Why are American high school curriculums so damn easy?

[Amit]

Why aren't kids learning basic tenets of organic chemistry, cell biology, biochemistry, anthropology, sociology, or <whatever> in high school instead of in college? I have never understood this.

Plz explain.

[Illmatic]

getting the kids to pass all the ****ing standardized tests (and get more funding) is the top priority for most schools and everything practical comes second.

[Amit]

amen bruva after watching the wire 4th season i definitely hear what ur sayin

[Illmatic]

1. get kids to pass tests
2. push them off to any 4-year school that will take them
3. ???
4. profit

[BridgeToSolace]

We need to be able to teach our current curriculums better before we go one to more advanced ones.

Assuming that curriculums are the right way to go.

Which they aren't, in their current form. At least not in public schools.

[stevensonmat2]

dude i lived the wire 4th season

I wasn't in Baltimore, but really those situations could have been pulled from my school days.

[g°®†]

Why aren't kids learning basic tenets of organic chemistry, cell biology, biochemistry, anthropology, sociology, or <whatever> in high school instead of in college? I have never understood this.

Plz explain.


Because it is unnecessary.


Anthropology and sociology might be beneficial to know, but that's about it.


Rudimentary mathematics and basic reading skills are all that are necessary nowadays.

[Permanent Solution]

tbh I learned many of those things in high school

that aside, the thing is, that's more education than many people really need, at least the science curriculum is.

ignoring all of the above though, the combination of under-paid-teachers, standardized testing (teaching to tests) and the lack of a good education at any point in the public school system cause this problem.

[Amit]

i guess i'm just frustrated that high school was such a monumental waste of my brainpowers

[SugarCoatedSour]

It maintains that kids from a wealthy more goal-oriented background secure themselves the positions in universities and college. And the rest get to staff the labour market in support. Thus eliminating the middle-class forming a society of well-informed socialites/legacies and grunts with large family networks.

[DBoons Ghost]

i guess i'm just frustrated that the high school I attended was such a monumental waste of my brainpowers

Unless you've attended every single high school in all of the United States and know their curriculum you probably shouldn't make statements like that.

I corrected it for you. :)

[Permanent Solution]

i guess i'm just frustrated that high school was such a monumental waste of my brainpowers

i'm just going to throw this out there and see what you guys think:
high schools should be vocational.

[Kingofdudes]

Magnet programs ftw

[Iskandar]

Why aren't kids learning basic tenets of organic chemistry, cell biology, biochemistry, anthropology, sociology, or <whatever> in high school instead of in college? I have never understood this.

Plz explain.Idk I learned all that but my country's public education system doesn't suck.

[DBoons Ghost]

Amit started this thread to stroke his ego.

Move along folks.. nothing to see here.

[spitfirejunky]

Because it is unnecessary.


Anthropology and sociology might be beneficial to know, but that's about it.


Rudimentary mathematics and basic reading skills are all that are necessary nowadays.

And yet hardly enough to get by in university if you want a less-than-rubbish job. You can't take a strictly what-is-necessary approach to education. Its purpose isn't only to equip you for the job market, it's also to provide intellectual stimulation.

[Amit]

It maintains that kids from a wealthy more goal-oriented background secure themselves the positions in universities and college. And the rest get to staff the labour market in support. Thus eliminating the middle-class forming a society of well-informed socialites/legacies and grunts with large family networks.

this makes sense

and no i didn't make this thread to stroke my ego because i'm not very smart

[DBoons Ghost]

No Amit not very smart at all. Now you're gonna fish? I'm surprised at you! Are you feeling insecure today?

[Dave de Sylvia]

Why aren't kids learning basic tenets of organic chemistry, cell biology, biochemistry, anthropology, sociology, or <whatever> in high school instead of in college? I have never understood this.

Plz explain.
because that **** is lame

[Iskandar]

and no i didn't make this thread to stroke my ego because i'm not very smartYou get by on your good looks and rich parents. And playing the race card.

[Amit]

No Amit not very smart at all. Now you're gonna fish? I'm surprised at you! Are you feeling insecure today?

no i'm just being honest

if i was actually smart i'd be doing quantum physics or biomedical engineering or something

[Permanent Solution]

There are not many genuinely smart posters on these forums.

There's a far greater number who have an overinflated view of their own intelligence.

[Iskandar]

But you're at least smarter than the average bear if you have the mettle to engage in intellectual discussion with we fine folk!

[Dave de Sylvia]

Well look at Vince trying to sound intelligent.

2/5.

[Amit]

But you're at least smarter than the average bear if you have the mettle to engage in intellectual discussion with we fine folk!

looool

[Permanent Solution]

But you're at least smarter than the average bear if you have the mettle to engage in intellectual discussion with we fine folk!
but the average bear is at this point depressingly idiotic
Well look at Vince trying to sound intelligent.

2/5.
wot?

:(

[spitfirejunky]

I don't even know what intelligent means.

[DBoons Ghost]

I couldn't even define intelligent versus smart or wise. I've learned a lot in here plus we share ideas and that's cool. I don't even care about the intellectual or not anymore. That's not why I come in here. Mostly it could be just to insult Steve. Even that's no fun anymore.

[Amit]

lol dboon

i come in here to learn from smokey d and reaganasty (and to laugh at steve)

[Permanent Solution]

I would define intelligence as a measure of the ability to learn rapidly and apply that learning to solving problems.

I would define well-educated to mean knowing a lot of facts.

Wise is more or less well-educated, but well-educated in life as opposed to some school subject.

Smart means you have the ability to be well educated, but doesn't imply intelligence.

[Dave de Sylvia]

but the average bear is at this point depressingly idiotic

wot?

:(
=]

I miss the days when I used to post here.

[Iskandar]

Amit Routh: smarter than the average Indian.

Which isn't hard considering his home country's literacy rate is like 33%!!

[Akira]

i'm just going to throw this out there and see what you guys think:
high schools should be vocational.

I think the idea of starting vocational training early is seen as "giving up" on kids, but I see some merit.

High school curricula are useless. I don't see why kids shouldn't be put on some sort of specialized track earlier.

[Iskandar]

The high school curriculum is intended to be diverse so you have a lot of options.

[DBoons Ghost]

I would define intelligence as a measure of the ability to learn rapidly and apply that learning to solving problems.

I would define well-educated to mean knowing a lot of facts.

Wise is more or less well-educated, but well-educated in life as opposed to some school subject.

Smart means you have the ability to be well educated, but doesn't imply intelligence.

Why thank you Vince I am grateful for the definitions.

[Akira]

But it ends up being so diverse that kids get exposed to a lot but learn little.

[Amit]

The high school curriculum is intended to be diverse so you have a lot of options.

diverse? what the **** this is a lie!

and i went to a really good public high school too :[

[exredhouseresident]

Mainly because as a nation, we'd rather have a high graduation rate instead of a higher average IQ.

[Permanent Solution]

I think the idea of starting vocational training early is seen as "giving up" on kids, but I see some merit.

High school curricula are useless. I don't see why kids shouldn't be put on some sort of specialized track earlier.
How is it giving up? I mean, if vocational means training them to flip burgers, ok, that's giving up I suppose. But if vocational means some people are auto techs, and some people are engineers, I don't see a problem with that. I mean, imagine how far ahead we could jump in fields if we had an extra year or two or curricula devoted to advanced topics in someone's field of study?

