Thoughts On College And Tuition?

[PhuturePriest]

College is an amesome investment but like any investing it has to be done correctly.

Often times I see people on this phorum wanting to go to a private Catholic college and get a bachelors in theology.

That's a recipe for disaster. Unless you are planning to continue on the academic track to a doctorate or enter the priesthood, the Church has 0 unmet need for people with bachelors degrees in theology. None. Zippo.

It's not needed to evangelize and in fact it's a barrier to evangelization if it keeps you from entering religious life or having a happy Domestic Church because of all the debt.

Everything you will learn in Dr Scott Hahn's undergrad classroom (or at Ave Maria or Christendom for instance) can be learned by opening books on the weekend.

 

My sister went to Benedictine and got a degree in theology and youth ministry. In one of her classes, one of her required books was Coming Soon: Unlocking the Book of Revelation by Michael Barber. She literally paid $33,000 that year to hear a guy relay the information out of a $16 book.

[Credo in Deum]

http://youtu.be/eiRGRvE_Wqg

[PhuturePriest]

But those people turn out to be the Rousseau's of this world. And Rousseau was a moron. Not only is there no replacing, there's really no comparison. I'm tired of dealing with people thinking they're experts because they've read and think they understand what they're reading. 

 

Both narrow-minded and wrong. Stephen Ray has never taken one college class in his life. He is also a leading expert on apologetics and tour guides in the Middle East, and is one of the most sought-after apologists in the world. He learned everything he knows simply by going to the library.

[Poorly Catechized Convert]

I don't like the idea that you need a practical major (usually defined as a STEM field) to make college worth it. English, poli
sci, economics, and similar degrees can be made to work. Sure they don't lead directly into a specific career, but if someone worked hard and took internships they will be able to fine a decent job. Also, people who study these fields are usually not doing so because they aren't good enough for a STEM feild, but because these subjects appeal to how they think and are something they're willing to make work. Someone who majored in a STEM field just because it was practical, but hated the subject, won't be able to compete with the majority of people in the majors -- despite doing good in class. Furthermore, some people aren't suited for going into a trade and wouldn't be successful in such a career. In these cases it makes sense to get a liberal arts degree and work at gaining experience to be employable after college. That is a viable route to go.

[CrossCuT]

The majority of my science classes required me to purchase a$200 text book which the teachers never used. They typically taught off their power point slids and use the book as a reference or "If you want additional info go to the text book,  but I will only test you on the slides."

[Basilisa Marie]

But those people turn out to be the Rousseau's of this world. And Rousseau was a moron. Not only is there no replacing, there's really no comparison. I'm tired of dealing with people thinking they're experts because they've read and think they understand what they're reading. 

 

Oh I agree completely, which is why I said that nothing can replace a classroom setting (learning to think, research, etc). :)  A classroom has a certain capacity to teach you how wrong you are that self-study really lacks. Even when you think you're just dealing with facts and knowledge, there's a certain level of wisdom and understanding that can only be passed on through learning from other people, ideally in a flesh-and-blood expert, but possibly from a good book. 

 

Either way, people need guidance.  I wouldn't trade my undergraduate or graduate studies for anything, they're huge forces in determining who I am today. But I don't expect them to get me a job. I expect them to get me over one of many hurdles on the path towards getting a job. 

 

There's got to be a careful balance between pragmatism and idealism. The danger in being too pragmatic is that you lose the real sense of what a liberal education means, and in some ways that calls into question some of the most important ideas about what it means to be a citizen of the Western World. You reduce education to simple memorization of facts. It's like eliminating the Holy Spirit's gifts of wisdom and understanding in favor of knowledge. The danger in ignoring practical considerations is that you end up with kids who think that a job will just be handed to them, that everything will work out in the end simply because they can't really feel the debt until later. And to be fair, no generation has really taken on debt like this for school before, so there weren't a whole lot of models to learn from. 

[PhuturePriest]

Oh I agree completely, which is why I said that nothing can replace a classroom setting (learning to think, research, etc). :)  A classroom has a certain capacity to teach you how wrong you are that self-study really lacks. Even when you think you're just dealing with facts and knowledge, there's a certain level of wisdom and understanding that can only be passed on through learning from other people, ideally in a flesh-and-blood expert, but possibly from a good book. 

 

Either way, people need guidance.  I wouldn't trade my undergraduate or graduate studies for anything, they're huge forces in determining who I am today. But I don't expect them to get me a job. I expect them to get me over one of many hurdles on the path towards getting a job. 

 

There's got to be a careful balance between pragmatism and idealism. The danger in being too pragmatic is that you lose the real sense of what a liberal education means, and in some ways that calls into question some of the most important ideas about what it means to be a citizen of the Western World. You reduce education to simple memorization of facts. It's like eliminating the Holy Spirit's gifts of wisdom and understanding in favor of knowledge. The danger in ignoring practical considerations is that you end up with kids who think that a job will just be handed to them, that everything will work out in the end simply because they can't really feel the debt until later. And to be fair, no generation has really taken on debt like this for school before, so there weren't a whole lot of models to learn from. 

