It seems I didn't write it well enough to get my point across. I'll
After a point, additional schooling just wastes a person's time.
For the type that work with their hands, it's sometimes better to get out
of the classroom and in to the shop where they can make mistakes and
actually engage in learning.
As in, experience is what you get by working and making mistakes because
you don't have the experience<g>
Think "book smart."
It's like a lawyer after passing the bar exam. Long on the tools to do
the job but no experience doing the job.
The doctor who got his degree yesterday is NOT going to be my doctor.
Give him a year or two in residency - hopefully in a busy urban ER or in
his/her clinical specialty and you've got something.
I can't think of a profession or career where OJT doesn't make all the
difference in the finished product.
If you speak frankly (or rather if they will speak frankly with you)
most college professors will acknowledge that the college degree today
is not much more than the high school diploma of decades ago.
An extra two years of schooling in community college? Sure, why not.
Two additional years of child care. Local community college established
(via a very nice person) a fund that would cover ALL tuition for two
years at the local community college. The only criteria was graduation
from a local high school (Not GED or alternative day care <g>) with a, I
think, "C" average.
Nice huh? Help them out, get them working, get away from the sense of
You should have heard the bitching and moaning by a number of ingrates!
"Why the hell should I have to pay for my books and activity fees, etc.?"
On 1/31/2015 5:35 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
No where is this more evident that in chemistry/analytical laboratory
When I graduated I went to work for a company in southern Michigan. We
hired GOOD high school graduates for the technician positions in the
lab. By the time I retired, we would not look at a high school graduate.
There were two reasons. One the high school grand could pass the
standardized test but did not have the knowledge to be trained for the
The second reason was that from a Government Regulatory aspect it was
much easier to convince an regulatory person that the person had the
proper training if we started with a person with a BS or MS degree, and
then trained; them rather than saying we started with a high school
Did it make any difference, I have tried to train people that had a
college "Education" that could not comprehend what they read, at least
could not translate what they read in the steps necessary to do the job.
Sure. Much less wriggle room in the sciences. Hard to bullshit your
way through the workplace there.
Funny, one my "sources" is #1 daughter, a chemistry prof. She was in AP
courses from 6th grade on. As a junior she wasooking for her undergrad
school she did an overnighter at Knox College - highly rated in the
sciences. Participated in a study group of sophomore chem students that
night. She was feeding them all the answers.
When she went off to undergrad at St Olaf in MN, she basically chilled
the first three semesters before having to get back into the grind.
Finished there with a double major Biology & Chemistry. Then off to the
U of MN and her PhD in Biochemistry.
The kids that she now teaches are good kids but ill-prepared for someone
like her. Would you believe "helicopter parents" in college?
"Look, Julie's grades are slipping. You realize that if she fails your
course, she will be in danger of losing her scholarship?"
Oh well, says my daughter. If Julie doesn't attend class and start
applying herself, she probably will lose the scholarship but it's not
all bad, she won't need it when she flunks out."
My background is law enforcement and I saw and still see, although
retired, the "new breed" coming up with degrees. Amazing what thought
processes some of them have. Fresh out of the academy and they are
wondering why they have to work patrol instead of an immediate promotion
to Lt or department head - "I do have a degree you know!"
The first six months they spend out on the street with a FTO and then
working those same streets on their own is the best education they will
ever get - if they accept it as such. They soon realize that the degree
means little without the street experience and trial by fire. If they
don't learn it, they leave; typically after getting their butt kicked a
couple three times.
This is true, there is the over qualification tag that can hold an over
educated person back. It would be better if the education after HS
focused on physical trade skills to those that are going to actually do
that for a living. Simply put, college is not for every body and if
every one is offered a free college education you are going to see
"sanitation engineers" riding on the back of the garbage truck
collecting your trash every week.
Lew Hodgett wrote:
Why is that?
You're not old enough to remember the GI Bill offered to vets
returning from WWII.
It was attacked as being a gov't handout; however, in the end it
turned out to be
the best investment the gov't ever made.
It developed a generation of trained college graduates, most of them
were the first
in the their family to graduate, that drove the last half of the 20th
The increase in income taxes paid the direct cost of the program and
in an educated work force put us on the moon.
This proposed program is aimed at the community college programs.
Programs that are 2 years aimed at directly providing qualified people
the local market opportunities.
The program is optional. No one is holding a gun to some ones head to
Rather it provides a means to attend a community college and learn a
that is needed in the local area.
It sets the hook to get a degree by requiring that a 2.5 GPA is
maintained to qualify.
Everybody wins on this one including the skeptics who are convinced
is a waste.
Yes, the gov't is not the most efficient way of doing some things, but
provide the best way some other things.
Things that the private sector either can not or will not provide.
Even Barry Goldwater recognized that gov't provides a unique service
private sector doesn't provide.
Only took him about 3-4 terms to gain that perspective.
On 2/1/2015 6:29 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
College police forces with MRAPS; NSA sucking up your privacy; license
plate readers tracking your locations; SWAT teams raiding Mom & Pop
farms and homes, shooting the old folks dogs, for selling raw milk or
planting vegetables in the front yard; LEO 'asset forfeiture' programs,
nothing more than a license to steal with no crime committed; TSA
stealing from your luggage, and harassing 80 year old ladies in wheel
chairs; Homes invasions by LEO with no knock warrants, without regard to
having the correct address...
There is an old adage in the debate business.
When you have the facts, use them.
When you don't have the facts, dig up all the crap you can, throw
it up on the wall and see if something will stick.
Lots of crap got tossed up on the wall, but nothing stuck.
Hint: Paranoia doesn't count.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.