Plus it's not like vocational school means abandoning a general education necessarily, I still think Math majors need to learn English well to write technical papers. But maybe instead of learning calculus, the auto tech can learn more applicable math like weights and measurements, and flow. You know? Something that actually interests the students.
Why thank you Vince I am grateful for the definitions.
I was sure you would be. :p

:(

[DBoons Ghost]

diverse? what the **** this is a lie!

and i went to a really good public high school too :[

This is America! You want a top notch education you gotta pay for it.

Nothing is free, boy. Aint no handouts! Gotta go earn it! Why when I was your age, I had to eat dirt for weeks on end and walk 5 miles through a war zone to get to school and when I got there we had to share 3 pencils and 1 sheet of paper that was so thin from all the erasin'

[SugarCoatedSour]

Hey bears are transcendentally smart. They are some of the only animals that trip on mushrooms and don't die a horrible self-inflicted confusing death.

[Akira]

How is it giving up? I mean, if vocational means training them to flip burgers, ok, that's giving up I suppose. But if vocational means some people are auto techs, and some people are engineers, I don't see a problem with that. I mean, imagine how far ahead we could jump in fields if we had an extra year or two or curricula devoted to advanced topics in someone's field of study?

Plus it's not like vocational school means abandoning a general education necessarily, I still think Math majors need to learn English well to write technical papers. But maybe instead of learning calculus, the auto tech can learn more applicable math like weights and measurements, and flow. You know? Something that actually interests the students.

I was sure you would be. :p

:(

You misunderstand. People see problems with vocational education, but I support it.

[Permanent Solution]

This is America! You want a top notch education you gotta pay for it.

Nothing is free, boy. Aint no handouts! Gotta go earn it! Why when I was your age, I had to eat dirt for weeks on end and walk 5 miles through a war zone to get to school and when I got there we had to share 3 pencils and 1 sheet of paper that was so thin from all the erasin'

I was surprised (and amused) when during my visit to Cornell and talking to other kids visiting there, I realized my public high school was providing a better education to me than the people going to $40k private schools were getting.

[griftadan]

i took sociology in both high school and college and i can assure you it was a waste of time

[Iskandar]

Sociology was great wtf are you talking about

[Permanent Solution]

You misunderstand. People see problems with vocational education, but I support it.
Ah, fair enough.

[BridgeToSolace]

Sociology was great wtf are you talking about

Maybe he meant that it was a waste to take it in both?

[SugarCoatedSour]

I think school should be from gr.1-10 after that kids are released to figure what they want. Most will get a job and the ones who don't find their options fulfilling will be much more convinced in furthering their education in which case gr11-12+post ed will not only be vocational but the students will have a good sense of their skills and direction.

[thedriveinfan]

multiple choice is the devil

[elmntrs]

most of the teachers i've had absolutely hate teaching curriculums based around standardized tests

it's sad

[griftadan]

Maybe he meant that it was a waste to take it in both?

no both were just platforms for the instructors to spout their worldview, i'm not opposed to the concept of "sociology" itself

[Permanent Solution]

I think school should be from gr.1-10 after that kids are released to figure what they want. Most will get a job and the ones who don't find their options fulfilling will be much more convinced in furthering their education in which case gr11-12+post ed will not only be vocational but the students will have a good sense of their skills and direction.

If we stopped teaching to standardized tests grades K-8 would be more than ample for a general education, with Grades 9+10 for vocational school in more elementary skill sets, and 9-12 for more advanced jobs, rolling into college where maybe a bachelors would actually be meaningful for most degrees.

[SugarCoatedSour]

If we stopped teaching to standardized tests grades K-8 would be more than ample for a general education, with Grades 9+10 for vocational school in more elementary skill sets, and 9-12 for more advanced jobs, rolling into college where maybe a bachelors would actually be meaningful for most degrees.

Well ya, essentially I'm implying that kids should be free at the age where they can decide with their freewill (however uninformed it is) to gain experience. It can be expected that there would be more delinquent activity and what not but essentially it would initiate a real weeding out process for actual intellects and actual labourers. Not to say labourers are bad, they're necessary and some are physically equipped to do just that. The important thing is that those that choose to gain education will truly want it rather than be pushed along and then dropped off with a debt to a college and not a single idea about how to apply themselves.

[Permanent Solution]

Well ya, essentially I'm implying that kids should be free at the age where they can decide with their freewill (however uninformed it is) to gain experience. It can be expected that there would be more delinquent activity and what not but essentially it would initiate a real weeding out process for actual intellects and actual labourers. Not to say labourers are bad, they're necessary and some are physically equipped to do just that. The important thing is that those that choose to gain education will truly want it rather than be pushed along and then dropped off with a debt to a college and not a single idea about how to apply themselves.

Yeah that sounds good, but I think even laborers should get some vocational education. Like, imagine how useful it might be to explain some introductory/broad overview architecture and structural mechanics to a construction worker might be.

[SugarCoatedSour]

Ya, nothing should be put in the backseat. Like for example there are labour workers that have a complete through-and-through understanding of their job but they get kept in the same place for like 20 years instead of moving onto management or a leadership role, while some subpar worker with desk jockey tendencies can just hop on a computer and get promoted consistently in the same work environment. It all comes down to being clued in, you've gotta know your rights and your options.

[Mr. Ron]

all of those things besides anthropology were offered at my high school.

[Aaron]

It's because teachers cant cane students any more. Put the fear back in them and they'll learn.

[Mr. Ron]

it also has to do with the disparity between school districts.

[Aaron]

It's because people are too accepting of differences. Treat the the same, hit them, and they'll fall in line.

[Mr. Ron]

only stupid people though. Stupid people deserve beatings.

[Aaron]

No. Everyone. But tell them it's cause they're one of the stupid ones.

[Akira]

most of the teachers i've had absolutely hate teaching curriculums based around standardized tests

it's sad

Nah man tests are da best. Too bad No Child Left Behind wasn't more forceful.

[Reaganista]

Why aren't kids learning basic tenets of organic chemistry, cell biology, biochemistry, anthropology, sociology, or <whatever> in high school instead of in college? I have never understood this.

Plz explain.

i wont need to know any of those things at any point in my life maybe that's why

[Amit]

yea but i do!

[Reaganista]

maybe u should go to some specialized school for that kind of thing

[Amit]

yea its prolly called a university or sommat

[gregulus]

no i'm just being honest

if i was actually smart i'd be doing quantum physics or biomedical engineering or something

I'm in the same boat you are. I have a friend who is a whiz at physics but ultimately plans to go to med school because our country inadequately funds the natural sciences. I'll stick to molecular biology, tbh.

[Reaganista]

i promise not to sue u guys too hard ok

[McP3000]

I was surprised (and amused) when during my visit to Cornell and talking to other kids visiting there, I realized my public high school was providing a better education to me than the people going to $40k private schools were getting.
That applies to a lot of colleges, but private high schools are so much better than public ones. Public ones teach you how to pass a test and do blue collar jobs, my high school taught me how to prepare for college.
only stupid people though. Stupid people deserve beatings.
This a thousand times
Nah man tests are da best. Too bad No Child Left Behind wasn't more forceful.
No Child Left Behind :lol:

[Iscariot]

That applies to a lot of colleges, but private high schools are so much better than public ones. Public ones teach you how to pass a test and do blue collar jobs, my high school taught me how to prepare for college.

i don't know a single person from my public high school that had a hard time transitioning to college given that they actually chose to

i think you're trying too hard to validate the tens of thousands of dollars mommy and daddy spent so you could go to school with lots of other white kids

[Dave de Sylvia]

My private school taught me that I'm better than poor people. Also that Jesus loves me.

