The Duggars and CollegePlus

[Publius]

There's no drinking and partying at community colleges. Since I rarely drink and I'm an introvert, I would have not partaken in those activities. Besides, the local state universities where I live are commuter schools. Even with all of my work experience, I'm still being beat out in this job market by people with even more experience, so I don't see how being younger with less experience would help me. But what possibly could have helped me was going to a school with name recognition in the region and internships set up by the university. Over a year after getting my bachelor's degree and becoming registered as a licensed chemical dependency counselor intern, I still can't get an internship to become fully licensed.

My family was poor and I held jobs that paid a little above minimum wage when I was younger. Paying $100 or whatever it used to cost for one test would have meant that we wouldn't have money for food that week. There was no way I could have afforded to completely test out of a degree and pay the enrollment fees plus the tuition for whatever capstones at the Big 3. I did use leftover financial aid to pay for my TESC enrollment fee, but I also had a lot of transfer credits, so I didn't need as many tests. If I had started from scratch, I would have needed to attend a college for at least two years to get enough financial aid to afford the tests and pay for the enrollment. How much do the cheapest degrees at the Big 3 cost? $4,000-$6000? And there wasn't FEMA and ALEKS back then. By the time I would have saved that up, I could have completed two years at a CC for free.

Yeah, well you usually can't get 4 year degree from a community college. I also wasn't saying YOU do that stuff, would of, whatever... that's just sadly the stereotypical college student. Which reminded me another reason I forgot... was that the average student graduates with over 20K of debt. That's a lot of dough. I know it's not perfect for everyone... I was just saying that for me, personally, I'm very grateful for this opportunity and much rather prefer it to a traditional route. So when you stated "For people straight out of high school, I think they should go to a traditional college if they can." I think that there are excellent reasons for the opposite. Young people getting their degree knocked out right of highschool, if possible. The first 2 years of college are a review of highschool. The other half of the classes, you'll never use, which boils things down to not much actually being learned. If you're going to be an engineer, go to med school, fine. For me, again personally, my accounting degree is checking a box and what is necessary to move on to the next level. A lot of times a degree is just that, a check in the box and the foot in the door to get that interview, or move that next level up. Why not get it knocked out ASAP, and do it as cheap as possible too?
Again, I'm not saying everyone can do this, or that this will work in every case. For me, personally, and many other people, it's a wise investment to not go the traditional route.

[Jonathan Whatley]

When 1 out 2 college grads can't get a job, what's going to set you apart? When you can say, "Well hey, I'm 2-3 years younger then most other grads, and I did something different. I researched, I dedicated myself, and didn't waste my time drinking and partying. I sought the best use of my time, my money, and my resources and accomplished what I set out for AND I'll do the same for you."

There's a core of this argument that I like and respect, but there are two elements that really don't sit right with me.

There seem to be implications here that a younger job candidate competing against older candidates should
• cite their age as a reason to favor them
• imply that competing candidates who have been to B&M college are more likely than the candidate to spend time drinking

Whoa! It's one thing to think these things privately, another to bring them out as "you can say" material for the job search.

In any case, rather than building yourself up, these two points seem to me to lean a little too heavily on cutting others down, (a) based on age, and (b) based on some sort of Animal House stereotype applied to people who attend B&M school, at least secular B&M school, as a group.

There's a classic episode of The Simpsons where Homer needs to go to college to take a course on nuclear physics for his work. To orient himself to college life… he watches a ridiculous comedy film about "the rowdy members of Chugalug House," and he arrives at Springfield University determined to pull all sorts of hi-jinx. Of course life at Springfield University is really nothing like 1980s genre comedies! Everyone else is there to learn; Homer's scheming doesn't work out too too well.

Sometimes the preconceptions of B&M college heard around here may be more like Homer Simpson's than y'all would like to admit. :p

I also wasn't saying YOU [sanantone] do that stuff, would of, whatever... that's just sadly the stereotypical college student.

