Since Jacks' slavery thread got off topic (again, sorry :(  but at least this time it wasn't just a bunch of name-calling) and DanootaandMe suggested it, I thought I'd take it upon myself to start it.....carry on :)

Here's my thought RE: athletic scholarships.

Let's face it, schools make $$ on athletics therefore, it's a wise "investment" to spend some of that $$ on athletes who will keep that going.  If your team sucks, you make less, if it's good, you make more.  Some of these kids who get the athletic scholarships wouldn't be able to afford college without the scholarship.  If they're actually doing the required coursework and graduating, I have no problem.  Now, those who have no intention of graduating and take powder puff classes are the ones I have a problem with.  And, thanks to Title IX, if you're going to offer scholarships for one sport, you have to offer it for all.  I dated a guy in college (who married my ex-best friend, but that's a different story) who was there on a GOLF scholarship.....without it, he wouldn't have been able to afford to go to college, but he graduated with honors and now works at a golf course somewhere.

Race/sex/gender based scholarships:  should NOT be allowed.  There is currently a $500 scholarship being offered at my school.....the criteria:  2 X chromosomes..... no GPA minimum, no specific major required, nothing else involved.....if you're female, you qualify.  All you have to submit is your name, address, ID # and phone.

The donor can choose that recipients meet certain conditions criteria to qualify, and there's no way around that. We're applying for UC Irvine and a question involving scholarships asked if the student was from or had ancestors from a certain Province in China & coincidentally, my wife's grandmother was from that very place, so we deduced the Scholarship donor must have been from there and chose to donate in the hopes that people from their land would get access to that money. In some cases like this, I don't think there's a problem 

Good ideas :)  Good luck getting them implemented ;D

Not saying that your philosophy is bad, just that it'll never happen for numerous social, political and economic reasons.


The donor can choose that recipients meet certain conditions criteria to qualify, and there's no way around that. We're applying for UC Irvine and a question involving scholarships asked if the student was from or had ancestors from a certain Province in China & coincidentally, my wife's grandmother was from that very place, so we deduced the Scholarship donor must have been from there and chose to donate in the hopes that people from their land would get access to that money. In some cases like this, I don't think there's a problem 


Yeah, people can donate money to whoever they want if they are a private donor and not going through a public "middleman".

The donor can choose that recipients meet certain conditions criteria to qualify, and there's no way around that. We're applying for UC Irvine and a question involving scholarships asked if the student was from or had ancestors from a certain Province in China & coincidentally, my wife's grandmother was from that very place, so we deduced the Scholarship donor must have been from there and chose to donate in the hopes that people from their land would get access to that money. In some cases like this, I don't think there's a problem 


Exactly. I could care less about what some private donor desires to give his/her money too.

When I was in both college and grad school, I sought out scholarships that had me in mind. I had a friend who earned a scholarship for tracing her heritage to Cornwall, England. Did I hate her b/c of her English roots or her ability to get something for it? No, it's a waste of energy. Every group has attributes worthy of a scholarship, big deal. The point is that you're able to find something suitable for you to get the ultimate goal: a college education.

Often times, I wonder if the complaints are from those who couldn't get a "free ride" or a "partial free ride" b/c they either a) lack the qualifications for any scholarship or grant, or b) they didn't look for them. Honestly, there are scholarships for Everyone Race, gender, nationality, sexual orientation, and handicap are just some attributes toward getting scholarships like hobbies, extracurricular activities, intended college major, etc. Why does it matter how someone pays for their education? Having had all forms of financial aid as well as out-of-pocket tuition costs (grad school isn't much of a financial aid resource area, lol), I'm glad to see someone not having to deal with costs.

Exactly. I could care less about what some private donor desires to give his/her money too.

When I was in both college and grad school, I sought out scholarships that had me in mind. I had a friend who earned a scholarship for tracing her heritage to Cornwall, England. Did I hate her b/c of her English roots or her ability to get something for it? No, it's a waste of energy. Every group has attributes worthy of a scholarship, big deal. The point is that you're able to find something suitable for you to get the ultimate goal: a college education.
Often times, I wonder if the complaints are from those who couldn't get a "free ride" or a "partial free ride" b/c they either a) lack the qualifications for any scholarship or grant, or b) they didn't look for them. Honestly, there are scholarships for Everyone Race, gender, nationality, sexual orientation, and handicap are just some attributes toward getting scholarships like hobbies, extracurricular activities, intended college major, etc. Why does it matter how someone pays for their education? Having had all forms of financial aid as well as out-of-pocket tuition costs (grad school isn't much of a financial aid resource area, lol), I'm glad to see someone not having to deal with costs.




