hero69 wrote:
slightly different subject, i was talking to someone about charter schools and i indicated that charter schools were revolutionizing the educational system. he said it was smoke and mirrors.

apparently, unbeknownst to me, charter schools can dump the underperforming kids back into the public school system which elevates the numbers for charter schools but depresses those for public schools

AlexC wrote:
Here are the numbers:

Student Diversity 2013-2014
Dr. Ronald E. McNair Academic High School
United States

Hispanic 21.0%
Asian 39.0%
African American 16.0%
White 19.0%
Native American 1.0%

https://k12.niche.com/dr-ronald-e-mcna ... gh-school-jersey-city-nj/

JPhurst wrote:
Over the summer there were a bunch of articles about tech companies now looking for liberal arts majors to fill positions. Here's one.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeand ... liberal-arts-degree-tech/

I've always felt that unless you are pursuing a career in an area that requires specific technical knowledge, what you specifically studied in college was less important than learning how to think and write.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

Have you spoken to many "X studies majors"? Their linguistic skills in the language they're learning is nothing like full fluency.

Took Russian for three years. I was never a serious Russian student, the language just fascinated me. By the time I got to the third year, most of my classmates were majors. They were hardcore, and if you're a major you have to go live and study there for at least a year. Total immersion. So, yes, I would say they were pretty fluent. Admittedly, they were studying it at the right time in history. The top students were courted back in the late '80s/early 90s by the CIA, State Department, banks, energy companies media organizations, NGOs and think tanks.

devilsadvocate wrote:

Have you spoken to many "X studies majors"? Their linguistic skills in the language they're learning is nothing like full fluency.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

By the way, I speak a "desired foreign language" and am not a "X languages" major. You end up with the language if you're an immigrant or a children of immigrants.

I can only speak for myself and those I know as children of Chinese immigrants. Most of us speak well enough to order at a restaurant or argue with our parents, not well enough to function at a high professional level. The vast majority of us can barely even write our names in Chinese. All the cramming and studying Chinese parents insist on, sadly, doesn't include the language. My own parents conceded that was a mistake when they realized how big a demand there was for fully fluent English-Chinese bilingual workers.

JadedJC wrote:
[quote]
devilsadvocate wrote:

A large part of that though is that attendees tend to come from far wealthier families. It isn't surprising that the GW Bushes of the world aren't graduating from Harvard and Yale with student debt.

And if you start to look at graduate level education, which tends to be less concentrated based on socioeconomic status (for a variety of reasons), you'll see a ton of people graduating from the likes of Harvard and Yale law with massive sums of debt.

But sure, some go to ivy league schools and for whatever reason have less debt. Their ability to find employment still relates to their major, at least to some degree. Yes, some can still get banking internships or go into management consulting. But that takes a methodical dedication to preparing for those that many liberal arts majors don't really pursue.

You know, rather than speaking in sweeping generalizations and just plain making stuff up, I invite you to actually look at the financial aid stats for schools like Harvard. They're easy to find and the schools are pretty transparent on the economic backgrounds of their students and how need-based aid is determined. Students from families like the Bushes are in the minority.

Some 60% of students come from families making less than $200k, and even those making more than $200K aren't excluded from receiving aid (if, for example, they have more than one child in college). The other Ivy League schools have aid models pretty similar to Harvard's.

For whatever reason, you dislike the liberal arts, which is fine. To each his own.

But your last sentence makes no sense whatsoever - not even from a sentence-construction point of view - and is backed by nothing other than your own biased assumptions. You clearly don't have a STEM background.

People from those backgrounds live by facts and figures and they use facts and numbers to persuade people to their point of view. You clearly don't. In the JC List vernacular: You're simply talking out of your ass.

devilsadvocate wrote:

By the way, I speak a "desired foreign language" and am not a "X languages" major. You end up with the language if you're an immigrant or a children of immigrants.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

Sure, but with finance they had to pick up real quantitative skills somewhere. That doesn't just happen.

Do you understand how big financial institutions like Goldman Sachs work? They assemble teams with all sorts of backgrounds or talents. In the early and mid-1990s, the banks were all trying to court Russian and Chinese majors because they were in a hurry to do deals in those countries. That's where many of my classmates ended up. They needed people who spoke the language and understood the culture. A lot of the big-picture macro strategists don't come from technical backgrounds. They hire people with more technical skills to write proprietary trading programs or do the quantitative analysis.

devilsadvocate wrote:

Sure, but with finance they had to pick up real quantitative skills somewhere. That doesn't just happen.

devilsadvocate wrote:

A large part of that though is that attendees tend to come from far wealthier families. It isn't surprising that the GW Bushes of the world aren't graduating from Harvard and Yale with student debt.

And if you start to look at graduate level education, which tends to be less concentrated based on socioeconomic status (for a variety of reasons), you'll see a ton of people graduating from the likes of Harvard and Yale law with massive sums of debt.

But sure, some go to ivy league schools and for whatever reason have less debt. Their ability to find employment still relates to their major, at least to some degree. Yes, some can still get banking internships or go into management consulting. But that takes a methodical dedication to preparing for those that many liberal arts majors don't really pursue.

