UO Thursday!

bluekid

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

WendyToo:

I also want to note re: scholarships that when I was in high school, I didn't qualify for most need based scholarships, based on my (single) father's enormous salary of $35,000 per year, with two kids entering college that year.  Even if I had gotten a partial need-based scholarship, he never would have been able to cover the rest, because the money just wasn't there. Furthermore, even if a kid can get a ful lscholarship, if their socioeconomic status is such that they have to work full time, or even multiple jobs, to get by, college still may not be an option. 

I don't understand why people are allergic to working full-time during college? I did it, carried a full work load, and did very well in school.  DH worked through law school as well.  Was I able to go booze it up every weekend? Nope. For one thing, I didn't have time and for another, I didn't have any money to booze it up.  I am almost positive you worked full-time during college as well, Wendy...clearly, it isn't an ideal situation but..you gotta do what you gotta do...

 

Honestly? Because most just can't. It's the rare student who is good enough at both work and school to pull off both full time with any measure of success.

Most can't or most won't?

In my experience, can't---for multiple reasons.

College students today are just qualitatively different than college students 10 years ago. Most need around a year of remedial work at the university to even be ready for college-level work. As a wider swath of the population goes to college (a good thing!) we have to remember that they're going to have a wider variability of ability levels. Basic math, reading, and writing are a real struggle for many students. A high percentage of Oklahoma college students (especially at non R1 schools) have parental responsibilities as well.  Our Nesties are generally not representative of the average student in terms of academic ability, so we can't really say, "Well I could do that, so anyone could do that!"

Others can't work full time because it's literally not allowed by their programs. This was the case for me in grad school. I would have lost my fellowship had I had any employment at all my first year. After that first year, my advisor would have killed me had I worked more than 25 hours/week. She was pissed that I was working that much.

Finally, some students are in very intense programs. If you're trying to get in to a very competitive grad. program, focusing on working full time may be a good short term strategy, but I'd hate for it to affect students' coursework so much that it damages their prospects long-term.

Yes! This, this! 

McGillicuddy13

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

WendyToo:

I also want to note re: scholarships that when I was in high school, I didn't qualify for most need based scholarships, based on my (single) father's enormous salary of $35,000 per year, with two kids entering college that year.  Even if I had gotten a partial need-based scholarship, he never would have been able to cover the rest, because the money just wasn't there. Furthermore, even if a kid can get a ful lscholarship, if their socioeconomic status is such that they have to work full time, or even multiple jobs, to get by, college still may not be an option. 

I don't understand why people are allergic to working full-time during college? I did it, carried a full work load, and did very well in school.  DH worked through law school as well.  Was I able to go booze it up every weekend? Nope. For one thing, I didn't have time and for another, I didn't have any money to booze it up.  I am almost positive you worked full-time during college as well, Wendy...clearly, it isn't an ideal situation but..you gotta do what you gotta do...

 

Honestly? Because most just can't. It's the rare student who is good enough at both work and school to pull off both full time with any measure of success.

Most can't or most won't?

In my experience, can't---for multiple reasons.

College students today are just qualitatively different than college students 10 years ago. Most need around a year of remedial work at the university to even be ready for college-level work. As a wider swath of the population goes to college (a good thing!) we have to remember that they're going to have a wider variability of ability levels. Basic math, reading, and writing are a real struggle for many students. A high percentage of Oklahoma college students (especially at non R1 schools) have parental responsibilities as well.  Our Nesties are generally not representative of the average student in terms of academic ability, so we can't really say, "Well I could do that, so anyone could do that!"

Others can't work full time because it's literally not allowed by their programs. This was the case for me in grad school. I would have lost my fellowship had I had any employment at all my first year. After that first year, my advisor would have killed me had I worked more than 25 hours/week. She was pissed that I was working that much.