^ good point.  I do see Mama_K's point too  Diane's sis-in-law's sister's kid with mediocre academic abilities got a full ride to play hoops at Wash. St. & I overheard the women talking about how the sis-in-law had to take out loans & pay to get her hard working A student through UCLA & how unfair it is that someone that barely got by on grades gets the special treatment, but she's like 6'4' & a can play B-ball. It's tough not to be dissapointed at that, but my niece graduated from UCLA & got her education/diploma & has a good job just months out of college. We're going to go see the sophomore play basketball this Saturday when the Cougars come into Berkeley to play Cal.  Womens basketball doesn't draw dick, the arena might be 1/3 to 1/2 full but tickets are just 3 bucks, & pizza at the famous Blondies on Telegraph av. afterwards.  As for my daughter, wife & I?  we're looking & applying for every scholarship we can  ;D  hell yes!  any help that reduces my out of pocket expenses is appreciated.

^ good point.  I do see Mama_K's point too  Diane's sis-in-law's sister's kid with mediocre academic abilities got a full ride to play hoops at Wash. St. & I overheard the women talking about how the sis-in-law had to take out loans & pay to get her hard working A student through UCLA & how unfair it is that someone that barely got by on grades gets the special treatment, but she's like 6'4' & a can play B-ball. It's tough not to be dissapointed at that, but my niece graduated from UCLA & got her education/diploma & has a good job just months out of college. We're going to go see the sophomore play basketball this Saturday when the Cougars come into Berkeley to play Cal.  Womens basketball doesn't draw dick, the arena might be 1/3 to 1/2 full but tickets are just 3 bucks, & pizza at the famous Blondies on Telegraph av. afterwards.  As for my daughter, wife & I?  we're looking & applying for every scholarship we can  ;D  hell yes!  any help that reduces my out of pocket expenses is appreciated.


Yeah, we're hoping Jason got all of my and Jess' latent genius and will score mucho scholarships when it gets to that time, but in the meantime we're saving up some $$ so he can worst-case scenario pay for tuition and best-case get some tax-free $$ to blow on booze and hookers.

Some schools don't give out athletic scholarships at all (i.e. the Ivy League schools, although Division I for the most part in NCAA sports, only offer academic scholarships), but the actual students that get into the school and decide to play for the teams do quite well.  Princeton men's basketball, for example, is an extremely gifted program despite the lack of resources, and was ranked as high as #9 in the country several years ago. 

Need-based scholarships are fair, in my opinion, because they offer kids who otherwise wouldn't have the financial means to get to college and to pay back the mountain of student loans a chance to make something of themselves without the fear of future financial burden (unless they were stupid like me and many other college kids and pile up craploads of credit card debt).  In a way, athletic scholarships are the same.  If you're looking at a reasonably bright kid who happens to be able to dunk a basketball from the free-throw line, shouldn't he tout this gift to help him get into a school and get a degree?  And for the poor kid, shouldn't he be given a chance to show that he can achieve without having to work 40-hour weeks to pay his tuition and rent? 

I have no problem with scholarships.  Even those based on sex, age, race, religious belief, sexual preference, or favorite breakfast cereal.

However, I feel that they should all be tied to academic performance and class schedule.  Somebody who gets a C in Advanced Astrophysics should get more consideration then a jock who gets an A+ in Advanced Basket Weaving.

And if somebody wants to make a special scholarship for Navajo Indians, Druze, or Irish-Mexican Americans, I have absolutely no problem with that.  But people who agree with those types of scholarships also should not protest if somebody else wants to make a scholarship for Christians, Caucasians, or Men.

However, I believe that all scholarships should be reviewed annually, and that performance and class attendence should be tied to the continuation of the scholarship.  That way if somebody is "slacking", it can be taken away and given to another student more deserving.

However, I feel that they should all be tied to academic performance and class schedule.  Somebody who gets a C in Advanced Astrophysics should get more consideration then a jock who gets an A+ in Advanced Basket Weaving.


The problem is that athletics brings in a gargantuan sum of money to a lot of universities, and if they can recruit the best athletes, they will go balls out to do it.  The money trickles down to the community and to alumni donations as well, which benefits the whole university.  However, the NCAA does have regulations in place, along with the university itself, to mandate that scholar/athletes maintain a certain grade point average or they will be deemed academically ineligible and thus lose their scholarship.  That's probably why a lot of athletes major in fluffy majors like "General studies" or "Sociology".