Well, so you do recognize that this is a stereotype. But although you allow exceptions, you still seem to be applying the stereotype to B&M students generally.

The first 2 years of college are a review of highschool. The other half of the classes, you'll never use, which boils things down to not much actually being learned.

Are you sure about this?

Let's look at just the first two years. If the hospital serving your family stopped hiring new associate's-level nurses but instead hired new high school graduates to do the same work, no material difference? The graduate of a grade 12 chemistry course can solve college organic chemistry problems comparably well to someone who took one year of gen chem and one year of organic chem at the college level? If you were hiring an accounting assistant, you'd count an associate's in business as indicating no more preparation in business than reviewing a high school business course?

[a4tunatemom]

Does this thread make anyone else think of this song?

This is the song (thread) that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friends.
Some people started singing (writing) it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing (writing) it forever just because

This is the song (thread) that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friends.
Some people started singing (writing) it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing (writing) it forever just because . . .

[mrs.b]

If this thread doesn't get at least another 3 or 4 more pages well then we'll just have to beat this dead horse harder! :leaving:

I've contracted the services of someone to beat the horse for me.

[Publius]

There's a core of this argument that I like and respect, but there are two elements that really don't sit right with me.

There seem to be implications here that a younger job candidate competing against older candidates should
• cite their age as a reason to favor them
• imply that competing candidates who have been to B&M college are more likely than the candidate to spend time drinking

Whoa! It's one thing to think these things privately, another to bring them out as "you can say" material for the job search.

In any case, rather than building yourself up, these two points seem to me to lean a little too heavily on cutting others down, (a) based on age, and (b) based on some sort of Animal House stereotype applied to people who attend B&M school, at least secular B&M school, as a group.

First, I wasn't trying to build myself up, but pointing out that there were several reasons why someone out of highschool would benefit from getting a degree via distance learning compared to B&M. Forgive me, you're right about those implications. I wasn't saying they SHOULD cite them though, but there are going to be times when it could benefit them. If nothing else, being 2-3 years younger, you have more time to find a job. With how hard it is to find a job, period. If it's going to take say 6months to a year to find a job, regardless of how you got your degree, you're still going to enter the job market sooner then your peers.

Well, so you do recognize that this is a stereotype. But although you allow exceptions, you still seem to be applying the stereotype to B&M students generally.

To what degree and what means time is wasted, I won't deny that you're not wasting time attending a B&M school. More extreme types of the stereotype, the drinking and partying, though still widely practice, are not done by many students.

Are you sure about this?

Let's look at just the first two years. If the hospital serving your family stopped hiring new associate's-level nurses but instead hired new high school graduates to do the same work, no material difference? The graduate of a grade 12 chemistry course can solve college organic chemistry problems comparably well to someone who took one year of gen chem and one year of organic chem at the college level? If you were hiring an accounting assistant, you'd count an associate's in business as indicating no more preparation in business than reviewing a high school business course?

Generally speaking yes... personally speaking absolutely. Everything in my first section for my degree, I knew a large amount of it even before finishing HS. The exception probably being, some more advanced/complex economic issues for Macro and Micro, and Managerial Communications. Everything else, English, W Civ I & II, College Math, Algebra, Precalc, Stats, Biology, American Gov, History of US I & II, SS&H, A&I Lit, and Intro to World Religions. I'm not saying I didn't need to study for those, but I had a great foundation and needed more of a brush up cause 75-90% of the info I already learned. BTW, I even specifically said, there are exceptions specifically pointing out med school, not 2 sentences later "The first 2 years of college are a review of highschool. The other half of the classes, you'll never use, which boils things down to not much actually being learned. If you're going to be an engineer, go to med school, fine. For me, again personally, my accounting degree is checking a box and what is necessary to move on to the next level." If you want to say, "Oh you said med school and not the medical field". Fine, but my point was there are exceptions and the medical field is one.

