a house in London. ;-)

On the other hand, I remember remarking to my mother that, unlike when she was young, there is not "It" anymore -- for my parents' generation, there came a time when they could say, "This is It": i.e., they knew when they had come to the point where they had the job they would have for the rest of their working life, which provided them with health insurance and retirement; when they were living in the house they would live in for the next 30+ years; etc. In other words, there were guarantees in life. My father majored in engineering because, in the 50s, it was a sure ticket to a good job.

Now, however, as I told my mother, there is no "It" anymore -- there are few college majors or jobs or careers that will guarantee stability for the rest of one's life; few of us reach the point, where our parents could, where they know that, if they just keep playing by the rules and don't screw up, they are pretty much set for the rest of their lives.

And since there are no guarantees in anything anymore, why not do what makes you happy? I realize that having to provide for a family (which I don't have to do) can throw a wrench of practicality into the works; but even so, since they aren't any guarantees anymore -- that *this* major will land you a good job, that *this* career will keep you for the rest of your life -- I believe students should at least consider what makes them happy.

We are in a situation now where many people will have to retool and retrain and readjust and reinvent themselves over the course of their lives. The "hot" career today may be outsourced to Bangalore five years from now. And people with a good, general arts and sciences education may be in the best position to adapt to change, to make the necessary adjustments, to learn a new career.

By all means, shape your college education with a view towards finding a stable, well-paying job after you graduate. But also consider the fact that the career you've chosen might not be what spend the rest of your working life doing.

I'm not saying you should major in history instead of accounting. I'm saying that maybe you should double-major in accounting *and* history.

Derek Copold: "As far as choosing a career path, I'm coming to the conclusion that parents should encourage kids to do it as early as junior high."

...With the caveat that career paths these days can be very bendy things (as David J. White noted).

What I did in college is not exactly what I did in grad school. What I did in grad school isn't the same as what I do now. What the training did was create stepping stones, bridges between career steps. I never had a clue then that I'd end up doing what I do today. The area didn't even exist when I was evaluating colleges.

The big mistake is being twenty years old and: a) thinking you can plan the rest of your life in fine detail, or b) thinking you have to have it all lined up by now.

My undergraduate (private liberal arts) education was the best $140,000 I ever hope to spend, and though I will be paying a big chunk of my income toward paying it off (the portion I funded through loans -- I also worked full time as a waitress and housekeeper throughout college) until I'm 52 (literally) I don't regret a penny of it. Yes, I could be now spending an extra $350 a month on my car, clothes, or housing -- but one of the things those great books I read taught me was that that stuff wasn't going to make me happy. I make a modest living as a social worker (I do now have a graduate degree as well, but I made only about $5000/year less with my BA), pay my bills, buy more great books, and am very happy -- something I would never have been if I had done the Practical Thing and gotten an accounting degree. There's something to be said for Knowing Thyself.

"Dinkwad." Mmm, that's some good Christian name callin right there. Tell the dope to just shut up and get a job, because that's what Jesus would do.

Many of the comments here seem quite angry. Most people gravitate to jobs based at least somewhat on their natural abilities, personality types, and other preferences, in my experience. The person whose favorite activity since age five is reading, probably isn't going to go into accounting, no matter how constrained their other circumstances. The person whose personality requires as much security as possiblea will probably work for the federal government rather than choose self-employment.
In my view Rod went into (or was called into) journalism because he has a story to tell and he wants people to listen. I don't think he would have ended up in accounting, even if it seems very practical to him. My calling was book publishing. I've had no complaints. I've been self-employed for many years (I wanted a lot of control over my own schedule and work environment and I also wanted to be able to dress as I pleased).
My guess is that the editors of the original article were looking for a column with a provocative attitude, which the young man delivered. I'd think his situation will resolve itself. I don't like to demand things of other people that I don't ask of myself.

Tell the dope to just shut up and get a job, because that's what Jesus would do.

Well, St. Paul did say "Those who do not work will not eat."

Wow, who knew I had so much in common with Rod? I started as an English major, realized I hated writing English papers because they decimated my ability to enjoy fiction, and switched to political science. Then I took a few philosophy courses and fell in love, so I am about to graduate with honors and a double major in political science and philosophy, in which I completed both the pre-religion and pre-law tracks . I went to a no-name state university in Georgia an hour from my house, lived at home the first two years and worked full time. Moved into town about a year ago because I got a job with an airline working at a call center here. I'm going to graduate with about $10 k in debt, so I'm happy, especially since most of that is money I blew on clothes and concerts; Georgia's lottery paid for my degrees.