However, I believe that all scholarships should be reviewed annually, and that performance and class attendence should be tied to the continuation of the scholarship.  That way if somebody is "slacking", it can be taken away and given to another student more deserving.


That is the case for most scholarships.  Some are awarded on a year-by-year basis, and can be renewed if the student shows satisfactory progress.  I almost had mine revoked because I feel below a 3.0 (bummer) my first year because I did too much partying and not enough studying...but there was  a grace period to drag it up so I did :D

Out of curiosity, I took a gander at some of the scholarships available at my school and probably 1/2 of the ones I looked at had NO academic requirements attached.  THAT's where I have a problem.  If a private company/donor wants to offer a scholarship based on race/sex/religion/whatever, that's fine.  However, I think there should be some academic requirement attached as well.  After all, isn't the point of college to actually learn something?

That's probably why a lot of athletes major in fluffy majors like "General studies" or "Sociology".


This is so true.  And so sad.

However, this is not always the case.  Many NFL players have gone on to get their degree and become businessmen and engineers after their pro careers ended.  Many in fact have refused pro offers, because they either wanted to finish school, or persue another career first.

Roger Staubach is a great example.  After winning the Heisman Trophy playing for the Naval Academy, and turned down all offers from the NFL.  He even volunteered for service in Vietnam.  It was only after the completion of his 6 years of active service that he went Pro.  He did this at the age of 27, and continued to play for another 10 years.

And today, Ian Johnson is the Running Back for the Boise State Broncos.  A Sophomore majoring in Education, he has already stated that he will not put his name into the NFL Draft until after he graduates in 2009.  He wants his college degree, because he plans on being a teacher once his football career ends.  In fact, Oregon State has made him an offer, but he turned it down because BSU has a superior Education Degree program.

When I was a high school senior, I applied for numerous scholarships (academic and non-academic)....and I received none.  I have always been an almost all A (give or take a few B's) student...very serious with my studies.  I applied for financial aid and was completely turned down because they based it on my parent's income (which BTW, was nowhere near any higher than low to med. middle class wages).  So, I received NOTHING toward school....so therefore, I ended up not going (even though I was accepted to several schools).  I went to work and a few years later, I decided to just go to community college (as, I could pay for that each semester as I went along because it was fairly cheap). I got about 3 years and about 80 credits worth of classes there, and I really want to finish my degree once Vaughn starts kindergarten. I would LOVE to be able to find some ways of funding (whether it be grants, financial aid, scholarships, etc)...to help me do this. I know that Chris and I cannot afford to just pay outright for 2 years of college.....does anyone have any ideas?

My problem with this isn't because I'm jealous that I can't get specific scholarships.

I got close to $6000 for school. I got that mainly because the Government dosen't recognise my parents and I got a small part because I was very academically profficient where my major was concerned.

What I have a problem with is scholarships based solely on race, religion or gender. As if we don't already have enough division.

Here is a novel idea. Why not make college free for anyone who wants to attend-as long as acheive a certain GPA?



Ok, ok. You can all start calling me a socialist now.



Cat

Here is a novel idea. Why not make college free for anyone who wants to attend-as long as acheive a certain GPA?



Ok, ok. You can all start calling me a socialist now.



Cat


what a grand idea! If only things were that easy. :-\\

Here is a novel idea. Why not make college free for anyone who wants to attend-as long as acheive a certain GPA?



Ok, ok. You can all start calling me a socialist now.



Cat


Lovely as it would be, the tax burden would be insane.

And what of students who fight their ass off to achieve said GPA, but cannot.  Are they not allowed a college education?  Do you then force them to pay?  What if they can't pay? 

If I knew that my college would be paid for if I maintained a certain GPA...then buddy, I would work my everloving ass off to take up an opportunity like that. It would be a grand incentive, to say the least. ;)

If I knew that my college would be paid for if I maintained a certain GPA...then buddy, I would work my everloving ass off to take up an opportunity like that. It would be a grand incentive, to say the least. ;)



I'm still saying, what if you do all that and you still can't achieve that GPA?  What about students who come from poorer H.S.s and don't have the H.S. education that someone who comes from a better school would have?  Should they then not be allowed a college education?

I'm still saying, what if you do all that and you still can't achieve that GPA?  What about students who come from poorer H.S.s and don't have the H.S. education that someone who comes from a better school would have?  Should they then not be allowed a college education?