[McP3000]

i don't know a single person from my public high school that had a hard time transitioning to college given that they actually chose to
Well Houston also has one of the worst public school systems in the country.
But still

i think you're trying too hard to validate the tens of thousands of dollars mommy and daddy spent so you could go to school with lots of other white kids
oh my god you're hilariously cynical and stupid

[McP3000]

My private school taught me that I'm better than poor people. Also that Jesus loves me.
Hilarious. Because thats what private high school is like.

[Iscariot]

i am cynical but i'm def not stupid just very opinionated

and anyway how does calling me stupid prove that your school wasn't like 98% rich white kids

[McP3000]

because it wasnt

40% of the school was on scholarships
Stop being presumptuous and appealing for sympathy.

[Dave de Sylvia]

No seriously my school was run by a religious order. I made the better than poor people bit up but I'm pretty sure it's still true.

[Iscariot]

how do you get the assumption that i'm appealing for sympathy

and wow 40% were on scholarships is that supposed to mean that non-whites need scholarships because i'm pretty sure white kids get them too

[McP3000]

No seriously my school was run by a religious order. I made the better than poor people bit up but I'm pretty sure it's still true.
Its not, has never been true for any of the private schools ive attended or had friends attend.

how do you get the assumption that i'm appealing for sympathy
Talking about how poor people are discriminated against or whatever idk

and wow 40% were on scholarships is that supposed to mean that non-whites need scholarships because i'm pretty sure white kids get them too
this is a two sided argument.
A) you assume that scholarships are only given to non-whites
B) Then you criticize the school for not giving scholarships to non-whites

It doesnt sound like anything more than they fact that you resent people who are born with more money than you. That rich people are inherently bigoted, evil, or something. Its quite perplexing and hypocritical.
You criticize the rich, but we all know you wouldn't willingly give up the chance to become rich yourself. So shut the **** up.

[Iscariot]

Talking about how poor people are discriminated against or whatever idk

that wasn't at all what i was talking about though

i was pointing a tremendous fault in the system of selective educating present in private schooling and the fact that those who pay for it really aren't getting what they pay for their children are getting virtually the same education as they would in a public school just they get to be around a bunch of snobby bros the entire time


this is a two sided argument.
A) you assume that scholarships are only given to non-whites

except in my last post i said the exact opposite so i'm left to ask this:

what?

B) Then you criticize the school for not giving scholarships to non-whites

no i didn't :confused:

It doesnt sound like anything more than they fact that you resent people who are born with more money than you. That rich people are inherently bigoted, evil, or something. Its quite perplexing and hypocritical.
You criticize the rich, but we all know you wouldn't willingly give up the chance to become rich yourself. So shut the **** up.

you have just.... completely blown my mind

[Dave de Sylvia]

Its not, has never been true for any of the private schools ive attended or had friends attend.
Relax, I was trying to hard to fail at being funny.

Seriously, I have no idea what private schools in the US are like. Ours are only really semi-private, funded by middle-class people who benefit from the government's policy of funding all university education.

[McP3000]

that wasn't at all what i was talking about though

i was pointing a tremendous fault in the system of selective educating present in private schooling and the fact that those who pay for it really aren't getting what they pay for their children are getting virtually the same education as they would in a public school just they get to be around a bunch of snobby bros the entire time
I would hardly call what i was being taught on the same level as my local HISD high school
but then again, inner/large city public high schooling is different

except in my last post i said the exact opposite so i'm left to ask this:

what?
If this is the case, then your phrasing was bad

no i didn't :confused:
again, phrasing

you have just.... completely blown my mind
awesome, now tell me how you dont act like you resent people that are wealthier than you

[Iscariot]

I would hardly call what i was being taught on the same level as my local HISD high school
but then again, inner/large city public high schooling is different

ok


If this is the case, then your phrasing was bad


again, phrasing

it makes perfect sense to me

> i make a comment about private schools being primarily occupied by rich white kids

> to refute this statement you say that 40% of the people at your school were there on scholarships

> as the little logic train that could chugs gently down the tracks, this appears as if you're saying, "no it's not all white kids, we have kids on scholarships too"

this comes off as incredibly racist and reinforces my opinion


awesome, now tell me how you dont act like you resent people that are wealthier than you

i don't need to tell you anything i've already made my point painfully obvious

[McP3000]

it makes perfect sense to me

> i make a comment about private schools being primarily occupied by rich white kids
You did

> to refute this statement you say that 40% of the people at your school were there on scholarships
I did

> as the little logic train that could chugs gently down the tracks, this appears as if you're saying, "no it's not all white kids, we have kids on scholarships too"

this comes off as incredibly racist and reinforces my opinion
Okay this is the miscommunication. I was referring more to the wealth factor of the students than their race. You see i didnt quote racial statistics and some bullshit like that.

[Iscariot]

ok then now we're clear

[siva_chair]

Hey bears are transcendentally smart. They are some of the only animals that trip on mushrooms and don't die a horrible self-inflicted confusing death.

Best quote ITT.

My private school taught me that I'm better than poor people. Also that Jesus loves me.

This is a close second Dave. Try harder next time k?

But the message is very important even if it only gets a silver medal.


Also, teaching to tests is what is wrong, IMO.

[Futue te Ipsum]

i probably do more work every week at uni than I did in 5 years of high school
high school is probably piss easy in every nation

[RG560M]

TBH taking all AP (many taught by college professors) has taught me well and gotten me prepared as best possible for college I believe, but I agree - there's little choice in what you get to learn. I'm in my first political science class ever as a freshman in college. I love it, why couldn't they teach this in HS?

So far college has been significantly less work than HS. Neither really challenge me, but I certainly do enjoy college a LOT more - especially as I can take classes in fields that interest me like my poli. sci. and German.

[Amit]

private schools suck tbh

[Rams]

no i'm just being honest

if i was actually smart i'd be doing quantum physics or biomedical engineering or something

If you were actually smart you'd realize BME is a waste of a major. They are left completely unprepared when they enter the job market and get trounced by the ChemE's, MechE's, Phys, and any other science based major that specialized in something.


A decent read about the short-comings of elitist school mentality:
http://www.theamericanscholar.org/su08/elite-deresiewicz.html

[Amit]

no one here thinks that but then again this is where the major was actually created

[Reaganista]

private school kids are good to have around because defeating them is more fulfilling than defeating some kid who also went to public school

[Amit]

yeah tru

[sLarkin20]

All I know is the only thing my high school gave a **** about was the stupd *** FCAT test (Florida Comprehension Assessment Test.)

I can't remember anything ever being mentioned about college, or anything about life after high school. All they seemed to care about was getting the kids to do the best they could on the FCAT.

[RG560M]

Yeah we had CATS testing and until senior year, that's all teachers cared about.

They gave away free iPods to kids who did really well.

[Jude]

I went to a magnet school in Philly that had a reputation of being extremely excellent but idk, I think it went downhill somewhat

not that it wasn't still way better than the rest of Philly's schools

But anyway standardized testing is like the anti-Christ as far as teachers are concerned and I can see why

Anyway Republicans are fags for wanting to give (white Christian) parents money to send kids to private (white Christian) schools instead of improving the schools that poor black kids are stuck in either way and I think we can agree on that

[pppoe]

You know what would be even better? Getting rid of black people.