I am probably going to law school; Georgia State, why not go to a public school? I have no desire to make huge amounts of money. I can be a public defender for 10 years and have my loans forgiven. I've recently thought about going back to my school to get a MBA since I'm probably the only person in the history of the world who has gotten more conservative after studying philosophy; but it seems that may be a bad plan given white collar America's state right now.If all else fails, I have a job right now that I could see making into a career for the next several years, the company does offer a lot of advancement, but I'd have to relocate to Atlanta. I'll graduate with next to no debt, compared to others. I could always go back and get a degree in something I could teach. Or, like the poster above said, go to trucking school and work for my father. He owns his own rig, and he makes more per week than I ever hope to.

I don't feel for this Ken guy. He could find something to do; if you're so idealistic that any brush with reality offends you either 1) something's wrong with your ideals or 2) join a monastery. I do think it's ridiculous that you can't bankrupt private school loans. I've seen lots of people who either have useless degrees or couldn't even make it through college be saddled with debt they'll never get rid of. These lenders have gotten themselves legally protected, so what do they care if they're loaning money to people who have no business getting it? They'll just garnish your check from your job at Wal-Mart.

To continue an earlier thread:
The sci-fi author Orson Scott Card ("Ender's Game") has recommended that aspiring fiction writers study political science or history, rather than literature. He states that fiction writers need to understand character, and those subjects offer a fascinating look at how and why people make decisions and what motivates them. Of course, I was a poli sci major, so I'm biased.
Which reminds me- there are subjects that are neither as "soft" as the humanities or as "hard" as physics. Poli sci, sociology, psychology, criminal justice, etc. Of course they have their subjective aspects, but all of these subjects require a working knowledge of how to collect and analyze data, encourage an understanding of human nature, and have their own varieties of the theory-hypothesis-test-validate standard that reigns in the hard sciences.
And Ken just reminds us all that Americans need to stop acting as if work exists to make us feel good about ourselves. Work exists because it needs to be done, so if you're not doing anything, don't turn up your nose at doing any "something."

I met a man today at the Fort Worth Botanic Garden's Fall Festival in the Japanese Garden. He was coaxing a beautiful bowl from a formless lump of clay on the potter's wheel in front of him. I talked to him; he said humbly that other people called him a master potter (implying that that's not the label he gives himself). He knew about the science and the chemistry and the 'personality' of the clay; he has a studio in his back yard, and fires his own wares. He takes a few students, adults who are able to commit to a fairly rigorous course of instruction.

For most of his life he was a government inspector. His passion and love for the art of creating beautiful pottery was a several decades' hobby before it became the second career that fills his retirement.

I got to thinking about this thread, about how we make two critical mistakes somewhere along the line. The first is to think that the thing we love to do must be a think we can study and learn in a university in order to obtain both a degree and a good job with good pay and good benefits in our chosen field of study. The second is to think that just because our economic circumstances require us to earn a "practical" degree or get a "practical job," we will never find a way to fit the thing we love to do best into our lives, simply because we can't "earn a living" at it in the present moment.

The man at the festival spoke of his craft with enthusiasm and joy, with the kind of love that doesn't gloss over the problems. He admitted that his wares weren't perfect, even with all his years of work--but he also said that perfection wasn't a realistic goal. He says he tells his students that if they want to make a perfect pot, they should buy a mold. Things made by hand have little wobbles or cracks in the glaze, but these are the things that make them unique and give them character.

The more the universities have as their goal a sort of unrealistic perfection that wants to pour unique individual human beings into a mold and have them come out as perfect accountants, perfect doctors or lawyers, perfect ivory-tower humanities majors suited to return to education on the other side of the desk, perfect corporate employees who will slide into their cubicles as easily as they slid behind the desks of their computer classes, and so on, the more people are going to find themselves caught between the Scylla of an expensive but ultimately worthless degree and the Charybdis of an equally expensive, practical, but personally unfulfilling one. People, like clay, can fight against being molded to become what they do not wish to be, and crack under the constant opposing forces of two different kinds of pressures.

In the end, the student considering a college degree needs to ask himself two important questions, one practical, one philosophical. The practical one is "Can I afford this?" because that's the question that so often doesn't get asked until sometime between the junior and senior year. The second is "Who am I now, who am I becoming, and who do I wish to be?" Some people would argue that you have to go to college to answer those questions, but I think we begin answering them as soon as we become aware of our unique selves in childhood, and don't stop answering them until we approach the end of our earthly existence. College may help some people find some answers, but whether or not that's the right approach to take is going to depend on the answer to the first question--because your college isn't interested in *who* you are becoming, only in *what* you will become, and that, like it or not, is defined in entirely pragmatic and measurable ways.