I think if the required GPA was a fair one (I'm not saying that it should be set at 4.0 or whatever)....that MOST people (if they studied hard and really tried)...could benefit from it. This would be perfect for someone like myself (who is basically a straight A student, but could never afford to go to college).

Here is a novel idea. Why not make college free for anyone who wants to attend-as long as acheive a certain GPA?

Ok, ok. You can all start calling me a socialist now.


It is not a bad idea, except for one problem:

Colleges would suddenly become overpopulated.  Classes will have to double in size, and the quality of the education would fall for everybody.

Then 4 years later, you would have the problem of all these people leaving with degrees, and not enough work for them all.  You will then have Business Majors running your local McDonalds, and Liberal Arts majors going "Would you like that super sized?"

Even with drop-out rates in High School in many areas near 50%, most schools in the country are badly understaffed.  If Colleges were suddenly swollen to include everybody who applied with no money, then Harvard and MIT would suddenly be giving the quality of education of a West Virginia Community College.

Trust me, I have seen this happen in my own industry.  At one time, having those magic letters "MCSE" meant a lot.  But in 2000, the government aid programs that gave grants to people on Welfare suddenly got the idea of giving grants to people for computer training.  Within 1 year, there were more MCSE's in LA then there were jobs for them.  Incomes for those that already had their certification dropped, and nobody was able to find work.

I have been there, trust me.  It is hard to find work when you are willing to go down to $20 an hour, and somebody with no experience is willing to do the same work for $8 an hour.  Before 2000, my normal hourly wage was $24.  By the time I got tired of it and left in 2003, the starting salary for an MCSE was around $16 an hour.

Oh, and the majority of those that got the grants?  They were never able to work a day in IT.  After spending a few months applying for jobs and getting refused for "no experience", they went back to working in fast food, or general retail.

It is not a bad idea, except for one problem:

Colleges would suddenly become overpopulated.  Classes will have to double in size, and the quality of the education would fall for everybody.

Then 4 years later, you would have the problem of all these people leaving with degrees, and not enough work for them all.  You will then have Business Majors running your local McDonalds, and Liberal Arts majors going "Would you like that super sized?"


This is exactly correct. College is.. and should be.. the divider.
It's already getting to the point now that so many jobs require a masters before you can advance so far.


On the GPA thing. In High School I got straight C's. In College I was a 3.6.
Now, granted, I grew up a bit in that time, but regardless.. when you start high school, you're what? 14-15 years old? Like a 14 year old gives a sh.it about 4 or 5 years time.

Then 4 years later, you would have the problem of all these people leaving with degrees, and not enough work for them all.  You will then have Business Majors running your local McDonalds, and Liberal Arts majors going "Would you like that super sized?"





You have that now.



Cat

This is exactly correct. College is.. and should be.. the divider.
It's already getting to the point now that so many jobs require a masters before you can advance so far.


On the GPA thing. In High School I got straight C's. In College I was a 3.6.
Now, granted, I grew up a bit in that time, but regardless.. when you start high school, you're what? 14-15 years old? Like a 14 year old gives a sh.it about 4 or 5 years time.


I did. But I guess, thankfully, that could be attributed to my family and how I was raised.

I did. But I guess, thankfully, that could be attributed to my family and how I was raised.



I was the same way.  My mom and dad didn't do well in H.S. and neither of them went to college.  So they pushed my sister and I to be the best students we could be and to excel.  They weren't ridiculously hard on us; if we tried our best and a C was all we got, they were happy.  If we didn't try at all and a C was all we got, they were pissed. 

I was an absolute complete nerd in school.

I did. But I guess, thankfully, that could be attributed to my family and how I was raised.


Right, but a lot of people aren't lucky like that.

For instance - I came from a good family (at least in my opinion) but my Dad was usually working 50-60+ hour weeks and my Ma was working part time or full time and keeping up the house. By the time I'd flunked half my classes it was waaaaaay too late to save my average.
I'm not gonna sit and complain about that, I'm the one that didn't work.. but the fact remains, that's the case for a lot of kids.

I was the same way.  My mom and dad didn't do well in H.S. and neither of them went to college.  So they pushed my sister and I to be the best students we could be and to excel.  They weren't ridiculously hard on us; if we tried our best and a C was all we got, they were happy.  If we didn't try at all and a C was all we got, they were pissed. 

I was an absolute complete nerd in school.


Were we twins or something? lol I was a nerd, except it wasn't obvious b/c I didn't fit the "nerd look". I wore makeup, wore nice (not necessarily trendy) clothes, and had a boyfriend. I had a secret identity, lol.


