Great article Bob, and one which a lot of people would benefit from reading. Not enough of us realize the impact on each of us when all of us are doing better and not just in this country, but throughout the world.
Soapbox alert: I'm in the midst of re-reading John Dewey's Democracy in Education for the first time in about 50 years and disagree with this statement: "Even among the educated, the quality of their education is dependent on the eliteness of the institutions they attend and their benefactors." The quality of one's education depends first on the aim of the education and second on one's ability and willingness to take advantage of the resources, both innate and provided that one has. What is impacted by the elite nature of the school one attends is the potential economic value of the associations and networks that are developed while enrolled. An attorney who goes to the University of (state of residence) Law School is quite possibly just as well schooled in law as one who goes to Harvard or Yale (even discounting the public faces of those schools as represented in Congress) but lacks the almost automatic entree into government or government-related positions and firms if that is what one seeks. It's a small difference, but one that is very important to some people. This holds true of every profession that I'm aware of; it was my misfortune to work with several graduates of the Culinary Institute of America who not only couldn't cook but couldn't even follow a recipe correctly. That the school took their money and provided a credential despite their demonstrable failure to acquire even the rudimentary skills on offer is an effective critique of the priorities our current education system holds and the impact on the progress we may make as a society.
For me, graduating in 1980 as a Registered Nurse, the statement "the quality of their education is dependent on the eliteness of the institutions they attend and their benefactors" does not apply. I went to a state college while others may have attended very expensive private universities, only to end up with the same job opportunities and same pay with much larger college loans to pay off. There is no way to learn everything in college that needs to be known about becoming an RN, and no matter where we got our education, we all would require more "on the job training" in our subsequent jobs after graduation. At that point, one is subject to the policies maintained by the employer, but there is generally an inflexible standard to be met in nursing.
Perhaps it's the strict licensing standards involved in some professions is what is able to maintain consistency amongst institutions of higher ed?
Sometimes (perhaps often) when I’m writing, I’ll make a statement without thinking about how it could be interpreted differently than I intended. I received an excellent education at a state school (one that I wouldn’t have been able to afford now), but had I attended a more elite school, I think I would have had a totally different experience. When I spoke of “quality of their education,” I was thinking more about the tools, facilities, and staff (professors, administrators, assistants, etc.) and not outcomes.
I attended Newark College of Engineering (which became NJIT while I was there) in a neighborhood that was pretty rough. We had no dorms, and limited student life on campus. Our facilities were spartan, and we were not at the forefront of the technology that was exploding at the time. That would change, though, and my Alma mater is now a technology leader. Nevertheless, we had some incredibly talented students and professors who learned and taught the thought processes we needed to develop.
My college experience was life-changing. Not only was I breaking a ceiling in my family, but I was essentially on my own financially. I became very invested, and left my meager high school experience behind by getting involved in student government and getting good grades. I joined a fraternity and lived near the campus for 3 years. I met my future wife at a mixer, found my first jobs with fraternity alumni, and a few years later, obtained my Professional Engineering License. In an elite school, I may have been lost.
When I started college, PCs weren’t around yet, and handheld calculators were just being introduced. Computer instruction was learning FORTRAN and running basic calculations using stacks of punchcards. The “rich kids” started bringing their fancy calculators to class, able to add, subtract, multiply, and divide with a few keystrokes, while the rest of us ran circles around them with our slide rules.
A few years later, as a young engineer in the pharmaceutical facilities arena, I took advantage of my company’s tuition reimbursement program, and got an MBA. It was in that program that I began to develop my writing, as I had to do a few case studies and write business plans. The college I attended was a good private school with a solid business program, but it was by no means an elite one.
So the quality of my education, measured by outcome, was excellent.
There's no doubt that licensing and CE requirements help maintain performance standards in some professions, but at least as important is the extent to which practitioners in any field accept the need for ongoing development and have learned how to learn. That's what we were supposed to be doing when we went to school, regardless of how much the school charged. As Bob and I have noted, what you bring to the experience can be as important as what the institution provides.
Thanks, Dave. I'll disagree with your disagreement to the extent that those of us who attended the "lesser" schools lacked the amenities, facilities, and social infrastructure that the ivy's had, but to your point, we may have been the better for it, having been more invested.