 

 

Both narrow-minded and wrong. Stephen Ray has never taken one college class in his life. He is also a leading expert on apologetics and tour guides in the Middle East, and is one of the most sought-after apologists in the world. He learned everything he knows simply by going to the library.

[blazeingstar]

Both narrow-minded and wrong. Stephen Ray has never taken one college class in his life. He is also a leading expert on apologetics and tour guides in the Middle East, and is one of the most sought-after apologists in the world. He learned everything he knows simply by going to the library.

 

Not really.  Bill Gates dropped out of the Ivy leagues, so did Zukerberg and so many of those on the fortune 500 list.  There can be anomalies.  There can be ridiculously talented autodidacts who do learn.   To post one or two people would be like trying to say that Julliard is unnecessary because Mozart didn't go to college.

 

Not only that, but I'm sure that he benefited from college level skills acquired by others. Unless his books are 100% divine revelation.

 

Although, I think you're actually wrong on the never taken one college class. Maybe not for a grade, but I imagine as a Research Fellow in theology, he's probably very familiar with the inside of a classroom.

 

We should be always learning, we should strive to learn.

[PhuturePriest]

Not really.  Bill Gates dropped out of the Ivy leagues, so did Zukerberg and so many of those on the fortune 500 list.  There can be anomalies.  There can be ridiculously talented autodidacts who do learn.   To post one or two people would be like trying to say that Julliard is unnecessary because Mozart didn't go to college.

 

Not only that, but I'm sure that he benefited from college level skills acquired by others. Unless his books are 100% divine revelation.

 

Although, I think you're actually wrong on the never taken one college class. Maybe not for a grade, but I imagine as a Research Fellow in theology, he's probably very familiar with the inside of a classroom.

 

We should be always learning, we should strive to learn.

 

I've spoken to him in person and personally know him. He said he's never even stepped into a college classroom before.

[Basilisa Marie]

I don't like the idea that you need a practical major (usually defined as a STEM field) to make college worth it. English, poli
sci, economics, and similar degrees can be made to work. Sure they don't lead directly into a specific career, but if someone worked hard and took internships they will be able to fine a decent job. 

 

See, that's the thing - you're supplementing your degree with experience, which is beneficial to ANY major. My boyfriend was a biology major but in order to get into medical school he did some special one-credit projects (a bit like an academic internship) and did a ton of hours volunteering and shadowing a doctor. Myself, on the other hand, majored in theology but didn't get an internship at the local parish while in school (derp, hindsight is always 20/20) and all anyone told me was that I didn't have enough experience to find a job, even though I had a degree and even though I took pastoral ministry classes. My engineering friends got their first jobs because of internships.

 

Just like a high school diploma and an SAT score really isn't enough to get into college these days, having a simple degree isn't enough to get you a job. 

 

To circle back to money, what do you think is a reasonable amount of debt? I heard one person say that it was the average maximum yearly salary for someone in your field, but I'm not sure how that translates. 

[Basilisa Marie]

 

 

Both narrow-minded and wrong. Stephen Ray has never taken one college class in his life. He is also a leading expert on apologetics and tour guides in the Middle East, and is one of the most sought-after apologists in the world. He learned everything he knows simply by going to the library.

 

Apologetics is not really theology. :) 

[blazeingstar]

I've spoken to him in person and personally know him. He said he's never even stepped into a college classroom before.

 

Given that he's sited for giving lectures, he's either diluting himself or you.

[PhuturePriest]

Given that he's sited for giving lectures, he's either diluting himself or you.

 

A lecture at a conference is not the same as a classroom.

[IcePrincessKRS]

Both narrow-minded and wrong. Stephen Ray has never taken one college class in his life. He is also a leading expert on apologetics and tour guides in the Middle East, and is one of the most sought-after apologists in the world. He learned everything he knows simply by going to the library.

 

Using one person as the end all be all of how education should be gauged and carried out is wrong and narrow-minded. Just because one guy made it work doesn't mean the rest of us can. Just sayin'.

[John Ryan]

But those people turn out to be the Rousseau's of this world. And Rousseau was a moron. Not only is there no replacing, there's really no comparison. I'm tired of dealing with people thinking they're experts because they've read and think they understand what they're reading. 

 

While I do love the writings of Rousseau, I assent with the general sentiment. There are three reasons I believe a liberal college education is necessary for educational enlightenment: (i.) the first is the centrality of the classics. Sociological education will orient you to the founding fathers of social thought, political education will (ideally) orient you to the founding political thinkers; (ii.) the needed discussion of a classroom setting in which ideas are tested. Sometimes you need to put out silly ideas and have them smacked down for you to learn and grow in your thought. Your ideas can evolve on free forum discussions such as this, but they are a compliment to the intensity of in class discussion with a learned professor; (iii.) learning from somebody more knowledgeable is key. I simply cannot fathom how one comes to understand G.W.F. Hegel without having it taught by someone.