Posted on 12/14/2011 8:42:35 AM PST by gabriellah
American conservatives should think long and hard about where they send their kids to college. It’s a serious matter. After all, what can you become these days without a degree? If the Left has their way—if you obtain a college degree in due time—you WILL become a liberal.
I fully realize that this has the potential to sound incredibly hypocritical coming from someone who is currently attending college – specifically someone who edits a publication comprised entirely of collegiate writers. But you’ll soon see why the awkward position I am in is entirely necessary.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecollegeconservative.com ...
Conservative think tanks should create a list...
The Top 20 schools Conservative Parents shouldn’t send their kids to.
or something like that.
After all, what can you become these days without a degree?
Really? A whole bunch of things. More to the point why pay for a useless college degree to work at Macy’s??
Zachary...Zachary...Zachary....You do NOT have to have a DEGREE to be successful....some of the most unsuccessful people have degrees....and remember people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs....NO degrees
A degree only means you had the charcter to start a thing and finish a thing...unless you got into something very specialized... like medicine, engineering, etc.
You are right. I work for a creep who has no degree and goes around here being as obnoxious as possible to everyone who DOES
Ridiculous, you don’t have to go to college in a uniform. oh wait . . is that what the title said . .
Still, there are Leftwingtard kids who can earn the real degrees, but they didn't become that way in college.
If students took a couple of years between high school and college and served in the armed forces, or worked at a dead end job, much of the liberal indoctrination at college wouldn’t stick.
That is profound. You come back from a war zone and you are 22 going on 30.
Higher education is a terrific bubble right now, far worse than the subprime mortgage bubble, so the important question is what will the universities of the future look like?
To start with, despite pretenses, the *purpose* of college is so that graduates will have better employment than they will with just a high school diploma. If they cannot do these two things, they fail. That is, “employment” and “better”.
“A well rounded liberal arts education” is meaningless if you are working in a minimum wage fast food restaurant.
So therefore, universities of the future will have to focus on these primary goals. If course majors and courses do not contribute to these goals, they are a waste of time and money.
And this includes sports. There is no such thing as college level training for sports. So an academic pretense for sports is an expensive waste. Baseball has a minor league to train players for the majors. No reason other sports can’t have the same.
There may also be colleges of liberal and fine arts, but these are not employment colleges, so should not receive public subsidies. They are vanity endeavors, so should be paid for up front and in full by student tuition.
The end result goes to a basic principal of good education. That students have only a limited amount of time and attention, and are paying good money, so must be handled with serious professionalism and given the honest opportunity to succeed, fully aware that many will fail.
Hard working and intelligent students will succeed, and those who cannot intellectually meet the demands of this education, or who are not willing to work for their own betterment, will fail.
gabriella is absolutely right!
I also had a Macroeconomics course which was pure indoctrination. Having suffered at grading time from arguing too much in my politics class the previous semester, I decided to handle this economics course differently: I parroted the professor at every opportunity, trying always to outdo him in extremes of positions. Meanwhile, I read independently contrary literature, and basically educated myself, gaining a very full understanding of the subject. When midterm exams were handed back, mine was temporarily withheld by the professor, so that he could read one of my answers to the class as an example of excellence! I ended up with a top grade in the course, but to this days I believe none of the Keynesianism we were taught.
I learned later that this approach is what people in Eastern Europe did under communism.
It may be wise to hide your true beliefs until you either are out of academia, or have yourself become a tenured professor of full rank.
Another bit of advice for students: pick a practical major, one with job possibilities.
gabriella is absolutely right!
I also had a Macroeconomics course which was pure indoctrination. Having suffered at grading time from arguing too much in my politics class the previous semester, I decided to handle this economics course differently: I parroted the professor at every opportunity, trying always to outdo him in extremes of positions. Meanwhile, I read independently contrary literature, and basically educated myself, gaining a very full understanding of the subject. When midterm exams were handed back, mine was temporarily withheld by the professor, so that he could read one of my answers to the class as an example of excellence! I ended up with a top grade in the course, but to this days I believe none of the Keynesianism we were taught.
I learned later that this approach is what people in Eastern Europe did under communism.
It may be wise to hide your true beliefs until you either are out of academia, or have yourself become a tenured professor of full rank.
Another bit of advice for students: pick a practical major, one with job possibilities.
Excellent! Ha ha ha.
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.