Jim M.:

Your numbers are basically correct from my experience, but if you live in an expensive area of the country (which Alaska is, and certainly my New Jersey), it doesn't mean it's going to be "quite easy."

But of course, we've been debating the question of "place" too under a separate post of Rod's here on CC, so that's a whole other subject ...

In theory, colleges are producing educated, thoughtful, problem-solving, self-sufficient young people ready to tackle the world's problems. In reality, colleges are likely just taking kids who were lazy to start with and making them lazier. Kids who remain lazy until a light-bulb goes off in their heads or their parent's heads.

The problem is not just college. It starts with us parents. I hate to say this, but I think we love our kids too much. As parents we cater to their every need, which we should do. But we also seem to cater to their every want. That is very dangerous. And here is what I mean. Background, I'm 35, married with 3 kids, the oldest of which is 7.

When we go places as a family, we usually listen to something the kids want to listen to. Growing up, us kids were forced to listen to what my parents wanted to listen to. Oh how I grew to hate the Statler Brothers. When we tell our kids to go outside and play, they expect us to play with them all the time. Growing up, I don't remember my parents playing with us regularly. We kids explored the neighborhood and the woods behind our houses. Parents, not the kids, decided where we would go eat when we would go out to eat. And I've been accused of being a mean-old dad when I shut off the TV and make them scatter.

Getting back to college age kids ... I hear people say the kids have it good at home for so long that its time they stepped up and take responsibility ... or that they should be grateful. To YOU, having someone wash your clothes, cook your meals and do your dishes sounds great. You would KNOW how nice that is. But these kids don't know how nice that is because it is all they have ever known! It is their reality!!

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying don't play with your kids. Just don't let your kids become parent dependent. You are not doing them any favors in the long run. The point is we raise these kids one way for 18 years and then expect college to change that? Don't get me wrong, I agree with a lot of what people have said about colleges in the posts above. It's just that I also see college as a reflection of what we have wrought.

All the best,

Soop

If you want to learn something, read one good, classic book. Look up every word or idea you can't understand. Then read another one, and another...after you have read 500 classics in depth, you will know more than 99.9% of all the Ivy grads who have been cranked through the big U assembly line, getting a smattering of this and that but never really learning much besides how to take tests and cram. Sure, we all got a lot of booze, dope, and sex on the way; but you can do that at home nearly as well.

That sounds like the basic plot premise of Good Will Hunting, particularly the scene in the bar where he humiliates the stuck-up graduate student. ;-)

***

A good friend of mine used to work as a truck driver. He would drive a truck for a semester and save up money, then quit and go to college for the next semester. He was an experienced truck driver with a good record, so he never had trouble getting a job when he needed one. He was able to work his way through a good college. He also lived very frugally and had few possessions other than clothes and books, and so he was able to save up enough money that after college he could afford to live in Rome for a *year* to take part in an academic program and pay for it himself. He then went to law school (for which he took out student loans), and now has a very good job. He works for the government; if he were working for the private sector he could probably be making a lot more, but in his present job he is able to use his language expertise. He really is a self-made man, and I have tremendous respect for him, and think that in many repects I don't stack up very well next to him. It really is possible to work one's way up, if one is willing to work hard and take chances.

I taught college English for many years. Most of my students were "non-traditional"--that is, they were well beyond the 18-22-year-old age range, and had been out in the world working and raising families for several years. They were wonderful. They knew what they were doing in school. They knew what they needed to learn.

I had occasional "college-age" college classes, which were a lot more trouble. That was where I ran into the only instances of cheating or plagiarism I ever had. All of the cheating was very ineptly done, BTW. One student copied the papers of another student in the same class, who had submitted them earlier in the same term, and had only gotten a C. You'd think he would at least know enough to borrow from an A student in another section of the course. Another copied word for word a Roger Ebert movie review that had appeared in the previous Sunday's paper. (I guess I'm saying that if my older students ever plagiarized, they were at least smart enough to do it so skilfully that I never found out. But I honestly don't think they ever did cheat.)

Anyway, I have concluded from this experience that nobody except certified child prodigies should be allowed into college before age 21. In Israel, the gap between high school and college, for many young people, is filled by military service. I think what kids here really need is to spend 3 or 4 years doing the kind of jobs currently available to people without college degrees. That would give them a real appreciation of what college these days is for, and what kind of learning they still need.

Aside from that, I believe that the main reason college costs have risen so high so fast is that most of the students and their families are paying through some third party, rather than directly out of their own pockets. Third-party payment corrupts every market it touches, including medical care and higher education.

