|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
On 6/23/15 6:20 AM, Lord Vath wrote:
When, "Animal House," came out I thought it was a documentary. I don't remember seeing you around when all that stuff happened at my student house. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 07:43:53 -0700, lal_truckee
wrote this crap: On 6/23/15 6:20 AM, Lord Vath wrote: When, "Animal House," came out I thought it was a documentary. I don't remember seeing you around when all that stuff happened at my student house. I was outside the sorority house watching the pillow fight. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
Lord Vath wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:22:17 +0000 (UTC), Mike Collins wrote this crap: lal_truckee wrote: On 6/22/15 6:45 PM, wrote: inanities I repeat: Where did you get the idea that college is about finding a job? Hint: Colleges are not Trade Schools, nor were they intended to be. Second hint: Focusing are skills needed by a first job won't prepare a student to learn the skills needed for second and subsequent jobs. Third hint: College is about preparing a mind, not preparing a specific skill set. Of course university is about finding a career. My daughter did a degree in civil engineering. She's a civli engineerr. My son did degrees in marine biology, He's a marine biologist. I did a BSc in Chemistry and an MSc in Clinical Biochemistry. I worked for 41 years in clinical biochemistry. It is also about preparing the mind but a much more important factor is making networks of contacts and is the reason that people can do basically useless arts degrees and still be employed in well paid jobs for which they are not qualified, Do you know any? This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe Yes. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
wrote:
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 9:23:40 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: lal_truckee wrote: On 6/22/15 6:45 PM, wsnell01 wrote: inanities I repeat: Where did you get the idea that college is about finding a job? Hint: Colleges are not Trade Schools, nor were they intended to be. Second hint: Focusing are skills needed by a first job won't prepare a student to learn the skills needed for second and subsequent jobs. Third hint: College is about preparing a mind, not preparing a specific skill set. Of course university is about finding a career. My daughter did a degree in civil engineering. She's a civli engineerr. My son did degrees in marine biology, He's a marine biologist. I did a BSc in Chemistry and an MSc in Clinical Biochemistry. I worked for 41 years in clinical biochemistry. It is also about preparing the mind but a much more important factor is making networks of contacts and is the reason that people can do basically useless arts degrees and still be employed in well paid jobs for which they are not qualified, Here is another interactive chart of majors versus careers: http://web.williams.edu/Mathematics/...areerpath.html The "timeline" tab is interesting. For the 1930-1959 grads, economics majors made up ~20% of banking/financial workers, as did the sciences, and as did the humanities, both ~20%. Fast forward to the 2005-2009 grads, and economics majors now make up 50% of banking/financial while the proportion of science and humanities grads working in banking/financial has withered. One obvious explanation is that economics (a proxy for business) grads have, over the years, preferentially hired other economics grads. The obvious conclusion is that college IS about careers, albeit less so for those who choose the "wrong" major. If you look at the timeline you will also see that the overall percentage of STEM graduates has almost halved so the increase in non-STEM graduates could be predicted just from the reduction in STEM graduates. Universities are about careers for those doing sciences and about connections for those doing arts subjects. Apart from those who move into university teaching and research. Very few history graduates become historians. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 2:03:10 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 9:23:40 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: lal_truckee wrote: On 6/22/15 6:45 PM, wsnell01 wrote: inanities I repeat: Where did you get the idea that college is about finding a job? Hint: Colleges are not Trade Schools, nor were they intended to be. Second hint: Focusing are skills needed by a first job won't prepare a student to learn the skills needed for second and subsequent jobs. Third hint: College is about preparing a mind, not preparing a specific skill set. Of course university is about finding a career. My daughter did a degree in civil engineering. She's a civli engineerr. My son did degrees in marine biology, He's a marine biologist. I did a BSc in Chemistry and an MSc in Clinical Biochemistry. I worked for 41 years in clinical biochemistry. It is also about preparing the mind but a much more important factor is making networks of contacts and is the reason that people can do basically useless arts degrees and still be employed in well paid jobs for which they are not qualified, Here is another interactive chart of majors versus careers: http://web.williams.edu/Mathematics/...areerpath.html The "timeline" tab is interesting. For the 1930-1959 grads, economics majors made up ~20% of banking/financial workers, as did the sciences, and as did the humanities, both ~20%. Fast forward to the 2005-2009 grads, and economics majors now make up 50% of banking/financial while the proportion of science and