Finally, some students are in very intense programs. If you're trying to get in to a very competitive grad. program, focusing on working full time may be a good short term strategy, but I'd hate for it to affect students' coursework so much that it damages their prospects long-term.

Here's a UO for you. I don't think it's best for all people to go to college.

I know we're brought up to think that anyone who wants to make something out of him/herself *must* get a four-year degree, but I just don't think it's true. H recently read a book called Shop Class As Soul Craft: An Inquiry Into the Value of Work. It's about the fact that manual labor, or any non-academic-based labor has merit. So many of us these days work to buy or sell ideas; the book is about the value of actually being able to create or fix something with your hands. And that's something you don't necessarily need a college education to do.

My brother wasn't cut out for school. He's a smart kid, but he hated every second of it. He still worked extremely hard to make a good life for himself. I think people from our hometown look down on him a bit for not getting a degree, they say he didn't apply himself, but I don't think we should be forcing everyone down that path. 

Also, I can't resist weighing in on the whole Occupy discussion. The 1% obviously didn't all work for what they have. Some of them no doubt received sizable inheritances in one way or another, and were born into a life of wealth. But someone in their family's history DID work for that money. Is it fair that they were born rich and I wasn't? Probably not. But it's their money. People should be allowed to be billionaires. It's part of what separates us from communism. I worked and put myself through college. I didn't make great grades, but I graduated. I worked through more menial, crappy jobs than I care to remember. I lived in sh*tty apartments with sh*tty roommates and racked up stupid credit card debt, because I was naive and often broke. I learned life lessons, and I learned the value of hard work.

Now I'm married and no longer living paycheck to paycheck. I'm a homeowner, and I have a job that I love, that pays well. I work in a fancy office building downtown, where now I get a bird's eye view of these protesters claiming that THEY are "the 99%." Well I'm sorry, a-holes, but no you're not.

There are very few people out there who, despite their best efforts, can't get by. I believe there should be restricted government assistance for those people, but not for the rest of the unemployed who think they can pick and choose between jobs while staying on unemployment. I have two friends who were unemployed for over a year, and it wasn't because they couldn't get a job, it was because they couldn't get a GOOD job, or a job in their field. I've been lucky enough to stay employed through all of the craziness with the economy, but if I ever did get laid off, I'd be working retail at the mall or dipping ice cream at Braum's after going through a month or two of unemployment. I just don't understand it.

Whoever it was (5th?) who mentioned that the janitor should earn 150% of your salary because he works harder - did you not work hard to get the degree you have that qualified you for your great job? Chances are, you worked as hard for your salary as he does, just in a different way.

I don't disagree with the Occupyers that there are some evil corporations and corrupt CEOs in the U.S., but stop complaining about it and go out and support local businesses, stop racking up more credit card debt than you can pay off, work harder to find a job - any job, and make your life better. Protesting isn't going to magically make the 1% hand over a check. I don't know what this movement thinks it's accomplishing. 

fuzzylogic

For the record, I had merit-based scholarships (though I could have qualified for need-based financial support, if I had needed it) AND I barely worked at all through college. My mom said that being a student was my job, and if I was going to take on a job outside of school, then it should be geared toward my degree. So I taught private music lessons.

There is no way that I could have finished my music degree AND worked full time in a reasonable amount of time. I know you're probably thinking, "Oh, WOW, a music degree is just SO HARD." But it is. The extra rehearsals in the evenings didn't allow for a job then, and my courses were fairly time-consuming outside of class. Then there was all the time spent practicing. Not everyone can work full time and have a full load (I often had 18 hours). To say it is feasible for everyone is incorrect.

And no, I didn't need remediation or anything like that. I was an excellent student who put forth a lot of effort toward her classes. My mother was incredibly supportive, because my sister and I were first-generation college students in our immediate family, and that was what was important to our parents, not that we made fries or waited tables.

We are part of the 99% and work our butts off. 