[sLarkin20]

Great idea!

[BridgeToSolace]

http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/botsnjtt.htm

I <3 Alfie Kohn

[McP3000]

Anyway Republicans are fags for wanting to give (white Christian) parents money to send kids to private (white Christian) schools instead of improving the schools that poor black kids are stuck in either way and I think we can agree on that
there is absolutely no correlation or base for this statement.
Rich people in fact pay more for black students to go to school, if you're going to look at poverty as a racial thing (which is just stupid in the first place).

[BridgeToSolace]

I would like to see a School Voucher thread. Anyone interested?

[McP3000]

School Vouchers?

[BridgeToSolace]

A school voucher, also called an education voucher, is a certificate issued by the government by which parents can pay for the education of their children at a school of their choice, rather than the public school (UK state school) to which they are assigned.

Palin and/or McCain mentioned it in their speech. It essentially bring competition into the mix.

[McP3000]

so its education welfare?

so they arbitrarily give free attendance to any school to poor people arbitrarily?

[BridgeToSolace]

No, every child gets a voucher and their parents get to decide what school they go to.

[McP3000]

including private schools? or is it just for public schools...

[Otherside]

private schools

[McP3000]

private schools
so, essentially, anyone and everyone goes to private schools and doesnt pay.

Am i missing something?

[Reaganista]

it's called privatization

[1338 h4x0r]

Why aren't kids learning basic tenets of organic chemistry, cell biology, biochemistry, anthropology, sociology, or <whatever> in high school instead of in college? I have never understood this.

Plz explain.

*curricula

[Otherside]

so, essentially, anyone and everyone goes to private schools and doesnt pay.

Am i missing something?

it would be an early incentive for the privatization of schools so that people would become familiar with them and in the long run turn them into a big business that would compete with public schools

[McP3000]

it would be an early incentive for the privatization of schools so that people would become familiar with them and in the long run turn them into a big business that would compete with public schools
okay im still really confused. Why would you want schools to become a big business and to compete with public schools? Private schools generally appeal to a different group of people that public schools.
And how would it be a business if everyone gets in for free.

[Reaganista]

it's called privatization

[McP3000]

okay, anyone besides Tway?

[Reaganista]

it's when you take something that used to be public and make it private

[BridgeToSolace]

It's called privatization.

[beso negro]

sociology? wtf that's offered at most schools is it not? I took it in highschool. it was easy aka a waste of time. i should have been taking calculus but at the time i thought a university degree wasn't in my future.

quantum mechanics in highschool would be sweet.

http://www.theamericanscholar.org/su08/elite-deresiewicz.html

rofl i wouldn't have known what to say to the plummer either but not because i'm stuck up but because i'm shy.

[Permanent Solution]

That applies to a lot of colleges, but private high schools are so much better than public ones. Public ones teach you how to pass a test and do blue collar jobs, my high school taught me how to prepare for college.

my high school taught me 90% of my gen ed courses for college as well as a few advanced topics and I was able to enter college with about 70 credits so idk what your big deal with your fancy private school is.

Oh and 90% of my public high school went to a 4 year university directly out of high school.
If you were actually smart you'd realize BME is a waste of a major. They are left completely unprepared when they enter the job market and get trounced by the ChemE's, MechE's, Phys, and any other science based major that specialized in something.

That's really not true at all, the biomedical field is so strapped for innovative minds that anyone intelligent will get their due credit. Now I'll admit, my research group has EEs and biologists only in it, but most of the other groups doing work on big grants have about 1/2 BMEs.
private school kids are good to have around because defeating them is more fulfilling than defeating some kid who also went to public school
quote of the day.
I would like to see a School Voucher thread. Anyone interested?
No.

[beso negro]

okay im still really confused. Why would you want schools to become a big business and to compete with public schools?

why the **** not?

[Amit]

yeah people get sent to all the decent ivy's and research schools like mit and jhu every year from my public school

oh wait i mean we're all doing blu coller jerbz

[Permanent Solution]

yeah i know people at every ivy and other elite west coast schools from my high school/middle school *shrug*

Also that posted article anti-elite schools was silly. Every job I've worked in has been thrilled to have me and other young people working for them because we bring TONS of great ideas and new solutions to old problems. Experience is way overrated. Experience breeds habit and stagnation, while success with little experience is pretty obviously evidence of innovation and uniqueness which I consider much better than stagnation myself.

[Reaganista]

i got a F in calculus in high school and then an A in calculus in college a year later go figure

[McP3000]

probably because you took the class twice

[niobium]

i find it insane that you do not learn about mexican or canadian history on ANY LEVEL. you do not even have to learn the provinces of canada or its capitals

[BridgeToSolace]

I agree. It's RIDICULOUS that we only learn things of import and relevance in the public school system.

[beso negro]

i find it insane that you do not learn about mexican or canadian history on ANY LEVEL. you do not even have to learn the provinces of canada or its capitals

there's no point in learning stuff like that. it's just memorization. we have wikipedia for **** like that now. studying history and geography has become pointless.

[niobium]

you guys confuse me

[beso negro]

high schools should make their curriculum harder. but more history and liberal arts classes don't make the curriculum harder. math, science, and engineering classes are more important.

[BridgeToSolace]

More important for what?

Liberal arts classes can absolutely provide things that mathematics courses cannot.

At least the math courses I was taught.

For example, I never had to discuss morality in the math class.

[Reaganista]

ya guys liberal arts studies are useless you will never get a full scholarship to a top 20 lawl school learning a lot of liberal arts stuff it just wont happen o wait nvm

[beso negro]

More important for what?

Liberal arts classes can absolutely provide things that mathematics courses cannot.

At least the math courses I was taught.

For example, I never had to discuss morality in the math class.

any idiot can have an opinion on morality.

but not everyone can solve differential equations or understand particle physics.

[Reaganista]

o wow particle physics

[BridgeToSolace]

any idiot can have an opinion on morality.

But not every idiot can tell you why your opinion on morality is retarded.

but not everyone can solve differential equations or understand particle physics.

Why would anyone want to do that?

And by anyone, I mean anyone who isn't in a specialized field which requirs that knowledge - a fairly limited number.

Being good at math doesn't make you smarter. Critical thinking does.

[beso negro]

Being good at math doesn't make you smarter. Critical thinking does.

exactly. math/science/engineering will improve your critical thinking more than anything else.

[Reaganista]

no actually philosophy does

[Radiobass81]

there's no point in learning stuff like that. it's just memorization. we have wikipedia for **** like that now. studying history and geography has become pointless.

Hah! Hilarious, buddy.

A very scary thing is, having all the information of the world at your fingertips and still being completely aparted from so much knowledge. That, in turn, brings ignorance, like your jewel of a post.

(Bit off topic) I love how stuck up some people who study hard sciences are, who take everything GIVEN to them as true, and discard any other means from the social sciences as only a placebo.

[niobium]

i still don't see why it's harmful knowing which province quebec lies in. it's kind of like our world we should know where cities are and stuff.

[Kingofdudes]

who take everything GIVEN to them as true

Well we do have proofs! :p

[beso negro]

it's harmful because it's a waste of time studying that when wikipedia exists.