If somebody else is paying for something you buy, you have no way to influence the quality, quantity, and price of what you buy by refusing to buy any more of it. Just try to get your health insurance provider to refuse payment for medical treatment you consider unnecessary or shoddy.

If someone other than the actual user of what you sell is paying for it, you have no incentive to try to please the user, or to keep your prices within the user's ability to pay, since you will get paid anyway.

Which is why, even though there are a lot of problems with voucher systems, I prefer them--it restores the link between seller and user, and the responsiveness of the market.

People, like clay, can fight against being molded to become what they do not wish to be, and crack under the constant opposing forces of two different kinds of pressures.

Fantastic post, Erin. I agree, and I also agree with Rod that it needn't be an "either/or" thing. I graduated from a liberal arts college in 2002 with a degree in English. My parents paid for my education so I have no debt. I knew from the age of 9 or 10 that I wanted to be a writer, so majoring in English was a no-brainer, but I also knew I had to be at least somewhat practical. Creative writing was my “thing,” but obviously that doesn’t pay the bills. I also knew I didn’t want to teach. I had done journalism in high school and I liked it well enough, so I took journalism classes, was an editor on my school’s newspaper and had some journalism internships. One of those internships led to my first job, as an editorial assistant, which I landed a couple weeks after graduation.

The English program at my school was great, because it didn’t just offer literature classes, but creative writing, journalism and technical writing classes. It was broad enough to encompass my interests and still be somewhat practical.

Fast forward five years, and I’ve decided that journalism is not for me. I’m a poet and I found that I actually don’t want a day job that involves writing, because I have less urge to write in the off-hours. Right now I work as an in-house graphic designer in the marketing department of a technology company. It’s great because it fulfills my creative impulses, but since it doesn’t involve writing, it doesn’t sap my energy to write. It actually helps my poetry, I think, since it’s a different kind of creativity. I started at this company as a temp proofreading technical documents, and I eventually moved into the marketing department and started doing more and more design work. Almost everything I learned was on the job. I am very lucky that my company is very good about letting people move around within the company and find where they fit. I realize not all companies are like this.

People do need to be somewhat practical when they go to college, but they also need to hang on to their dreams. Sometimes they’ll do that by teaching whatever it is that they love, or double majoring, or finding a practical bent to what they love (such as sound engineering for the music lover or journalism for the writer), or doing what they love on the side (as was the case with the potter mentioned above, or me with my poetry). One should not feel they have to go into something they don’t like purely for the money. You’re really only setting yourself up for failure, because you’ll be competing against people who are passionate about what you don’t like. But the advice to “follow your dreams and it will all work out” is equally foolish; that just isn’t true for all but the best of the best.

And sometimes you’ll end up doing something completely different from what you started out doing. You never really know how a career is going to go for you until you get there.

I also think one should avoid debt whenever possible. Parents should save for their children’s college educations from an early age, and encourage them to go in-state. I went in-state, and my parents saved, which is why I have no debt. We’re saving for our 3-year-old daughter already, and all our kids are definitely going to college in-state.

The purpose of university in this day and age, as I see it, is credentialism - to provide those who would be middle class with certification of their bona fides. The level of education listed on your resume is more important to employers than your technical ability; and, as we students are constantly told, you're more likely to get a job through alumni networking and university job fairs than through sending out resumes anyway.

Last I read, the average amount someone without a bachelors degree can make per year in our country is $4500, and tuition alone is $5000 - meaning, you can't expect to work your way through school anymore. Even most grads I know, in technical fields no less than the humanities, are 'working poor', some tens of thousands of dollars in debt to the government student loan program. Most are under-employed, workingwithout benefits in call centres or the few factories left in our area. None can afford to buy a house, few to get married, and the ones with kids are struggling the worst. In that kind of situation, living with your parents and putting off staring a family are financial survival strategies.

In this kind of situation, it's bloody naive to be talking about the cultural legacy the university is supposed to give you. Too many students get sucked in by that kind of rhetoric. Yes, our civilization needs it, but under current conditions only a fool would pay for it. The point of Rod's article was to mock one such fool for being so idealistic, and for being too proud to admit he's painted himself into a corner. I go to one of my countries most 'vocationally' oriented tech schools, and I often hear students and teachers both lament the effect of this on the intellectual climate - if it won't advance your job prospects, it isn't wanted on campus - but that's what a university largely devoid of foolish idealists looks like.

For the record, one of the best educated people I know never actually completed high school until his late twenties. The education comes of sitting on the packing crates at the factory where he worked - until the new management laid everyone off - reading Dante on his breaks. But he hasn't been able to get a white-collar job on the strength of DIY education, and likely never will.