+PuppyWuppy+

McGillicuddy13:

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

WendyToo:

I also want to note re: scholarships that when I was in high school, I didn't qualify for most need based scholarships, based on my (single) father's enormous salary of $35,000 per year, with two kids entering college that year.  Even if I had gotten a partial need-based scholarship, he never would have been able to cover the rest, because the money just wasn't there. Furthermore, even if a kid can get a ful lscholarship, if their socioeconomic status is such that they have to work full time, or even multiple jobs, to get by, college still may not be an option. 

I don't understand why people are allergic to working full-time during college? I did it, carried a full work load, and did very well in school.  DH worked through law school as well.  Was I able to go booze it up every weekend? Nope. For one thing, I didn't have time and for another, I didn't have any money to booze it up.  I am almost positive you worked full-time during college as well, Wendy...clearly, it isn't an ideal situation but..you gotta do what you gotta do...

 

Honestly? Because most just can't. It's the rare student who is good enough at both work and school to pull off both full time with any measure of success.

Most can't or most won't?

In my experience, can't---for multiple reasons.

College students today are just qualitatively different than college students 10 years ago. Most need around a year of remedial work at the university to even be ready for college-level work. As a wider swath of the population goes to college (a good thing!) we have to remember that they're going to have a wider variability of ability levels. Basic math, reading, and writing are a real struggle for many students. A high percentage of Oklahoma college students (especially at non R1 schools) have parental responsibilities as well.  Our Nesties are generally not representative of the average student in terms of academic ability, so we can't really say, "Well I could do that, so anyone could do that!"

Others can't work full time because it's literally not allowed by their programs. This was the case for me in grad school. I would have lost my fellowship had I had any employment at all my first year. After that first year, my advisor would have killed me had I worked more than 25 hours/week. She was pissed that I was working that much.

Finally, some students are in very intense programs. If you're trying to get in to a very competitive grad. program, focusing on working full time may be a good short term strategy, but I'd hate for it to affect students' coursework so much that it damages their prospects long-term.

Here's a UO for you. I don't think it's best for all people to go to college.

I know we're brought up to think that anyone who wants to make something out of him/herself *must* get a four-year degree, but I just don't think it's true. H recently read a book called Shop Class As Soul Craft: An Inquiry Into the Value of Work. It's about the fact that manual labor, or any non-academic-based labor has merit. So many of us these days work to buy or sell ideas; the book is about the value of actually being able to create or fix something with your hands. And that's something you don't necessarily need a college education to do.

My brother wasn't cut out for school. He's a smart kid, but he hated every second of it. He still worked extremely hard to make a good life for himself. I think people from our hometown look down on him a bit for not getting a degree, they say he didn't apply himself, but I don't think we should be forcing everyone down that path. 

Also, I can't resist weighing in on the whole Occupy discussion. The 1% obviously didn't all work for what they have. Some of them no doubt received sizable inheritances in one way or another, and were born into a life of wealth. But someone in their family's history DID work for that money. Is it fair that they were born rich and I wasn't? Probably not. But it's their money. People should be allowed to be billionaires. It's part of what separates us from communism. I worked and put myself through college. I didn't make great grades, but I graduated. I worked through more menial, crappy jobs than I care to remember. I lived in sh*tty apartments with sh*tty roommates and racked up stupid credit card debt, because I was naive and often broke. I learned life lessons, and I learned the value of hard work.

Now I'm married and no longer living paycheck to paycheck. I'm a homeowner, and I have a job that I love, that pays well. I work in a fancy office building downtown, where now I get a bird's eye view of these protesters claiming that THEY are "the 99%." Well I'm sorry, a-holes, but no you're not.

There are very few people out there who, despite their best efforts, can't get by. I believe there should be restricted government assistance for those people, but not for the rest of the unemployed who think they can pick and choose between jobs while staying on unemployment. I have two friends who were unemployed for over a year, and it wasn't because they couldn't get a job, it was because they couldn't get a GOOD job, or a job in their field. I've been lucky enough to stay employed through all of the craziness with the economy, but if I ever did get laid off, I'd be working retail at the mall or dipping ice cream at Braum's after going through a month or two of unemployment. I just don't understand it.