VanVorster wrote:
The bigots on here don't observe being polite or constructive but because of their anonymity and call people trash, inferior, crappy to imply their own supposed innate superiority. No one is expressly using the N word but it's there beneath the surface as well as the white superiority complex. And once a person of color calls them out on it, they get all bent out of shape and call the person of color a racist. That is called projection folks.

http://www.racefiles.com/2013/07/03/w ... bout-being-called-racist/

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

Here's the disconnect here: she is saying "statistically, it is likely to result in X", to which you are countering with a personal anecdote that you didn't fit X. You may be a counter-example, but you don't disprove the statement, which is correct.

The other thing to keep in mind is that none of what you wrote implies that you wouldn't have been better off if you didn't major in something inherently marketable, rather than needing to rely on being a "quick learner" (which, in this market is a massively tough sell - I'm not going to hire even an entry level developer that doesn't have a CS degree because why would I? Nor will I hire a project manager with a "fluffy" degree even from an ivy when I could have many with an MIS, CS or at worst, straight up business management degree also from good schools).

What I'm saying is the average Ivy grad leaves school with a much lower student debt load than those who went to a non-Ivy private school, like NYU or Northwestern, and often lower than those who attended a state university. In 2012, the average debt owed by a Princeton grad was just over $5,000. At Yale, it was around $9,000. You owe more buying your first car. And its even possible to pay that off waiting tables. I have no idea what the job market is nowadays for those graduating with liberal arts degrees. I agree it's much tougher than it was 25-30 years ago and if I had a kid, I probably wouldn't want him/her to pursue a liberal arts degree. Your argument is narrowly based on hiring a software developer. Of course, you should only hire someone with a CS degree (fwiw, my ex has a CS degree and lost three jobs over a relatively short period because someone in or from India did the work for a lot less money). What I'm talking about are fields that DON'T require specific STEM skills. They do exist. For example, media, marketing and even finance. I know lots of people in finance - currency and bond traders and asset managers - who majored in history, philosophy and foreign languages.

I don't dispute your contention that I would have been better off pursuing something, as you put it, "inherently marketable." I certainly would be making more money, if that's what you mean by better off. But I know myself well enough to know I would have been bored and miserable in a technical field. Life is full of trade-offs that way. I'm in a job I mostly love and perform well (when I'm not on JC List). I'll never be wealthy, but I do all right: I have no debt besides the mortgage and I have enough to pay my bills, save decently for retirement and still have a little leftover to splurge on shoes or a vacation once in awhile. Btw, why are you so hostile to everyone posting on this thread? I mean this as a sincere question.

You are cherry picking the student debt data. Princeton is considered a model school in terms of how to best serve its student body with its "no loan policy". The average undergrad student load debt exceeds 27K. That's AVERAGE. For every Princeton grad with a debt of 5K, there's (statistically) one or more students with much more in debt.

Pebbles contention that data is not being provided is turning a blind to established facts: as a country, we are facing a student load debt crisis. Too many grads are coming out of school with too much debt. Add to these totals and numbers the people who continue their studies in fields like law, medicine, etc. Tons more money. The average law school loads debt is around 100K. For many schools, it is much more.

I was refuting your original contention of Ivy grads leaving school with "a pile of debt" they will regret. I'm saying the Ivies have fat endowments and a significantly high percentage graduate without any debt. Those who do typically have a total debt load well below the national average.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

Here's the disconnect here: she is saying "statistically, it is likely to result in X", to which you are countering with a personal anecdote that you didn't fit X. You may be a counter-example, but you don't disprove the statement, which is correct.

The other thing to keep in mind is that none of what you wrote implies that you wouldn't have been better off if you didn't major in something inherently marketable, rather than needing to rely on being a "quick learner" (which, in this market is a massively tough sell - I'm not going to hire even an entry level developer that doesn't have a CS degree because why would I? Nor will I hire a project manager with a "fluffy" degree even from an ivy when I could have many with an MIS, CS or at worst, straight up business management degree also from good schools).

What I'm saying is the average Ivy grad leaves school with a much lower student debt load than those who went to a non-Ivy private school, like NYU or Northwestern, and often lower than those who attended a state university. In 2012, the average debt owed by a Princeton grad was just over $5,000. At Yale, it was around $9,000. You owe more buying your first car. And its even possible to pay that off waiting tables. I have no idea what the job market is nowadays for those graduating with liberal arts degrees. I agree it's much tougher than it was 25-30 years ago and if I had a kid, I probably wouldn't want him/her to pursue a liberal arts degree. Your argument is narrowly based on hiring a software developer. Of course, you should only hire someone with a CS degree (fwiw, my ex has a CS degree and lost three jobs over a relatively short period because someone in or from India did the work for a lot less money). What I'm talking about are fields that DON'T require specific STEM skills. They do exist. For example, media, marketing and even finance. I know lots of people in finance - currency and bond traders and asset managers - who majored in history, philosophy and foreign languages.

I don't dispute your contention that I would have been better off pursuing something, as you put it, "inherently marketable." I certainly would be making more money, if that's what you mean by better off. But I know myself well enough to know I would have been bored and miserable in a technical field. Life is full of trade-offs that way.