Right, but a lot of people aren't lucky like that.

For instance - I came from a good family (at least in my opinion) but my Dad was usually working 50-60+ hour weeks and my Ma was working part time or full time and keeping up the house. By the time I'd flunked half my classes it was waaaaaay too late to save my average.
I'm not gonna sit and complain about that, I'm the one that didn't work.. but the fact remains, that's the case for a lot of kids.


I'm not arguing with you at all. I hear you and I agree. I responded because you stated that 14 year olds don't think of their futures 4-5 years down the road. I also agree that college is the great divider. It's not meant for everyone. I hate how many parents assume that their children automatically strive for college, but yet, when they flunk out, they claim not to have seen the signs before. Hello, how about he/she stating that they didn't want to go?

Were we twins or something? lol I was a nerd, except it wasn't obvious b/c I didn't fit the "nerd look". I wore makeup, wore nice (not necessarily trendy) clothes, and had a boyfriend. I had a secret identity, lol.


I don't know, it's possible.  They say everyone has a twin out there.  ;)

I'm not arguing with you at all. I hear you and I agree. I responded because you stated that 14 year olds don't think of their futures 4-5 years down the road. I also agree that college is the great divider. It's not meant for everyone. I hate how many parents assume that their children automatically strive for college, but yet, when they flunk out, they claim not to have seen the signs before. Hello, how about he/she stating that they didn't want to go?


Right. My Ma was Miss. PhD and everything, I think it was just expected that I'd be great in school - Hated it, academics make my brain melt.

Right. My Ma was Miss. PhD and everything, I think it was just expected that I'd be great in school - Hated it, academics make my brain melt.


I hear ya. My husband wants my son to do athletics. I don't have a problem with him playing something in his spare tme. But my son gets a kick out of drawing, art, and construction sets. I would rather have him hone in those skills than tossing a ball for his school (mind you, he's eight now).

It's all about finding what works for your child and honing in that. Many times parents try to live some second life through their kids. I vow to never do that. I had my chance. I achieved what I wanted and I'm in the career that I wanted. It's their turn to figure themselves out (with some good guidance, of course).

I hear ya. My husband wants my son to do athletics. I don't have a problem with him playing something in his spare tme. But my son gets a kick out of drawing, art, and construction sets. I would rather have him hone in those skills than tossing a ball for his school (mind you, he's eight now).

It's all about finding what works for your child and honing in that. Many times parents try to live some second life through their kids. I vow to never do that. I had my chance. I achieved what I wanted and I'm in the career that I wanted. It's their turn to figure themselves out (with some good guidance, of course).


He's lucky that you can spend so much time with him.
I'm not making excuses for people, but the expectations of many jobs today take mothers or fathers away from their kids 90% of the time.
There are so many that don't have that opportunity.

I think a big problem is the schools ridiculous expectations and insane testing policys.

My neice is 11 and is being tested and put in to different bands based on her test scores.. at 11. How the hell is a kid supposed to get excited about learning if they're already tossed on the educational dumpster at 11?

He's lucky that you can spend so much time with him.
I'm not making excuses for people, but the expectations of many jobs today take mothers or fathers away from their kids 90% of the time.
There are so many that don't have that opportunity.

I think a big problem is the schools ridiculous expectations and insane testing policys.

My neice is 11 and is being tested and put in to different bands based on her test scores.. at 11. How the hell is a kid supposed to get excited about learning if they're already tossed on the educational dumpster at 11?


As a teacher, I certainly see exactly what you are talking about, especially with parenting roles and school expectations (but that's another headache for another time, lol). Now mind you, when my son gets older and sees how I'm home every day by four (or five, if I don't have anything to grade) or that I get the same days off, he may not feel so lucky when he tries to play slick on me, lol.

As a teacher, I certainly see exactly what you are talking about, especially with parenting roles and school expectations (but that's another headache for another time, lol). Now mind you, when my son gets older and sees how I'm home every day by four (or five, if I don't have anything to grade) or that I get the same days off, he may not feel so lucky when he tries to play slick on me, lol.


Ah yes, the big advantage of being a teacher, same holidays as when you were a kid.  ;D

Ah yes, the big advantage of being a teacher, same holidays as when you were a kid.  ;D




hell yeah!!! lol

I have advocated for free public colleges on these threads before, so I very much agree with Cat.  If a small and poor country like Cuba can offer free education through grad shool the rich USA can certainly do it.  I would add a post graduation work requirement, like community service for some period of time.  And if you can't make the grade, what happens now?  Well, first its academic probation, then its the door.  And there are always private schools.  Nor would class sizes have to increase.  As it is, there are many Ph.D's looking for work and having trouble finding it in several fields.