Whoever it was (5th?) who mentioned that the janitor should earn 150% of your salary because he works harder - did you not work hard to get the degree you have that qualified you for your great job? Chances are, you worked as hard for your salary as he does, just in a different way.

I don't disagree with the Occupyers that there are some evil corporations and corrupt CEOs in the U.S., but stop complaining about it and go out and support local businesses, stop racking up more credit card debt than you can pay off, work harder to find a job - any job, and make your life better. Protesting isn't going to magically make the 1% hand over a check. I don't know what this movement thinks it's accomplishing. 

I absolutely agree with EVERYTHING just said here.

And whenever someone busts out the "a janitor works harder than we do" comment I always chuckle.  As of 3pm today, I will have work a 70 hour week. Granted, I am sitting on my @ss at my desk and not performing manual labor but my job is extremely mental intensive.  That 70 hours doesn't count the phone calls I answer at midnight from my boss because he is in a panic or the emails I answer from distributors on the weekends or the various other ridiculous fires I am expected to put out when I should spending time with my family.  When it is all said and done, my hourly rate isn't so hot either.  But I have health insurance, right, so I guess how hard I work doesn't really matter.

Snowful

McGillicuddy13:

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

5thOfJuly:

+PuppyWuppy+:

WendyToo:

I also want to note re: scholarships that when I was in high school, I didn't qualify for most need based scholarships, based on my (single) father's enormous salary of $35,000 per year, with two kids entering college that year.  Even if I had gotten a partial need-based scholarship, he never would have been able to cover the rest, because the money just wasn't there. Furthermore, even if a kid can get a ful lscholarship, if their socioeconomic status is such that they have to work full time, or even multiple jobs, to get by, college still may not be an option. 

I don't understand why people are allergic to working full-time during college? I did it, carried a full work load, and did very well in school.  DH worked through law school as well.  Was I able to go booze it up every weekend? Nope. For one thing, I didn't have time and for another, I didn't have any money to booze it up.  I am almost positive you worked full-time during college as well, Wendy...clearly, it isn't an ideal situation but..you gotta do what you gotta do...

 

Honestly? Because most just can't. It's the rare student who is good enough at both work and school to pull off both full time with any measure of success.

Most can't or most won't?

In my experience, can't---for multiple reasons.

College students today are just qualitatively different than college students 10 years ago. Most need around a year of remedial work at the university to even be ready for college-level work. As a wider swath of the population goes to college (a good thing!) we have to remember that they're going to have a wider variability of ability levels. Basic math, reading, and writing are a real struggle for many students. A high percentage of Oklahoma college students (especially at non R1 schools) have parental responsibilities as well.  Our Nesties are generally not representative of the average student in terms of academic ability, so we can't really say, "Well I could do that, so anyone could do that!"

Others can't work full time because it's literally not allowed by their programs. This was the case for me in grad school. I would have lost my fellowship had I had any employment at all my first year. After that first year, my advisor would have killed me had I worked more than 25 hours/week. She was pissed that I was working that much.

Finally, some students are in very intense programs. If you're trying to get in to a very competitive grad. program, focusing on working full time may be a good short term strategy, but I'd hate for it to affect students' coursework so much that it damages their prospects long-term.

Here's a UO for you. I don't think it's best for all people to go to college.

I know we're brought up to think that anyone who wants to make something out of him/herself *must* get a four-year degree, but I just don't think it's true. H recently read a book called Shop Class As Soul Craft: An Inquiry Into the Value of Work. It's about the fact that manual labor, or any non-academic-based labor has merit. So many of us these days work to buy or sell ideas; the book is about the value of actually being able to create or fix something with your hands. And that's something you don't necessarily need a college education to do.