[Radiobass81]

exactly. math/science/engineering will improve your critical thinking more than anything else.

No. Not necessarily in Math, but in Science and Engineering, in the current teaching methods, one is made to believe what they are told in textbooks, even the most far-out theories, without space to question. And that's how it's been for centuries, and those few that go on to test the knowledge are usually looked down upon on society, even if years later their theories are proven right. Currently, even Newton's theories are being looked on again, revising revising revising.

The hard sciences, the way they are thought now, are basically just a DEPOSIT of information which one must see as real, and only in your PhD, when you're investigating, you are given space to question anything.

Another big problem of the sciences (off topic with the above, just mentioning) is that, instead of creating people with all-around knowledge to better understand a whole, they are specializing people (by area), which by itself is not a problem, but the education is slowly changing to where a person studying X thing only LEARNS and KNOWS about that specific thing. So we have some chemists completely out of synch with other important areas, even in the hard sciences.

[niobium]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_physics

what's your point

[Radiobass81]

Well we do have proofs! :p

Yeah, and there was proof for all kinds of theories once seen as truth and now seen as rubbish.

You know spanish? I've got quite a bit of texts (short ones, longest probably being 11 pages) critizicing the current scientific system (in means of teaching, not investigating), and I think all of the texts are written by scientists. Good reads <3.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

it's harmful because it's a waste of time studying that when wikipedia exists.

i agree in that life is an open-book exam, but don't tell me that when you hear something on the news about a mad cow scare in alberta you're going to run up to the computer and look up where alberta is, how that affects you, and why you should care. having even the faintest recollection of a high school history/geography course gives you a much better grounding in the real world than storing your brain on wikipedia.

[StreetlightRock]

there's no point in learning stuff like that. it's just memorization. we have wikipedia for **** like that now. studying history and geography has become pointless.

You're insane. Thinking that the social sciences are simply an unchanging boxes of facts is so outmoded and detached from their practice you have no idea what you're talking about. You're dismissing the very practice of studying the way the world works. (Albeit in a very different way from the hard sciences). It's a disgusting self-imposed ignorance there.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

No. Not necessarily in Math, but in Science and Engineering, in the current teaching methods, one is made to believe what they are told in textbooks, even the most far-out theories, without space to question. And that's how it's been for centuries, and those few that go on to test the knowledge are usually looked down upon on society, even if years later their theories are proven right. Currently, even Newton's theories are being looked on again, revising revising revising.

The hard sciences, the way they are thought now, are basically just a DEPOSIT of information which one must see as real, and only in your PhD, when you're investigating, you are given space to question anything.

Another big problem of the sciences (off topic with the above, just mentioning) is that, instead of creating people with all-around knowledge to better understand a whole, they are specializing people (by area), which by itself is not a problem, but the education is slowly changing to where a person studying X thing only LEARNS and KNOWS about that specific thing. So we have some chemists completely out of synch with other important areas, even in the hard sciences.

wtf are you talking about

i'm an engineering undergrad. if i were go to up to my prof and disagree with a formula, he would take me into his office and do 2 things. first he would show me the research that proved it, then he would start off with a bunch of simple equations we know are true and use them to explain why the formula i disagree with is just an extension of them. if he was unable to do at least one of those things he would sign me up for a master's degree right away and get his name on whatever i publish.

[BridgeToSolace]

Studying geography by itself is fairly stupid. Knowing the different provinces of canada is pointless.

If you're learning about the different dynamics between the provinces, then I guess it's important to know the geography of them.

But otherwise, who cares?

My history class basically consisted of us learning most of the material on our own at home. In class, my teacher would essentially make us discuss and think about what we had read. "Do you consider what the settlers did to the Indians to be genocide?" And when we said "Define genocide" he said "figure it out."

It sounds kind of lazy, maybe, but it's a very rewarding and interactive way of teaching a class.

[niobium]

beso negro doesn't want future generations learning about history because every child has access to the internet

[Radiobass81]

wtf are you talking about

i'm an engineering undergrad. if i were go to up to my prof and disagree with a formula, he would take me into his office and do 2 things. first he would show me the research that proved it, then he would start off with a bunch of simple equations we know are true and use them to explain why the formula i disagree with is just an extension of them. if he was unable to do at least one of those things he would sign me up for a master's degree right away and get his name on whatever i publish.

It was more of an argument to the science classes. I mentioned engineering because of the science classes obliged to take. Not the engineering classes, themselves.

The only problem in engineering is if you're taught a formula and never how it came about, but that doesn't happen, unless a prof doesn't care about that.

[Radiobass81]

Studying geography by itself is fairly stupid. Knowing the different provinces of canada is pointless.

If you're learning about the different dynamics between the provinces, then I guess it's important to know the geography of them.

But otherwise, who cares?

My history class basically consisted of us learning most of the material on our own at home. In class, my teacher would essentially make us discuss and think about what we had read. "Do you consider what the settlers did to the Indians to be genocide?" And when we said "Define genocide" he said "figure it out."

It sounds kind of lazy, maybe, but it's a very rewarding and interactive way of teaching a class.

Geography isn't all just learning the names of regions. Geography is divided into two mayor concentrations. One which is what you described as geography, and the other I completely forgot what was it's concentration point... :-/.

Just mentioning.

[Shell]

*curricula

[beso negro]

The only problem in engineering is if you're taught a formula and never how it came about, but that doesn't happen, unless a prof doesn't care about that.

yea many electrical engineers don't understand the physics behind what they do but thats not really important. they work on an abstraction above maxwell's equations.

[StreetlightRock]

Studying geography by itself is fairly stupid. Knowing the different provinces of canada is pointless.

If you're learning about the different dynamics between the provinces, then I guess it's important to know the geography of them.


Until you realize that geography is so much more than that. Geography departments in Universities are not simply the study of rocks and maps. Think about social geography, cultural geography, geography though time, political geography, all of which see geography as defined not by the structures of the Earth but by what people see within them. Geography today is now just as much a study of culture, anthropology, sociology, history and all them other "oly's" out there.

[gregulus]

No. Not necessarily in Math, but in Science and Engineering, in the current teaching methods, one is made to believe what they are told in textbooks, even the most far-out theories, without space to question. And that's how it's been for centuries, and those few that go on to test the knowledge are usually looked down upon on society, even if years later their theories are proven right. Currently, even Newton's theories are being looked on again, revising revising revising.

The hard sciences, the way they are thought now, are basically just a DEPOSIT of information which one must see as real, and only in your PhD, when you're investigating, you are given space to question anything.

Another big problem of the sciences (off topic with the above, just mentioning) is that, instead of creating people with all-around knowledge to better understand a whole, they are specializing people (by area), which by itself is not a problem, but the education is slowly changing to where a person studying X thing only LEARNS and KNOWS about that specific thing. So we have some chemists completely out of synch with other important areas, even in the hard sciences.
What is there to question regarding lectures in the natural sciences? Most textbooks detailing the natural science explain classic experiments at the forefront of various fundamental concepts within the field or explain the derivations from which formulas used to explain phenomena arose. It seems a lot easier to question something in a ethics class than a class where everything you're being taught, especially in the introductory level, is been rigorously tested.

That said, I think philosophy is an important subject to be taught, as it is easier to teach critical thinking via philosophy than it is throwing 4 or 5 equations at them and then expecting them to solve a certain problem. Philosophy is also rather interesting.