Does anyone have thoughts on the Christendom's and Thomas Aquinas's of our days? Specifically, schools focused on classic liberal education with a very strong religious identity. Personally, I wonder if not enough attention is being placed towards spiritual attainment that lends itself towards practical application in every day living. Of note, is the same phenomenon shared amongst our Orthodox brothers?

In Christ,
-jp

Unless you have genius level talent, a conservative with liberal arts aspirations better learn a paying trade.

What the heck does that mean? Non-genius conservatives aren't allowed to be writers, editors, bank workers, managers, salespeople, project managers, or any of the other many, many things that people with liberal arts degrees do all the time?

My parents encouraged my brothers and me to study anything that interested us in college, and not worry about how it would help us earn a living.

I graduated with a B.A. in International Studies (kind of a cross between political science and history) -- because it interested me. After college I went straight into the pubishing industry (answering phones, working in the business office, helping with some proofreading) -- because it interested me. Twenty-five years later I'm still on that path, though I've shifted over to technical editing. I like my job and it pays very well. (Nobody ever asked me my political leanings, not in one single interview.)

Mrs. Pringle

Off subject, but related to Maria's comments. This summer I ran into an American engineer who had taught a course at Leningrad U, something very technical and way beyond my grasp. (Like most liberal arts people, my scientific knowledge is near zero) I may have been the victim of some tekky leg-pulling here, but he said that at that time the Russians were building computers fundamentally different than ours. As I understood him, ours are binary--you know, on-off-- but the Russian designs were 3-way--on-off-and neither. When the USSR fell apart, it became a pc world and this technology was put aside. I asked which was better? He said that for handling the really difficult problems in physics and engineering, the Russian system was, and too bad it was abandoned.

Maria, you are nearly fluent in English. Where did you learn it?

I'm surprised that this young man didn't think about what kind of job he wanted to get when he majored in history. His expectations seem to be rather unrealistic. Young people need to think about what they would like to do in life to make a living, and then form a plan to get there. We live in a highly technical world where any form of professional level employment is rather like a craft with a specialized knowledge base. A bachelor's degree is the first building block in many professions, but most require that one farther their education beyond that. If he didn't want to continue in school or didn't have the funds to continue in school, then he should have started with a major that had a higher technical component to it.

This seemed to be so obvious when I was planning for college. Maybe it's because my parents had to work so hard to put us through college. My brothers and I helped to fund our education, and we all wanted to be able to come out of college with a craft or the skills that would be needed to find a job, so we majored in subjects that would enable us to do that.

I enjoyed the electives that I took in history, political science, & philosophy the most, but I never expected the learnings that I took away from those classes to pay my bills. There were many people in my classes who majored in those areas. I assume that they went on to get an advanced degree in something to profit financially from it.

A good liberal arts education is great preparation for full-time parenting--and not just in general philosophical ways. In my years as an at-home Mom, I spent about an hour each evening reading aloud. And, not to brag, but I think I pronounced everything correctly (it helps to have a Medieval studies background if your kids like fantasy as much as mine did).

A close friend is still trying to live down (the teasing is from her daughters, not me!) having gone throught the first three Harry Potters pronouncing "Hermione" without the last syllable. This wouldn't have happened if she'd known any Greek, or, given a basic grasp of iambic pentamenter, if she had ever read or watched The Winter's Tale.

Is that a practical application or what? best, Cindy

"I did get a scholarship, and thanks to that, and to some help from my folks, I graduated debt-free."

How fortunate for you that you had parents to help you and the ability to get a scholarship! It must be wonderful to grow up as a privelled upper-middle-class person whose parents have the spare cash lying around to give away to you. Not everyone has that luxury.

Let me guess, you are over 40, right? While it used to be possible to work (or have you parents pay) your way through college so that you could graduate debt free, in most cases this is no longer an option. Please look at the current cost of the college you attended - including the thousands of dollars for room and board and books (some of which are more than 100 dollars a pop now), multiply by the 5 years it takes a typical undergraduate student to complete a degree now, and tell me what you come up with and how it stacks up against your bank account.

Please note also that any loan a student must take out will bleed them dry. I know a man who borrowed $70K to get through undergrad and grad school (both at state colleges); after paying $500 a month for 7 years, his debt was down to $69K. Unlike credit cards or other debts, you cannot refinance your student loan if you do not like the current owner. My loan was sold by the company I consolidated with - who were fine to work with - to a shady company who will not answer my questions when I call and to whom I am paying an entire week's take-home salary every month - and probably will be until I am in my mid-60s.

So please get off your high horse about someone who did not have your breaks - or please mail me the $70K you have to spare so I can pay off my own debt.