My brother wasn't cut out for school. He's a smart kid, but he hated every second of it. He still worked extremely hard to make a good life for himself. I think people from our hometown look down on him a bit for not getting a degree, they say he didn't apply himself, but I don't think we should be forcing everyone down that path. 

Also, I can't resist weighing in on the whole Occupy discussion. The 1% obviously didn't all work for what they have. Some of them no doubt received sizable inheritances in one way or another, and were born into a life of wealth. But someone in their family's history DID work for that money. Is it fair that they were born rich and I wasn't? Probably not. But it's their money. People should be allowed to be billionaires. It's part of what separates us from communism. I worked and put myself through college. I didn't make great grades, but I graduated. I worked through more menial, crappy jobs than I care to remember. I lived in sh*tty apartments with sh*tty roommates and racked up stupid credit card debt, because I was naive and often broke. I learned life lessons, and I learned the value of hard work.

Now I'm married and no longer living paycheck to paycheck. I'm a homeowner, and I have a job that I love, that pays well. I work in a fancy office building downtown, where now I get a bird's eye view of these protesters claiming that THEY are "the 99%." Well I'm sorry, a-holes, but no you're not.

There are very few people out there who, despite their best efforts, can't get by. I believe there should be restricted government assistance for those people, but not for the rest of the unemployed who think they can pick and choose between jobs while staying on unemployment. I have two friends who were unemployed for over a year, and it wasn't because they couldn't get a job, it was because they couldn't get a GOOD job, or a job in their field. I've been lucky enough to stay employed through all of the craziness with the economy, but if I ever did get laid off, I'd be working retail at the mall or dipping ice cream at Braum's after going through a month or two of unemployment. I just don't understand it.

Whoever it was (5th?) who mentioned that the janitor should earn 150% of your salary because he works harder - did you not work hard to get the degree you have that qualified you for your great job? Chances are, you worked as hard for your salary as he does, just in a different way.

I don't disagree with the Occupyers that there are some evil corporations and corrupt CEOs in the U.S., but stop complaining about it and go out and support local businesses, stop racking up more credit card debt than you can pay off, work harder to find a job - any job, and make your life better. Protesting isn't going to magically make the 1% hand over a check. I don't know what this movement thinks it's accomplishing. 

Wow, I totally agree with this, especially the part about how not everyone has to go to college.  When you think about how much some people spend on college alone, and how much their average annual salaries are, it's quite possible you could go to trade school and earn a much better living.  People love to whine and make excuses for not being able to do this or that, but in the end it's all about personal accountability.  Just because you go to college, doesn't necessarily mean you're smarter or better educated than someone who didn't. It doesn't even mean that a college graduate applied himself/herself more.  I know a few folks who do way more self-study and research than I do and they aren't college grads.  They apply themselves to learning and self improvement way more than I do.  In my experience when I was in college and when I worked at a university, I see a lot of students who are wasting their time and money.  They wonder why they can't get jobs when they graduate because they still have NO skills.  I see a TON of that with older adults returning to school to get their MBA or graduate degree.  In the end, they're no better off compared to where they started, except now they have student loans.  Talk about a scam.  I think it's great we have choices about our education in the U.S. (compared to some other countries), I just think we're brainwashed to believe everyone has to do XYZ to be successful, when there are other options out there to earn a decent living. 

 

 

 

 

5thOfJuly

I totally agree that not everyone should go to college---but I do think that high school should prepare almost every student (though there will always be exceptions) to begin college level work. Students who choose to enter higher ed of any kind shouldn't need remedial courses if we can figure out how to improve primary and secondary education.

To be fair, I do need to say that, no, I didn't think grad school was hard. It was a lot of work, sure, but I got to read the books I wanted to read, research and write about topics I enjoyed, and spend my time hanging out with some really cool people. Plus, we got good and tipsy at least twice a week - It was honestly the most fun I've ever had in my entire life.