It boils down to, you're saving time and money. Why is it okay for adults to go down this path, but not regular aged college kids? Are kids all of sudden not allowed to step outside the box and apply themselves? If possible, must we go down the college road, for 4 years, and like the average college grad, graduate with over 25K in debt (btw, that's not my opinion, that's a fact... http://projectonstudentdebt.org/state_by_state-data.php)? When we could of knocked out the same degree in 1-2 years, and for a fraction of the cost. That's all. The pros simply outweigh the cons.

[topdog98]

It could also be considered "age discrimination" to assert that 30, 40, & 50 year olds are suitable for CBE but 18 year olds must go the tedious and expensive route.

[sanantone]

Yeah, well you usually can't get 4 year degree from a community college. I also wasn't saying YOU do that stuff, would of, whatever... that's just sadly the stereotypical college student. Which reminded me another reason I forgot... was that the average student graduates with over 20K of debt. That's a lot of dough. I know it's not perfect for everyone... I was just saying that for me, personally, I'm very grateful for this opportunity and much rather prefer it to a traditional route. So when you stated "For people straight out of high school, I think they should go to a traditional college if they can." I think that there are excellent reasons for the opposite. Young people getting their degree knocked out right of highschool, if possible. The first 2 years of college are a review of highschool. The other half of the classes, you'll never use, which boils things down to not much actually being learned. If you're going to be an engineer, go to med school, fine. For me, again personally, my accounting degree is checking a box and what is necessary to move on to the next level. A lot of times a degree is just that, a check in the box and the foot in the door to get that interview, or move that next level up. Why not get it knocked out ASAP, and do it as cheap as possible too?
Again, I'm not saying everyone can do this, or that this will work in every case. For me, personally, and many other people, it's a wise investment to not go the traditional route.

There are plenty of cheap state universities in my state and many in others. There are some that are less than $5,000 a year. To graduate with $20k in debt is often a choice. If an expensive school is worth going to, then it will provide plenty of scholarships and loan replacements. Although, there are community colleges that do offer bachelor's degrees. There are also plenty of universities that aren't party schools because they are commuter schools. To party for 4 years is a personal choice and shouldn't be a stereotype slapped on B&M students. I know a lot of people who are in their late 20s who never went to college and they're still partying. It doesn't mean we're all doing it. Anyway, there is such a thing as return on investment. Those who attend more prestigious colleges often get a better return on investment so much so that an extra $20k in debt can be wiped out in a couple of years.

A lot of students aren't prepared for college-level math and English right out of high school. Half of the people who attend community colleges are in need of remedial courses. Some of the people who post on this forum have horrible grammar and spelling. Others are struggling to get through basic or intermediate algebra on ALEKS. It's common knowledge that Americans tend to generally not know much about their own history and government and world geography. Many students do need those first two years of college.

[sanantone]

It could also be considered "age discrimination" to assert that 30, 40, & 50 year olds are suitable for CBE but 18 year olds must go the tedious and expensive route.

Did someone bring up discrimination? I just skimmed over the last few posts. It is not discrimination to say that people of a certain age group are more suitable for something than others. Discrimination would be denying a certain group of people access to CBEs. There is research that says that older people do better in online classes. I'll look it up when I get time.

[sanantone]

Does this thread make anyone else think of this song?

This is the song (thread) that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friends.
Some people started singing (writing) it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing (writing) it forever just because

This is the song (thread) that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friends.
Some people started singing (writing) it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing (writing) it forever just because . . .

I've contracted the services of someone to beat the horse for me.

People can choose not to read the thread if it bothers them that much.

[topdog98]

Sorry, I'll clarify. When I say discrimination, I mean the dictionary definition. I mean making a distinction in favor or against someone based on what group that person belongs to instead of judging on individual merits. I do not mean the modern definition of discrimination, which implies persecution. If someone says 30+ year olds should do this but not 18 year olds, they are making a distinction (or discriminating) based on age. I do not mean to imply that they are persecuting anyone or taking away their rights.