I'm in a job I mostly love and perform well (when I'm not on JC List). I'll never be wealthy, but I do all right: I have no debt besides the mortgage and I have enough to pay my bills, save decently for retirement and still have a little leftover to splurge on shoes or a vacation once in awhile. Btw, why are you so hostile to everyone posting on this thread? I mean this as a sincere question.

K-Lo wrote:
Quote:

the George Bushes of the world

Legacies...the biggest AA group around....but not at McNair, by the way. No family preference.

JPhurst wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:


Now you're just equivocating. "Oh, as long as they're REASONABLY smart it is GOOD ENOUGH." No, there are admissions criteria and you're supposed to choose people that *best* fit them.

That's what you say, not what people looking to create the next class of scholars says. You treat it like it's some game where you get a reward for a high score. Anyone admitted to these schools has achieved and accomplished both with numbers and in other areas.

No one ever asked me what my SAT score was after I got into college. No one ever asked me what my LSAT score was after I got into law school. No one ever asked me what my GPA was after I got my first job. Because once you get admitted or hired, you can demonstrate your ability to contribute by actually contributing rather than patting yourself on the back because you consider yourself "worthy" because of test scores.

As others have pointed out, you appear to be bitter, defensive, and hateful, needing to distort arguments and just make stuff up. Calm down and realize that the classes at McNair, Harvard, Yale, etc are all still outstanding achievers even with affirmative action. And in fact affirmative action may very well improve such achievement for all involved.

VanVorster wrote:
The bigots on here don't observe being polite or constructive but because of their anonymity and call people trash, inferior, crappy to imply their own supposed innate superiority. No one is expressly using the N word but it's there beneath the surface as well as the white superiority complex. And once a person of color calls them out on it, they get all bent out of shape and call the person of color a racist. That is called projection folks.

http://www.racefiles.com/2013/07/03/w ... bout-being-called-racist/

VanVorster wrote:
yeah Brewster, I wholeheartedly hear you. I get quite annoyed too when people leave out salient facts when they say inane things like "my grandfather came here with a dime and a pair of shoes and became middle class in a generation" leaving out crucial things like the GI Bill and no money down mortgages to land working class people in the suburbs and good schools etc. It's simply ignorant and misleading on the facts; and similarly undermines the credibility of the writer or proponent that it was all by dint of hard work and determination and if all those lazy blacks could just have done the same back then and now. Happy New Year.

http://newsreel.org/guides/race/whiteadv.htm

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
This is so widely known that I thought that it should be obvious to anyone that has attended college/grad school. But here you go:

https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/ ... oyment.Final_.update1.pdf

Unemployment rates:
Fluff - Art: 11.1%, Humanities/Liberal Arts: 9.4%;
Good degrees - Computer Science: 7.8%, Math: 6%, Business: 7.4%

The earnings delta is even greater. Your median humanities major makes $50k/year in their job, arts $46k, while business makes $64k, computers/math $76k and engineering a whopping $81k. This is from Georgetown, which I think is a respectable institution, even if not Ivy.

What you are presenting here is statistics about income and unemployment. You are not presenting the amount of debt that these students are carrying while leaving Ivy league schools. I am unsure if that statistic exists anywhere and I really don?t care enough to hunt it down.

My entire point was to state where one individual was providing some form of evidence, even if flimsy, while another just made a claim with a lack of evidence.

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

2. I find your hiring requirements a bit funny.

Why is that?

VanVorster wrote:

Regarding Malia and Sasha, given their parents, going to Sidwell, access to tutors, etc. it's highly likely that their scores/grades will be very high given their backgrounds. Obama has gone on record and said they should not be considered as candidates for affirmative action and MOST reasonable logical people agree on that. What I find interesting is that white people rarely or never seem to get upset or bothered by the George Bushes of the world (of which there are many) who get gentlemen Cs, no discernible talent, middling SAT scores and even get to become president but the moment there's a black or latino person who gets into U Penn all hell breaks lose and it's "wait, what were his/her SAT scores!" That is how white entitlement and access goes unaddressed and ignored and others scapegoated.

devilsadvocate wrote:
From that article: "Jews and Asians, on the other hand, are populations that immigrated to North America and included doctors, lawyers, professors, and entrepreneurs among their ranks"

And many came from lower classes not from these backgrounds at all. Saying that Jews/Asians were just rich and educated when they came here shows immense ignorance of the history of both of these groups.

the George Bushes of the world

devilsadvocate wrote:
This is so widely known that I thought that it should be obvious to anyone that has attended college/grad school. But here you go:

https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/ ... oyment.Final_.update1.pdf

Unemployment rates:
Fluff - Art: 11.1%, Humanities/Liberal Arts: 9.4%;
Good degrees - Computer Science: 7.8%, Math: 6%, Business: 7.4%

The earnings delta is even greater. Your median humanities major makes $50k/year in their job, arts $46k, while business makes $64k, computers/math $76k and engineering a whopping $81k. This is from Georgetown, which I think is a respectable institution, even if not Ivy.

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

2. I find your hiring requirements a bit funny.

Why is that?