Posted on 05/26/2013 7:31:42 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Oh boy ...... more social engineering being pushed by libs. That always turns out good. One thing I’ve learned is that everything in life isn’t fair.
It's almost like that's the plan.
Frankly, trade schooling pays better than most College Education. The “talented poor” are doing far better than the Elite College students.
Limousine liberals are only good at imposing virtues on others, usually their own family members who have paid for their high priced "education".
You have to admit that Harvard turns out a better class of liars, thieves and cheats.
better than dartmouth (geitner, immelt, reich, etc.)???
A Harvard education is probably just as good as a Oklahoma State University education. Except one costs $150,000 for four years, and the other is around $60,000 for four years (in-state tuition, of course).
Income “inequality”? I guess there’s plenty of that between the average janitor and the average trial lawyer. So would the libs want the government to pass a law requiring janitors and lawyers make the same salary? I’m sure many janitors would be thrilled at that. Not so sure about the liberal trial lawyers though.
The purpose of colleges and universities is to impart and advance knowledge. Nothing else. For its students to network and use that knowledge to succeed financially is a consequence outside of colleges and universities purview.
A telling statement in the article; "If top colleges are looking for a more comprehensive tutorial in recruiting the talented rural poor, they might take a cue from one institution doing a truly stellar job: the military."
The Armed Forces recruits in furtherance of its purpose, to maintain the most effective fighting force in the world. It does so by offering paying jobs with benefits and extensive training to those with potential and desire. It recognizes the significant social development and employment skills its members gain. But it rightfully doesn't consider these as part of its purpose.
Academe needs to quit worrying about being social services and concentrate on its actual purpose of being a knowledge factory.
Better than Princeton? Elliot Spitzer, Ralph Nader and Michelle Obama?
Seriously, this article is so much propaganda. Harvard has a huge proportion of poor and minority students. They pay little or no tuition. And it’s not just the athletes.
Your average state university is probably more liberal.
I'm sure there are some — but probably not nearly as many as the libs would like to believe.
“Frankly, trade schooling pays better than most College Education. The “talented poor” are doing far better than the Elite College students.”
I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately the elite academics in many parts of the country are taking over the community colleges and working to turn them into four year liberal arts schools. Programs in woodworking, auto mechanics, and plumbing are being dropped in favor of non-skill curriculum designed to prepare students to transfer to 4 year degree programs at the state university. As these college prep programs grow, the administrators are pushing to allow the community college to offer 4 year degrees.
If the states and federal government truly want to help lower income students the best way to spend the money would be to beef up technical and trade school education at the local community college level. Of course, that means less money for professors at Yale to waste on studying the condom preferences of minority students or the mating habits of boring bees.
Despite the billions being wasted on education an acclaimed two year degree woodworking program at a community college in a nearby county was closed due to lack of funding. The program was always filled with students and most of its graduates easily found work at cabinet shops in the region making good money. However, when budgets were tight, the administrators chose to cut technical education instead of the college prep courses which were deemed more important.
One more example that for the elites education is about feeding the education establishment, not teaching skills to young people.
My first thought, too. Are we supposed to accept the premise that income inequality is a bad thing? An idiotic Marxist notion, with the intellectual pedigree of a kindergarten mud pie recipe.
I was the first member of my family to go to college.
My parents were part of the lower middle class.
I chose a college near home and did well. I also had a good
choice of graduate schools. Why would I even consider an elite private college with most of my classmates from upper income groups and a prep school background? I would not have fit in nor done well in that academic setting.
“Why does it matter that top-performing low-income students aren’t making it into the best schools?”
Anecdotally, it appears to matter, IF using the big-name-college degree is to use it’s network of (a) alumni in the major coporations, and (b) everyone else in business (or government) who is impressed by a big-name-degree, to obtain a leg-up when starting their career.
HOWEVER, a study that was done at the Manhattan Institute a number of years ago, regarding “minority” students entering college with a law degree in mind, found that getting into an “elite” college was no panacea, and in fact, their “minority” peers who did not get into elite colleges were fairing better in their careers, on average, ten years after graduation.
The study followed “minority” students entering college to pursue a law degree, from high school graduation to 20 years later.
Those who accepted an “affirmative action” slot at an elite school (a) found that the expectations of them and the competition was daunting, more than they expected, and, they quit college altogether or switched schools before obtaining their bachelors degree, more often than their “minority” peers who did not take that college route.
Also, the “minority” students who did not take the “affirmative action” rooute, and in spite of graduating from a less prestiguous school, they rose from the bottom to associate, partner or their own practice in greater numbers within ten years of graduation than their “minority” peers who got an “affirmative action” slot at an elite law school. Becoming a little fish in a big pond at the most prestigous law firms can obtain a starting salary that is higher than peers graduating from less prestiguous schools and joining less prestiguous firms, but the study showed they were not as far along in their careers, on average, than their peers who took a less elite route, in school and in first employer.
“Harvard grad Ross Douthat has an answer that Ivy-leaguers knew long ago: “...elite universities are about connecting more than learning... the social world matters far more than the classroom to undergraduates.”
Yes, its about the “network”, however, more than one study shows that it does have its shinning examples, but it is not a panacea. Raw intelligence, drive, tenacity, dedication count more in the long run. The cover of the book may make a great first impression, but in time the readers have to remain interested.
“In 1970, 12 percent of recent college graduates came from the bottom quartile of the income distribution; 40 years later, the percentage was 7.3 percent.”
Gee, let me see - they are told by everyone in and out of government to give more points for being a “minority”, for being a female or for filling their ethnic “diversity” quotas, above any priority of simply “low income with great scholastic record” and what do you get? You get exactly what the colleges produced.
My own personal view is that the only thing that is presently sustaining the income rewards of an “elite” college degree is business world’s acceptance of what I believe is a myth that it produces anything “better” in any real sense. Its only “better” because the business world and government too keeps rewarding it, not because they or us would be any worse off if they didn’t.
So that future generations can have the agony of a government like our present Obama/Holder/Clinton cesspool. (Clintons provided the trailer trash diversity.)
The entire liberal agenda fails, and fails every time. But they keep on believing they can change human nature and defy the laws of the universe because they are so d*mned smart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.