humanities grads working in banking/financial has withered. One obvious explanation is that economics (a proxy for business) grads have, over the years, preferentially hired other economics grads. The obvious conclusion is that college IS about careers, albeit less so for those who choose the "wrong" major. If you look at the timeline you will also see that the overall percentage of STEM graduates has almost halved so the increase in non-STEM graduates could be predicted just from the reduction in STEM graduates. I only see fluctuations of about 10% in the sciences, and noticeably larger fluctuations in economics. It could be that students have wised up to the apparent preference for economics (business) grads by recruiters, and are defecting away from sciences. Really, who can blame them? |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 2:03:10 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
Universities are about careers for those doing sciences and about connections for those doing arts subjects. Apart from those who move into university teaching and research. Very few history graduates become historians. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeeh...rsity-rip-off/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...-money/359653/ |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
wrote:
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 2:03:10 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: wsnell01 wrote: On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 9:23:40 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: lal_truckee wrote: On 6/22/15 6:45 PM, wsnell01 wrote: inanities I repeat: Where did you get the idea that college is about finding a job? Hint: Colleges are not Trade Schools, nor were they intended to be. Second hint: Focusing are skills needed by a first job won't prepare a student to learn the skills needed for second and subsequent jobs. Third hint: College is about preparing a mind, not preparing a specific skill set. Of course university is about finding a career. My daughter did a degree in civil engineering. She's a civli engineerr. My son did degrees in marine biology, He's a marine biologist. I did a BSc in Chemistry and an MSc in Clinical Biochemistry. I worked for 41 years in clinical biochemistry. It is also about preparing the mind but a much more important factor is making networks of contacts and is the reason that people can do basically useless arts degrees and still be employed in well paid jobs for which they are not qualified, Here is another interactive chart of majors versus careers: http://web.williams.edu/Mathematics/...areerpath.html The "timeline" tab is interesting. For the 1930-1959 grads, economics majors made up ~20% of banking/financial workers, as did the sciences, and as did the humanities, both ~20%. Fast forward to the 2005-2009 grads, and economics majors now make up 50% of banking/financial while the proportion of science and humanities grads working in banking/financial has withered. One obvious explanation is that economics (a proxy for business) grads have, over the years, preferentially hired other economics grads. The obvious conclusion is that college IS about careers, albeit less so for those who choose the "wrong" major. If you look at the timeline you will also see that the overall percentage of STEM graduates has almost halved so the increase in non-STEM graduates could be predicted just from the reduction in STEM graduates. I only see fluctuations of about 10% in the sciences, and noticeably larger fluctuations in economics. It could be that students have wised up to the apparent preference for economics (business) grads by recruiters, and are defecting away from sciences. Really, who can blame them? Click on the 1930 to 1959 and the 2005 to 2009 and you can see big changes in the STEM subjects. A surprising and encouraging sign is the big increase in maths on the latest chart but most of the sciences are a lot smaller. The white gaps between the subjects also make smaller green lines seem thicker. Of course there have been so many other changes over the last period and this university doesn't have a medical school so the diagram may not be too representative but it's an interesting graphic. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
wrote:
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 2:03:10 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: Universities are about careers for those doing sciences and about connections for those doing arts subjects. Apart from those who move into university teaching and research. Very few history graduates become historians. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeeh...rsity-rip-off/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...