[Radiobass81]

What is there to question regarding lectures in the natural sciences? Most textbooks detailing the natural science explain classic experiments at the forefront of various fundamental concepts within the field or explain the derivations from which formulas used to explain phenomena arose. It seems a lot easier to question something in a ethics class than a class where everything you're being taught, especially in the introductory level, is been rigorously tested.

That said, I think philosophy is an important subject to be taught, as it is easier to teach critical thinking via philosophy than it is throwing 4 or 5 equations at them and then expecting them to solve a certain problem. Philosophy is also rather interesting.

The thing is, critical thinking is a must in Social Sciences and Humanities. Yes, it's easier to question something in ethics, but that's exactly the point. One isn't taught to question enough in Sciences. And again, even if they are the most recent discoverings, it still doesn't make them truth. That could change once someone else makes another discovery.

EDIT: By the way, thanks, Shell <3.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

The only problem in engineering is if you're taught a formula and never how it came about, but that doesn't happen, unless a prof doesn't care about that.

It does occasionally happen when the formula is beyond what students at the undergrad level can understand. There are a few matrix computations that we did in structural engineering last year that the prof explained in words instead of equations (so we could understand why they work without having to spend 6 months proving it), and my fluid dynamics course relied on so many formulas that he would only prove them if we asked him to, but for the most part engineering and all forms of math can be proven on-the-spot if you don't believe them.

I don't know what other sciences you were criticizing, but I'd imagine that if you didn't believe something your organic chemistry teacher said s/he'd be willing to show you the relevant research that proves it too.

[Radiobass81]

It does occasionally happen when the formula is beyond what students at the undergrad level can understand. There are a few matrix computations that we did in structural engineering last year that the prof explained in words instead of equations (so we could understand why they work without having to spend 6 months proving it), and my fluid dynamics course relied on so many formulas that he would only prove them if we asked him to, but for the most part engineering and all forms of math can be proven on-the-spot if you don't believe them.

I don't know what other sciences you were criticizing, but I'd imagine that if you didn't believe something your organic chemistry teacher said s/he'd be willing to show you the relevant research that proves it too.

It's mostly the most 'out-there' parts of any science. what I'm refering to. And again, they can show me how much research is available, in a few years, new 'discoveries' may prove them to be completely farfetched.

Not to mention, trying to find the 'order' to the world assumes that the world has order, but that's another thing completely :p.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

It's mostly the most 'out-there' parts of any science. what I'm refering to. And again, they can show me how much research is available, in a few years, new 'discoveries' may prove them to be completely farfetched.

Not to mention, trying to find the 'order' to the world assumes that the world has order, but that's another thing completely :p.

Sure, but a good prof will not teach theoretical conjecture as fact. They might tell you what the 5 smartest guys on the planet have theorized in their basement, and they might say it's likely, but they won't say THIS IS FACT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY IT MAY BE WRONG unless the science behind it was very sloppy.

The part I find most impressive is how often theoretical models of the "far-out sciences" as you call them turn out to be right. It boggles my mind that people can sit down with a bunch of equations, come up with a new equation that only works with 11 variables, conclude that the universe is an 11-dimensional set of strings, and that so far it seems to be right.

[Radiobass81]

Sure, but a good prof will not teach theoretical conjecture as fact. They might tell you what the 5 smartest guys on the planet have theorized in their basement, and they might say it's likely, but they won't say THIS IS FACT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY IT MAY BE WRONG unless the science behind it was very sloppy.

The part I find most impressive is how often theoretical models of the "far-out sciences" as you call them turn out to be right. It boggles my mind that people can sit down with a bunch of equations, come up with a new equation that only works with 11 variables, conclude that the universe is an 11-dimensional set of strings, and that so far it seems to be right.

The 'so far' in the last line of the second paragraph is the most imporant part of your post, from my point of view.

[spitfirejunky]

there's no point in learning stuff like that. it's just memorization. we have wikipedia for **** like that now. studying history and geography has become pointless.

If you truly believe this then you don't know anything about history and geography.

[gregulus]

The 'so far' in the last line of the second paragraph is the most imporant part of your post, from my point of view.

No one teaches string theory as fact.

[Radiobass81]

No one teaches string theory as fact.

Yes but you can't deny that many of theories are given (or taken) as facts by most profs (or students). Ever read Freire (started reading him this semester in most classes)? Most science classes go along with what he calls Bancary Education (not sure if the english translation is actually Bancary or not, but it's 'Educación Bancaria' in spanish).

[beso negro]

If you truly believe this then you don't know anything about history and geography.

why do you care bro you're in math/engineering just like me :thumb:

[Radiobass81]

why do you care bro you're in math/engineering just like me :thumb:

Doesn't mean you should treat other valuable concentrations as useless.

He's simply not ignorant.

[gregulus]

Yes but you can't deny that many of theories are given (or taken) as facts by most profs (or students). Ever read Freire (started reading him this semester in most classes)? Most science classes go along with what he calls Bancary Education (not sure if the english translation is actually Bancary or not, but it's 'Educación Bancaria' in spanish).

Many scientific theories have a lot more credence than you are giving them credit for. It's not as if a theory is just proposed and taken as fact. I don't think you understand how the scientific community works.

[Already_Taken]

yea many electrical engineers don't understand the physics behind what they do but thats not really important. they work on an abstraction above maxwell's equations.

how are you saying this???? Physics is the first things you learn in any engineering degree.

in order to know the workings of something today, you must study HISTORY to find where it came from and how it got that way. if you think electrical engineers just mindlessly do their job then you sir, are an idiot.

[beso negro]

Doesn't mean you should treat other valuable concentrations as useless.

He's simply not ignorant.

well they aren't nearly as valuable or important as our fields

how are you saying this???? Physics is the first things you learn in any engineering degree.

yea but its an abstraction below electrical engineering. you use kirchoffs rules or other shortcuts instead of maxwell's equations.

[Already_Taken]

lol go ahead and live that way. some people enjoy learning.

[beso negro]

rofl i study more than most. mine is just more concentrated.

[Radiobass81]

Many scientific theories have a lot more credence than you are giving them credit for. It's not as if a theory is just proposed and taken as fact. I don't think you understand how the scientific community works.

Rereading my posts, I am generalizing a bit too much, but you get my point, right?

And it's not neccesarily the scientific community per se, it's the way many are taught, but I getcha.

[Radiobass81]

rofl i study more than most. mine is just more concentrated.

The more you concentrate in X area, the more ignorant you're actually becoming, as you're only looking at problems through one point of view. One should have atleast basic knowledge from a variety or fields. Hell, it's called a university because of universal knowlede.

Ever read (forgive the possible mistake in my title translation) the The Trandsdisciplinary Letter? Or Doris Lessing's speech when she won an Award in Austria in 2001 (great two-page speech regarding current education)?

[Already_Taken]

rofl i study more than most. mine is just more concentrated.

i didn't question your studying, just your belief that being blatantly ignorant is a perfectly acceptable standard to hold yourself to.

[beso negro]

Ever read (forgive the possible mistake in my title translation) the The Trandsdisciplinary Letter? Or Doris Lessing's speech when she won an Award in Austria in 2001 (great two-page speech regarding current education)?

nope

i didn't question your studying, just your belief that being blatantly ignorant is a perfectly acceptable standard to hold yourself to.

so i don't know the provinces of canada.. boo hoo.

if i need to know, to wikipedia i go.