Great article Bob, and one which a lot of people would benefit from reading. Not enough of us realize the impact on each of us when all of us are doing better and not just in this country, but throughout the world.
Soapbox alert: I'm in the midst of re-reading John Dewey's Democracy in Education for the first time in about 50 years and disagree with this statement: "Even among the educated, the quality of their education is dependent on the eliteness of the institutions they attend and their benefactors." The quality of one's education depends first on the aim of the education and second on one's ability and willingness to take advantage of the resources, both innate and provided that one has. What is impacted by the elite nature of the school one attends is the potential economic value of the associations and networks that are developed while enrolled. An attorney who goes to the University of (state of residence) Law School is quite possibly just as well schooled in law as one who goes to Harvard or Yale (even discounting the public faces of those schools as represented in Congress) but lacks the almost automatic entree into government or government-related positions and firms if that is what one seeks. It's a small difference, but one that is very important to some people. This holds true of every profession that I'm aware of; it was my misfortune to work with several graduates of the Culinary Institute of America who not only couldn't cook but couldn't even follow a recipe correctly. That the school took their money and provided a credential despite their demonstrable failure to acquire even the rudimentary skills on offer is an effective critique of the priorities our current education system holds and the impact on the progress we may make as a society.
For me, graduating in 1980 as a Registered Nurse, the statement "the quality of their education is dependent on the eliteness of the institutions they attend and their benefactors" does not apply. I went to a state college while others may have attended very expensive private universities, only to end up with the same job opportunities and same pay with much larger college loans to pay off. There is no way to learn everything in college that needs to be known about becoming an RN, and no matter where we got our education, we all would require more "on the job training" in our subsequent jobs after graduation. At that point, one is subject to the policies maintained by the employer, but there is generally an inflexible standard to be met in nursing.
Perhaps it's the strict licensing standards involved in some professions is what is able to maintain consistency amongst institutions of higher ed?
Sometimes (perhaps often) when I’m writing, I’ll make a statement without thinking about how it could be interpreted differently than I intended. I received an excellent education at a state school (one that I wouldn’t have been able to afford now), but had I attended a more elite school, I think I would have had a totally different experience. When I spoke of “quality of their education,” I was thinking more about the tools, facilities, and staff (professors, administrators, assistants, etc.) and not outcomes.
I attended Newark College of Engineering (which became NJIT while I was there) in a neighborhood that was pretty rough. We had no dorms, and limited student life on campus. Our facilities were spartan, and we were not at the forefront of the technology that was exploding at the time. That would change, though, and my Alma mater is now a technology leader. Nevertheless, we had some incredibly talented students and professors who learned and taught the thought processes we needed to develop.
My college experience was life-changing. Not only was I breaking a ceiling in my family, but I was essentially on my own financially. I became very invested, and left my meager high school experience behind by getting involved in student government and getting good grades. I joined a fraternity and lived near the campus for 3 years. I met my future wife at a mixer, found my first jobs with fraternity alumni, and a few years later, obtained my Professional Engineering License. In an elite school, I may have been lost.
When I started college, PCs weren’t around yet, and handheld calculators were just being introduced. Computer instruction was learning FORTRAN and running basic calculations using stacks of punchcards. The “rich kids” started bringing their fancy calculators to class, able to add, subtract, multiply, and divide with a few keystrokes, while the rest of us ran circles around them with our slide rules.
A few years later, as a young engineer in the pharmaceutical facilities arena, I took advantage of my company’s tuition reimbursement program, and got an MBA. It was in that program that I began to develop my writing, as I had to do a few case studies and write business plans. The college I attended was a good private school with a solid business program, but it was by no means an elite one.
So the quality of my education, measured by outcome, was excellent.
There's no doubt that licensing and CE requirements help maintain performance standards in some professions, but at least as important is the extent to which practitioners in any field accept the need for ongoing development and have learned how to learn. That's what we were supposed to be doing when we went to school, regardless of how much the school charged. As Bob and I have noted, what you bring to the experience can be as important as what the institution provides.
Thanks, Dave. I'll disagree with your disagreement to the extent that those of us who attended the "lesser" schools lacked the amenities, facilities, and social infrastructure that the ivy's had, but to your point, we may have been the better for it, having been more invested.
I agree as to the social infrastructure and our being better for being more invested.