As to overcrowding in the job market, I'd say nonsense.  More and more jobs these days call for higher education in any case.  The biggest complaint from employers in Vermont is the scarcity of highly trained workers.  Beyond that, I have seen several reports that say we are falling behind in science and technology because of a lack of trained scientists.

As to overcrowding in the job market, I'd say nonsense.  More and more jobs these days call for higher education in any case. 


And sometimes that is an artificial way to weed out potential applicants.

My field is a good example of this.  I have been working in computers professionally for 20 years now.  And so many times when I am in the market, I see absolutely insane requirements.

For example, I have seen ads for Network Engineers that require a college degree.  What for?  Even more insane, jobs that are technical looking for people with a Computer Science degree.  Well, that is helpfull if you want a programmer, but not a Hardware Specialist or Network Engineer.  A 4 year CS degree involves programming more then anything else.

More and more in the last 10 years, employers have resorted to requiring College Degrees in technical fields, simply to ween out the "Paperwork MCSE".  This is why over the last 10 years, computers have gotten "Certification Crazy".  MCSE, NCE, A+, Network +, CCNE, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup.  Most HR types have absolutely no idea what the certifications mean, they simply want them.

And what will that mean to people like me?  I am sure that I am not the only one here that has absolutely no interest in ever getting a college degree.  I simply see no reason to spend 4+ years studying, when I will likely never need the information in a "real world" sense.  Me working with a College Drgree makes about as much sense as having your ASE Master Mechanic have a degree before applying for a job.  Or a guy that specializes in Photocopier Repair get an Electrical Engineering degree.

Basically, there are a lot of fields where to much education is absolutely no help.  And the time spent getting it actually detracts from the time a person could be getting "Real World" exposure, which counts for far more in a great many technical fields.

Now I am not "Anti-Education".  I have taken several courses in the LA Community College system for personal growth.  And I know that if I did bother to go to College, I would have absolutely no problem passing it.  But I simply can't see myself ever wanting to do that.  Whenever the NG gets around to signing my waiver, I am expecting to end up spending 6 months in training.  I am looking forward to that about as much as I would a root canal.

My remark about "overcrowding the job market" is mostly aimed at the HR types.  These are the ones that require all kinds of things as "requirements", which often have little or no bearing on the job itself.  And if a large number of people started to apply for positions, you will find HR managers that will tack on "College Degree Required", simply to weed out the ones they think are "unqualified".

For a great example of "over-certification", look at the "A+" certification.  A+ certification was designed to prove the equivelance of having 3 months hands-on experience in computer repair.  Now I have never taken the test, because it costs over $300.  And with over 20 years of experience (and both an MCSE and CNE certification), it is rather insulting to me.  It would be like requiring an ASE Master Mechanic to have a Tune-Up certification.  But a lot of companies now are requiring A+, which is insane.  The end result is that it favors those with the money to continualy train for and take the stupid tests, and those of us who can't/don't get screwed.

And if everybody was able to get free college, it would turn out the same way with a college degree.  It would cheapen it until it no longer mattered.  However, I do agree that I wish more states had a comprehensive Community College system like Los Angeles.  I did not realize how lucky I was, until I cheked into the Community Colleges in Alabama.  In LA, you can take any class for around $35.  Here, even the basic classes are $400+.

Here is a novel idea. Why not make college free for anyone who wants to attend-as long as acheive a certain GPA?



Ok, ok. You can all start calling me a socialist now.



Cat

I wouldn't make it "free," per se.  I would make all debts incurred repayable by post-graduate civil or military service. 
I suppose it's not quite "fair" to poor/middle class students if rich kids could pay the whole kit-and-kaboodle up front...

BUT

It would be a thousand times better than the backassward system we've got now.
The only parties benefiting from the "student loan" debacle are the banks and the collection agencies.
If I could have paid off my student debts teaching underprivileged children or working as a park ranger, I would have been glad to do so. 
Ever since Reagan, students incur massive debt which hampers their advancement in life and sometimes destroys their credit ratings.  This is is toxic to our culture...but so is the entire Ronald Reagan social reactionary legacy.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/oink.gif

I want my government to do something other than make war and intimidate its citizens.