The current provinces are Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, and Saskatchewan. The three territories are Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and Yukon.

[spitfirejunky]

why do you care bro you're in math/engineering just like me :thumb:

Didn't mean to come off as abrasive. History and geography have methodologies as intricate as applied sciences, and the fact that they seem to be less in demand on the job market does not diminish their intellectual value.

Knowing the location of a province in Canada is a fact as consequential in geography as knowing where a motherboard is in a computer. The aspect of geography you're taking swings at doesn't define the entire discipline and doesn't account for its importance in military strategy, economics, etc.

[niobium]

i used the province example because two canadians i've talked to have had to learn the us states and their capitals

[Reaganista]

if i need to know anything about math or physics i can have an indian or chinaman tell me about it for a fraction of the opportunity cost it would cost me to learn that garbage myself

[Already_Taken]

so i don't know the provinces of canada.. boo hoo.

if i need to know, to wikipedia i go.

The current provinces are Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, and Saskatchewan. The three territories are Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and Yukon.

well... that is asinine.

[Permanent Solution]

As a graduate engineering student, I support knowing the social sciences and applying them because at least in this era science will not be replaced by engineering in solving all problems.

[beso negro]

if i need to know anything about math or physics i can have an indian or chinaman tell me about it for a fraction of the opportunity cost it would cost me to learn that garbage myself

lol garbage.

social sciences are nice but sorry i want to make a lot of money in my life no time for history books. too many programming, engineering, physics, and math books to plow through first.

[Radiobass81]

lol garbage.

social sciences are nice but sorry i want to make a lot of money in my life no time for history books. too many programming, engineering, physics, and math books to plow through first.

Ah, that explains a lot. No wonder.

[Permanent Solution]

tbh i will make more money as an engineer with a broad background versus a highly specialized one.

we out pay some specialized engineer to do all the brute work but the diversely educated engineers are the ones who make bank because they actually solve the problems, the best engineers are paid less because all they do is implement the solution.

[Reaganista]

lol garbage.

social sciences are nice but sorry i want to make a lot of money in my life no time for history books. too many programming, engineering, physics, and math books to plow through first.

lol your making money argument fails on me
especially considering that i was making an economic argument for why it would be a waste of money for me to learn that stuff when the chinese will just do it for me

[Amit]

beso negro you don't understand a lot do you

if you are a business/econ major you will make far more moneyies than just about any engineer can even dream of making

[gregulus]

This thread is rather silly. Arguing for the superiority of one branch of study over another is arbitrary and pointless.

if you are a business/econ major you will make far more moneyies than just about any engineer can even dream of making
This is true. People study what they are interested in, most of the time. If you're going into a field simply because you want to make money and don't actually have any desire to do what you are trained to do, then you have failed.

[Reaganista]

that's only true because engineers are so ridiculously unimaginative they can't dream of making anything besides what they actually make

This thread is rather silly. Arguing for the superiority of one branch of study over another is arbitrary and pointless.
im arguing that im better at a branch that it's better to be better at
it's a different argument

[Permanent Solution]

beso negro you don't understand a lot do you

if you are a business/econ major you will make far more moneyies than just about any engineer can even dream of making

i semi-disagree with this because my point was sort of that a business-minded engineer is huge bank.

[gregulus]

im arguing that im better at a branch that it's better to be better at
it's a different argument

It might be better to be better at for people who are better at that branch.

[beso negro]

if you are a business/econ major you will make far more moneyies than just about any engineer can even dream of making

rofl business majors. sure a few will make more money but not because they have the degree just because they have good communication and people skills, determination, and some luck. any idiot can get the business degree.

econ majors yea will make good money. my bro is an econ major though and i dont see him making it in the real world.

not to mention starting salary for EE, CS, Physics is more than business and econ.

[Reaganista]

let's all argue about how much money we think we'll make

It might be better to be better at for people who are better at that branch.
no it's objectively better

[gregulus]

let's all argue about how much money we think we'll make


no it's objectively better

no tway. engineers and scientists are important people too.

[Dave de Sylvia]

rofl business majors. sure a few will make more money but not because they have the degree just because they have good communication and people skills, determination, and some luck. any idiot can get the business degree.

econ majors yea will make good money. my bro is an econ major though and i dont see him making it in the real world.

not to mention starting salary for EE, CS, Physics is more than business and econ.
do you wikipedia anything before you speak moronically on the subject

[Reaganista]

i mean better in the sense that i win not better in the sense that im more important

[beso negro]

tway thinks math and physics is gay. he should forfeit all his electronics.

[gregulus]

i mean better in the sense that i win not better in the sense that im more important

oh ok. that's cool.

[Reaganista]

beso negro think he's smart he should be laughed at

oh ok. that's cool
ya scientists are potentially way more important depending on what they research and how good they are but theyre also martyrs so kinda a raw deal imo

[beso negro]

do you wikipedia anything before you speak moronically on the subject

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/worklife/04/28/cb.salaries.grads/index.html

???

[Reaganista]

undergrad degrees o wow

[gregulus]

beso negro think he's smart he should be laughed at


ya scientists are potentially way more important depending on what they research and how good they are but theyre also martyrs so kinda a raw deal imo
this peaked my interests. how are they martyrs?

[Permanent Solution]

undergrad degrees o wow

not everyone is as elite as tway so that they can get graduate degrees

[Reaganista]

anybody who's smart enough to be an actually good scientist couldve probably chosen bschool law school or med school instead and all of those would lead to a better life imo for the scientist although they could potentially do a lot less good (depending on areas of specialty and whatnot since you can do good things in any of those fields really)

[gregulus]

anybody who's smart enough to be an actually good scientist couldve probably chosen bschool law school or med school instead and all of those would lead to a better life imo for the scientist although they could potentially do a lot less good (depending on areas of specialty and whatnot since you can do good things in any of those fields really)

yeah true. i'm glad i want to be a scientist!



but really, i have no desire to do anything else.

[Reaganista]

that's a bummer

[Dave de Sylvia]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/worklife/04/28/cb.salaries.grads/index.html

???
yeah believe it or not most people make more than starting salary

[Reaganista]

since ive graduated ive made $0 cash money liberal arts degrees suck!

[Permanent Solution]

anybody who's smart enough to be an actually good scientist couldve probably chosen bschool law school or med school instead and all of those would lead to a better life imo for the scientist although they could potentially do a lot less good (depending on areas of specialty and whatnot since you can do good things in any of those fields really)

true but a lot of the smartest people care less about money than they do about discovery and research and such and so they do what they want because they enjoy it

[Dave de Sylvia]

what is the starting salary for liberal arts??

[Reaganista]

ya that's like giving your life for a cause
like a martyr does
bit of a stretch maybe but im gonna stick to it

[Permanent Solution]

ya that's like giving your life for a cause
like a martyr does
bit of a stretch maybe but im gonna stick to it

if that makes you a martyr then wouldn't anyone who does what they want to do be a martyr?

[Reaganista]

no im doing wat i want im not a martyr

[Permanent Solution]

y not? ur giving ur life to a cause (lawyering iirc)

[Reaganista]

im not giving my life to a cause im tryina get paid son

[gregulus]

im not giving my life to a cause im tryina get paid son

to get paid don't have to make more than $0 since you've graduated?

[Reaganista]

im tryna get paid im not gettin paid

[gregulus]

im tryna get paid im not gettin paid

i hope your tryna works out for you v. v. soon.