-money/359653/ These low study time courses are all non-science and technology subjects. Very few science courses have much free time. That's one of the reasons for the push for lower tuition fees for STEM subjects. When I did my BSC at University in the 1960s and 70s I had no tuition fees and the local council paid a grant for living expenses. Because I had worked for three years before going to university I got the full grant which was (just) enough to live on. 50% of my MSc tuition fees were paid by my employers (who were the people running the course) My children had a combination of grants and loans but no tuition fees. Their younger cousins had both loans and tuition fees. That only applies to England and Wales. Scottish students have no fees. It would be perfectly possible to charge all graduates an extra income tax instead of these fees but the government instead runs a ridiculous service which gives cheap loans and then accepts that many of them will never be repaid. In much of Europe (including most of Germany) there are no tuition fees. Many American students are finding that it's cheaper to pay living expenses in Germany and study free at their universities. England and Wales charge high fees for foreign students. A good deal of money is wasted on Arts and Humanities which will never be used seriously by the graduates. The subjects need to be studied but not by so many. By ther way the writers for the Spectator are generally the upper class arts graduates I am complaining about who went to Oxford and Cambridge to study soft subjects and never saw real life. British Universities do not have "majors". You usually study only one subject and supporting subjects related to the course. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 4:40:28 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
Click on the 1930 to 1959 and the 2005 to 2009 and you can see big changes in the STEM subjects. A surprising and encouraging sign is the big increase in maths on the latest chart but most of the sciences are a lot smaller. The white gaps between the subjects also make smaller green lines seem thicker. Of course there have been so many other changes over the last period and this university doesn't have a medical school so the diagram may not be too representative but it's an interesting graphic. This is strictly a liberal arts college with a few grad degrees (but still goes by the term "college") so there is no med, nursing, law, engineering or even a B-school per se. The "marketable" degrees would probably be the economics, comp sci and math. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Empiricism Was Not Well-Liked in the Past
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 5:11:29 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 2:03:10 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: Universities are about careers for those doing sciences and about connections for those doing arts subjects. Apart from those who move into university teaching and research. Very few history graduates become historians. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeeh...rsity-rip-off/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...-money/359653/ These low study time courses are all non-science and technology subjects. Very few science courses have much free time. That's one of the reasons for the push for lower tuition fees for STEM subjects. When I did my BSC at University in the 1960s and 70s I had no tuition fees and the local council paid a grant for living expenses. Because I had worked for three years before going to university I got the full grant which was (just) enough to live on. 50% of my MSc tuition fees were paid by my employers (who were the people running the course) My children had a combination of grants and loans but no tuition fees. Their younger cousins had both loans and tuition fees. That only applies to England and Wales. Scottish students have no fees. It would be perfectly possible to charge all graduates an extra income tax instead of these fees but the government instead runs a ridiculous service which gives cheap loans and then accepts that many of them will never be repaid. In much of Europe (including most of Germany) there are no tuition fees. Many American students are finding that it's cheaper to pay living expenses in Germany and study free at their universities. England and Wales charge high fees for foreign students. A good deal of money is wasted on Arts and Humanities which will never be used seriously by the graduates. The subjects need to be studied but not by so many. By ther way the writers for the Spectator are generally the upper class arts graduates I am complaining about who went to Oxford and Cambridge to study soft subjects and never saw real life. British Universities do not have "majors". You usually study only one subject and supporting subjects related to the course. The "useless" degrees seem to be roughly the same on both sides of the Atlantic, the arts being among the worst and social sciences running close behind. Education degree is a somewhat special case since one usually needs it to teach primary school, so while it isn't exactly useless, the pay is low and it leads to a hard-exit career. Some other degrees are useless in the sense that some grads often end up in jobs that don't even require degrees and at the same pay, with lost wages during the college years and even student loan debt. Colleges vary, but usually a major requires the equivalent of two to three+ solid years of course work, related subjects, and core requirements and less than a year of electives. Double majors are possible, but sometimes difficult to arrange. I believe that choosing a "marketable" major began to be crucial in the mid-1970s for those not going on to grad or pro school. Before that, just having a degree was gold, since even BA/BS grads were relatively uncommon. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Creativity and empiricism | oriel36[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | March 6th 13 09:55 AM |
LOGICISM AGAINST EMPIRICISM IN DEDUCTIVE SCIENCE | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | March 4th 09 07:22 AM |
Saw it go past...... | Justa Lurker | Space Shuttle | 9 | December 11th 06 01:47 AM |
looking to the past | Mr Jherek Chamaeleo | Misc | 4 | January 6th 04 05:13 AM |
looking into the past??? | download the whole internet | Science | 8 | August 30th 03 11:17 PM |