The biggest complaint from employers in Vermont is the scarcity of highly trained workers.  Beyond that, I have seen several reports that say we are falling behind in science and technology because of a lack of trained scientists.
My question to this is what do they consider "training"?  I was looking at the "job fair" info that my school sent me and almost EVERY job offered had under the "requirements" section:  BA/BS in X, 1-2 years experience in the X field.  The way they were worded is that they wanted experience ON TOP OF what you already "did" in 4 years of schooling.  I also was looking at teaching requirements at some of the local community colleges and they "required" a master's degree and 2 years (minimum) teaching experience at the junior college level.  My question is:  how do you get experience if you can't get the job in the first place?

My question to this is what do they consider "training"?  I was looking at the "job fair" info that my school sent me and almost EVERY job offered had under the "requirements" section:  BA/BS in X, 1-2 years experience in the X field.  The way they were worded is that they wanted experience ON TOP OF what you already "did" in 4 years of schooling.  I also was looking at teaching requirements at some of the local community colleges and they "required" a master's degree and 2 years (minimum) teaching experience at the junior college level.  My question is:  how do you get experience if you can't get the job in the first place?


Lie.

Seriously.

That's the only way to do it.

Lie.

Seriously.

That's the only way to do it.
Well, I think I figured out a way to get the "experience" I need.....I can teach while I'm getting my Master's :)

My question to this is what do they consider "training"?  I was looking at the "job fair" info that my school sent me and almost EVERY job offered had under the "requirements" section:  BA/BS in X, 1-2 years experience in the X field.  The way they were worded is that they wanted experience ON TOP OF what you already "did" in 4 years of schooling.  I also was looking at teaching requirements at some of the local community colleges and they "required" a master's degree and 2 years (minimum) teaching experience at the junior college level.  My question is:  how do you get experience if you can't get the job in the first place?


The way I got my pre-full time teaching experience was teaching part time, both as a teaching asistant (at Rutgers) and as an adjunct (at SUNY Westbury and Keane State in NJ).  In your case they might consider high school teaching as appropriate expertience, so no, you don't need to lie.


I wouldn't make it "free," per se.  I would make all debts incurred repayable by post-graduate civil or military service. 
I suppose it's not quite "fair" to poor/middle class students if rich kids could pay the whole kit-and-kaboodle up front...


Our Governor in VT has proposed this.  I still opt for free public higher ed.

The way I got my pre-full time teaching experience was teaching part time, both as a teaching asistant (at Rutgers) and as an adjunct (at SUNY Westbury and Keane State in NJ).  In your case they might consider high school teaching as appropriate expertience, so no, you don't need to lie.

Our Governor in VT has proposed this.  I still opt for free public higher ed.
Unfortunately, they all specifically state that teaching experience must be at the junior college level or higher :-\\  I know my  current English teacher is a Master's student and is teaching Freshman English as are quite a few other "Fresh Eng" teachers so hopefully, I can do that as well :)

The way I got my pre-full time teaching experience was teaching part time, both as a teaching asistant (at Rutgers) and as an adjunct (at SUNY Westbury and Keane State in NJ).  In your case they might consider high school teaching as appropriate expertience, so no, you don't need to lie.

Our Governor in VT has proposed this.  I still opt for free public higher ed.


I wouldn't say no to free public higher ed.  I think education must be an investment in our society, not a super-expensive baby-sitting service that treats young adults like kids and only serves to keep them off the job market for a few years. 
My idea about civil service is to get citizens involved with their country in a real and meaningful way.  The goal of the Republican party has been to get the citizens to hate their government, and give them a government worth hating.  They've succeeded on both counts.  Now they're beggaring the middle class and selling our country piecemeal to the Chinese.  This crap has got to stop!

I think some employers put too much emphasis on the "college degree".  Again, while looking at the job fair info for the school, there was one that was for English majors (among others) for a sales position ???  I am currently an English major and I'm learning about Literature, I understand the writing element could be helpful (although the type of writing you do as an English major is literary analysis) but other than that, I see no correlation...

I think some employers put too much emphasis on the "college degree".  Again, while looking at the job fair info for the school, there was one that was for English majors (among others) for a sales position ???  I am currently an English major and I'm learning about Literature, I understand the writing element could be helpful (although the type of writing you do as an English major is literary analysis) but other than that, I see no correlation...


The whole concept of higher education is a semi-archaic stumbling block.

95% of jobs need experience and training IN! the field of the job.