[Permanent Solution]

im not giving my life to a cause im tryina get paid son

but scientists are paid well, just not as well as some other professions.

[Reaganista]

well my school has a 0% failure rate for a while so as long as i dont go insane it probably will

unless im insane already :(

but scientists are paid well, just not as well as some other professions.
cash rules everything around me cream get the money dolla dolla bill yall

[Permanent Solution]

tway is def insane

but yeh i see cool bro

[gregulus]

well my school has a 0% failure rate for a while so as long as i dont go insane it probably will

unless im insane already :(


cash rules everything around me cream get the money dolla dolla bill yall
where do you go to school with a 0% failure rate?

[Reaganista]

i must confess im being disingenuous i know you'll find this hard to believe
where do you go to school with a 0% failure rate?
gw law but most of the top 25 law schools never fail anyone that's why they say the curve saves me people than it hurts

[gregulus]

i must confess im being disingenuous i know you'll find this hard to believe

gw law but most of the top 25 law schools never fail anyone that's why they say the curve saves me people than it hurts

oh. you can kick it with poster der ubermensch at gwu.

[niobium]

you can made a decent living doing just about any profession if you have talent and can adapt

quick somebody give me an example to refute me

[Rams]

you can made a decent living doing just about any profession if you have talent and can adapt

quick somebody give me an example to refute me

Peace Corps

[Reaganista]

well some require more talent than others
for example if u want to make a living as a plate spinner u had better be just about the best in the world at it or no one will pay to see
you can be a just ok accountant and make a living

[niobium]

well true but that's pretty unrealistic

but then again they make great youtube fodder

[beso negro]

anybody who's smart enough to be an actually good scientist couldve probably chosen bschool law school or med school instead and all of those would lead to a better life imo for the scientist although they could potentially do a lot less good (depending on areas of specialty and whatnot since you can do good things in any of those fields really)

what are you talking about. most scientists have fun. see Brian Cox.

and since when does being a lawyer automatically make you a millionaire?

and scientists make just as much as doctors for the most part.

what is the starting salary for liberal arts??

30K

yeah believe it or not most people make more than starting salary

ok so what does that have to do with anything.

[Reaganista]

what are you talking about. most scientists have fun. see Brian Cox.

no

and since when does being a lawyer automatically make you a millionaire?

not wat i said

and scientists make just as much as doctors for the most part.
no lol

[oathfbass]

What is there to question regarding lectures in the natural sciences? Most textbooks detailing the natural science explain classic experiments at the forefront of various fundamental concepts within the field or explain the derivations from which formulas used to explain phenomena arose. It seems a lot easier to question something in a ethics class than a class where everything you're being taught, especially in the introductory level, is been rigorously tested.

That said, I think philosophy is an important subject to be taught, as it is easier to teach critical thinking via philosophy than it is throwing 4 or 5 equations at them and then expecting them to solve a certain problem. Philosophy is also rather interesting.

This right here is why I love humanities and dont really enjoy sciences/math.

[RG560M]

I wouldn't complain about working the post office, they pay as much as teachers here and all you need is a bachelors degree, you get all holidays off and good hours.

...And TBH when you can get a 2 bedroom for 600$ a month that's good, so that's prob what I'll do if I don't go for law.

[gregulus]

This right here is why I love humanities and dont really enjoy sciences/math.

What?

[Dave de Sylvia]

ok so what does that have to do with anything.
Because when people talk about how much a profession pays they generally don't mean the basic starting salary. For instance, the guy who employs the engineer probably makes more than the engineer. He probably has a business degree of some sort too, or maybe he just wings it like most successful business owners apparently do.

[Permanent Solution]

Because when people talk about how much a profession pays they generally don't mean the basic starting salary. For instance, the guy who employs the engineer probably makes more than the engineer. He probably has a business degree of some sort too, or maybe he just wings it like most successful business owners apparently do.
A lot of engineering managers hold engineering degrees and MBAs. Technical management is v. important in the engineering field because the boss needs to have an idea of what his employees do. Even a lot of CEOs in tech companies come from an engineering background.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Yeah, engineers have quite good starting salaries, but you don't make the big bucks nearly as often as someone in business who started off at half the salary you did.

edit: and engineers with MBA's own, urrite

[Radiobass81]

Because when people talk about how much a profession pays they generally don't mean the basic starting salary. For instance, the guy who employs the engineer probably makes more than the engineer. He probably has a business degree of some sort too, or maybe he just wings it like most successful business owners apparently do.

Isn't that the point of Industrial Engineers, though?

[Dave de Sylvia]

A lot of engineering managers hold engineering degrees and MBAs. Technical management is v. important in the engineering field because the boss needs to have an idea of what his employees do. Even a lot of CEOs in tech companies come from an engineering background.
Well yeah, but I'm just arguing against his contention that engineers make more money than business grads because their starting salary is higher.

[Permanent Solution]

Well yeah, but I'm just arguing against his contention that engineers make more money than business grads because their starting salary is higher.
That's completely fair, but a lot of people also assume engineers have a narrow salary range because they can only go so far in a company, but in reality a lot of engineering companies are run by engineers top to bottom.

[Reaganista]

their starting salary isnt higher tho

[Permanent Solution]

average starting salary for engineering bachelors is higher than average starting salary for business.

[808]

Permanent Solution, what do you do and how much money do you make?

I'm still trying to figure out what I want to do.

[Permanent Solution]

i'm an electrical engineering grad student and i've only held intern positions so far but this summer I was making $25/hour. With my masters I expect to make over $30/hour starting.

[808]

I ****ing hate you.

Guess I'm studying to be an electrical engineer.

[Reaganista]

lol

[beso negro]

the guy who employs the engineer probably makes more than the engineer.

yea and i'm sure the employer is or was an engineer of some sort.

they work their way up a company just like business majors would.

[Dave de Sylvia]

That's a ridiculous assumption to make.

[mph4ever]

the curriculums are so damn easy because there are so many average american kids that need to get to third level to make the system pay so the cream get educated and then theaverage kids end up in average jobs evermore

[Permanent Solution]

That's a ridiculous assumption to make.

It's partly true. Some engineers do move from engineering to management and continue to climb the corporate ladder.

Most engineers peak out at some level of technical proficiency (based on their intelligence/competence) and stay there till they retire.

I've known engineers who were with a company 30+ years and were at the level I expected to be at after 5 so yeah.

[Dave de Sylvia]

It's partly true in the way that most ridiculous things probably have some minor element of truth behind all the nonsense.

[mph4ever]

average starting salary for engineering bachelors is higher than average starting salary for business.

that is only because they are productive from the off, management experience comes with years and years on the job.

experts at engineering seldom make good managers. they are individual contributors, normally part of a team, sometimes, at best, tey get to lead

[Permanent Solution]

Well, probably a little more than that but yes I mostly agree.

edit: to post above: plz read like every recent post I've made because I dispute none of that.

[mph4ever]

edit: to post above: plz read like every recent post I've made because I dispute none of that.

just reinforcing

[wartomods]

Because it is unnecessary.


Anthropology and sociology might be beneficial to know, but that's about it.


Rudimentary mathematics and basic reading skills are all that are necessary nowadays.

lol, ya sure

[oathfbass]

What?


Humanities are more subjective compared to math/science where there is usually a definite answer.

[SugarCoatedSour]

Can I say something?