3855WIN
Well-known member
They HAVE NOT enjoyed the online experience.Absolutely, but I'm sure neither would have wanted to do all 4 years that way.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They HAVE NOT enjoyed the online experience.Absolutely, but I'm sure neither would have wanted to do all 4 years that way.
They HAVE NOT enjoyed the online experience.
I work relatively closely with a couple UMW professors and this seems to be a very good way to get a lot of learning in. It sets students up to be responsible. No cutting class because you didn't feel like it (I'm guilty of that). If you miss you miss a week's worth of classes. The natural resources classes get field time, geology students get an intense course that I'm not sure I'd be able to handle. Our soils crew usually takes students out for a day of "this is what you really need to take from this course" kind of field day. I'd support more of the block scheduling.An argument can be made that the only thing that has skyrocketed in cost in the US more than health care is education. If the discussion is about ROI there is little question any more to me for many disciplines.
One thing that could change is the format of schooling. The UM Western does classes in such a way that one class is taken at a time. 3 hours a day for 3 weeks, and then it is done. I think something like this is interesting, because I think classes need to be more intense and difficult - to force a seriousness upon the students, as well as to focus any failures. Doing poorly in 5 classes over the course of a semester taken concurrently is easier than doing poorly in 5 classes, each seperately. Something like 30% of students drop out after their first year. There could also be some infrastructure savings related to a change in that direction.
I definitely agree that online classes are not as beneficial as classes in person. Many things will always require in person training.
The block system has been around for a while, Colorado College has been on the block for decades? My alma mater, had a fall semester, then a 1 month winter “block”, 4 week 1 course, and then a spring semester.An argument can be made that the only thing that has skyrocketed in cost in the US more than health care is education. If the discussion is about ROI there is little question any more to me for many disciplines.
One thing that could change is the format of schooling. The UM Western does classes in such a way that one class is taken at a time. 3 hours a day for 3 weeks, and then it is done. I think something like this is interesting, because I think classes need to be more intense and difficult - to force a seriousness upon the students, as well as to focus any failures. Doing poorly in 5 classes over the course of a semester taken concurrently is easier than doing poorly in 5 classes, each seperately. Something like 30% of students drop out after their first year. There could also be some infrastructure savings related to a change in that direction.
I definitely agree that online classes are not as beneficial as classes in person. Many things will always require in person training.
Yes! Colleges and Universities are not trade schools. You go to college to get a well rounded education, not just vocational training. Sure there are issues with costs, but let's not lose sight of this point. Going to college for me was life changing. It made me a better writer, a better reader, a better speaker, a better leader, a better thinker, the list goes on and on. I no longer work in the field that I majored in, but I certainly would not be where I am without my education. Was the cost worth it? I guess that's debatable. I think many people directly equate the cost to future earning potential, but I'm not sure that you can quantify the values of higher education. It's not for everyone, but there is certainly value beyond how big your paycheck is.
I have been in IT for about 23 years serving various roles including my current as a senior software architect. Part of my job is conducting technical interviews of candidates. I work for a small company and we do not have a bachelor degree requirement so from time to time I interview candidates that have an associates degree and have hired several and they have all worked out well; in fact, as well as anyone I have hired.I hope you are right. Computer Science is a great example. My son has a genius for working with computers (all self-taught) but will never earn the elusive computer science diploma because he will never be able to pass a calculus class or many of the other degree requirements. Still, I can assure you he is more capable with computers then most who do earn the degree!
Based on the numbers that attend each, that says more about the "High $ Private Schools" than the public schools IMO.I will add . Dave Ramsey said 2 days ago that 68% of CEO's and Presidents of Fortune 500 companies have degrees from State Schools and not High $ Private Schools. Just a thought for Ya!..............BOB!
I will add . Dave Ramsey said 2 days ago that 68% of CEO's and Presidents of Fortune 500 companies have degrees from State Schools and not High $ Private Schools. Just a thought for Ya!..............BOB!
I think that is a bit misleading...
1. Scale
Texas AM - 4 CEOs - Undergrads ~70,000
Dartmouth - 2 CEOs Undergrad ~6,600
Governors
Texas AM - 0
Dartmouth - 5
Harvard - 5
So per capita private schools turn our fortune 500 CEOs at a much higher rate.
2. Attendance of post grad
Exxon Mobile - Darren Woods - Texas AM (undergrad ) - MBA Kellogg school of business Northwestern
This makes the whole list murky, Woods is classified as public attendee... but
3. Classification... University of Michigan, public... kinda?
Academic rankings, funding, etc are just complicated... it's really hard to compare apples to apples
I think if you aggregated all highly paid professionals, MDs, Lawyers, CEO, etc and then looked at the top 10% of earners in each of those professions you would find a very high percentage attended an elite private institution during their career.
The connections and name are the most important part of an "elite" education. I won't argue that a CU legal education isn't as good as a Harvard one , but how many CU grads get supreme court clerkship.
How many MSU business graduates intern at Goldman each year
The point isn't that if you don't follow a specific path you can't achieve a goal. The point is that there is a path that is more statistically likely to allow you to achieve that goal than other paths.
I say learn a good trade then Start your own Buss. You will make double to triple of what the average college grad makes If You are smart and not lazy. And no Student loans to pay off. My Daughter and Hubby both School teachers ,Daughter has masters , And I was making more than them combined. for a long time. But self Buss isn't for everyone. Especially if you have to sell things. Some don't have the Personality for that. I loved it . The key is knowing the buss You are in . I sold all on knowledge not BS .Good luck To all Students.............BOB!
I think this holds true more for non-science degrees. In chemistry people don't really care where you did your undergraduate work, and if you look at every research group in the top research institutions of the country, you will see that they are always filled by students from smaller, less well known schools. People know that lab work and class work are very different, and we have all seen people who got undergraduate degrees from big name institutions flame out for one reason or another. So instead of putting a lot of emphasis on where people did their undergraduate degrees, people put a lot more emphasis on where and with whom they did their graduate or postdoctoral work. This is better, but obviously not perfect.
Off the top of my head, a former MIT chemistry department head grew up in Sheridan, Montana and did their undergrad in Bozeman. The current department chair at UC-Berkeley did their undergrad at Miami University in Ohio. The biggest name in organic chemistry got their undergraduate degree from New York University. Great scientists come from not super well known undergraduate programs.
If there are any high school students reading this thread and thinking about where they want to go for a science degree, I would say look at the state schools. They are a lot less expensive than the elite universities, while offering as good an education. It is also a lot easier to get your hands dirty in a research group, which really allows you to demonstrate your ability to your future letter writers while also giving you an opportunity to figure out if you actually like the work. And from my experience, students who came from the public institutions are usually, though not always, more competitive and better prepared for the harsh realities of grad school than the people who come from smaller liberal arts institutions.