I used to work for a newspaper, I would conduct interviews, write reports and compile information regarding the subject matter I was focusing on.
I can't spell. My Grammar is AWFUL. I can't punctuate. I didn't have a college degree in anything.. not just English or journalism.
I was really good at the job.. because... I was trained by somebody who knew what they were doing and I picked it up as I was doing it.
Not to name names, but there are highly intelligent people that post here that are unemployed and have been for some time.
Essentially, the whole reason for getting a college degree now is so that your company can say "85% of our employees are college graduates." Saying that makes middle America feel happy and confident with that company, even when the employees are as hopeless as anybody else.

I'm not saying a degree is a bad thing, I'm just saying that for a vast number of jobs, a degree has no bearing.

A perfect for instance is my Uncle.

He got up to a specific position in his company, he was managing something like 12 people and was in control of about a $50,000,000 portfolio. Now, to get that next promotion, he HAD to have a degree. He was to school, finished his degree and got the promotion. His new job.. exactly the same as the old one, he just keeps an eye on a bit more money.

The whole concept of higher education is a semi-archaic stumbling block.

95% of jobs need experience and training IN! the field of the job.

I used to work for a newspaper, I would conduct interviews, write reports and compile information regarding the subject matter I was focusing on.
I can't spell. My Grammar is AWFUL. I can't punctuate. I didn't have a college degree in anything.. not just English or journalism.
I was really good at the job.. because... I was trained by somebody who knew what they were doing and I picked it up as I was doing it.
Not to name names, but there are highly intelligent people that post here that are unemployed and have been for some time.
Essentially, the whole reason for getting a college degree now is so that your company can say "85% of our employees are college graduates." Saying that makes middle America feel happy and confident with that company, even when the employees are as hopeless as anybody else.

I'm not saying a degree is a bad thing, I'm just saying that for a vast number of jobs, a degree has no bearing.

A perfect for instance is my Uncle.

He got up to a specific position in his company, he was managing something like 12 people and was in control of about a $50,000,000 portfolio. Now, to get that next promotion, he HAD to have a degree. He was to school, finished his degree and got the promotion. His new job.. exactly the same as the old one, he just keeps an eye on a bit more money.
I'm not necessarily saying a degree is a bad thing either (great minds think alike ;)), just that sometimes it is overrated.

When my dad was working, he had been doing his job for about 30 years (same company, but had worked his way up) and they brought in a guy with a degree in engineering who had no clue how to do anything, but was making about $15K more a year than he was.  (The reason he knew this was he had applied for the job, but was turned down because he didn't have a college degree.)  The company then decided that he would have to get a college degree and join the union if he wanted to keep his job.  Since he had enough "time" to retire with full benefits, he retired because he knew there was no way he could get the degree they wanted at the age of 60+ ::)

The whole concept of higher education is a semi-archaic stumbling block.

95% of jobs need experience and training IN! the field of the job.

I used to work for a newspaper, I would conduct interviews, write reports and compile information regarding the subject matter I was focusing on.
I can't spell. My Grammar is AWFUL. I can't punctuate. I didn't have a college degree in anything.. not just English or journalism.
I was really good at the job.. because... I was trained by somebody who knew what they were doing and I picked it up as I was doing it.
Not to name names, but there are highly intelligent people that post here that are unemployed and have been for some time.
Essentially, the whole reason for getting a college degree now is so that your company can say "85% of our employees are college graduates." Saying that makes middle America feel happy and confident with that company, even when the employees are as hopeless as anybody else.

I'm not saying a degree is a bad thing, I'm just saying that for a vast number of jobs, a degree has no bearing.

A perfect for instance is my Uncle.

He got up to a specific position in his company, he was managing something like 12 people and was in control of about a $50,000,000 portfolio. Now, to get that next promotion, he HAD to have a degree. He was to school, finished his degree and got the promotion. His new job.. exactly the same as the old one, he just keeps an eye on a bit more money.


I was a journalism major.  The questions are "How much have you written?  What internships did you do?," not "What grades did you get in your journalism major?"


So, Mushroom, you don't have a college education, so how do you know so much stuff?  (rhetorical question.)

My friend Sam never even graduated high school and he's x10 more "cultured" than the average MBA flying business class and making six figures a year.
::)

I know first-hand how employers want experience in the field.  I got a degree to go into advertising, because it's something I've always loved, but I can't get a job in advertising without some experience first.  That's fine, if I have to put my dream on hold for a few years, then that's what I'll have to do.  However, I'll never regret getting a college degree, even if I can't use it right away.  I'm the first member of my family to go to college and get a degree, so that makes it mean more to me than the work I put into to achieving it.