Canada's University System

[peter12]

I'm getting back to Danish lessons. Can someone tell me how useful that is?

@Corsi - what's stopping you?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

The number of hours in a day, mostly.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

If that is their career of choice, or their aspirations, those people likely shouldn't be going to university. That would be an incredible waste of money. But if someone who is highly motivated and capable of applying their lessons in any context, a classical education is never a wrong path to follow. That classical education will help them climb the ladder quicker and result in greater gains for them. Education is for everyone, but a classical education is not for everyone. Some people are better off going to a tech school because of the structure and regimentation the modality and pedagogy relies upon.

In today's world, how does a classical education help anybody climb the ladder quicker? Today's employers do not value the classical education, they value degrees that specifically apply to their lines of business and for the majority of University courses and degrees, there is no one-to-one translation outside of STEM and Business School.

That is the biggest problem I saw and getting into the STEM and business schools was so competitive, many kids who don't belong in university settled for Communications and Culture or Psychology or History or other liberal arts degrees which left them utterly dazed and confused about how to find a job that they would be happy with.

For a vast majority of my cohorts and friends who went to post secondary in the 2000s, many of us have a undergraduate degree from a Canadian University but many ended up going to BCIT, NAIT, SAIT, etc. to actually be able to get a professional job in industry and nobody told us this. We had to find out the hard way that our first and most expensive degrees were actually useless paper.

There is a lack of information for parents, coaching in highschools, and information from University to help teenagers make the right informed decisions about their future careers and how valued their degrees are in the real world of today. The unversities just want to take in as much tuition as possible.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The number of hours in a day, mostly.

It just takes around twenty minutes a day. Learning a language to a level of personal enjoyment isn't too too hard.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

In today's world, how does a classical education help anybody climb the ladder quicker? Today's employers do not value the classical education, they value degrees that specifically apply to their lines of business and for the majority of University courses and degrees, there is no one-to-one translation outside of STEM and Business School.

That is the biggest problem I saw and getting into the STEM and business schools was so competitive, many kids who don't belong in university settled for Communications and Culture or Psychology or History or other liberal arts degrees which left them utterly dazed and confused about how to find a job that they would be happy with.

For a vast majority of my cohorts and friends who went to post secondary in the 2000s, many of us have a undergraduate degree from a Canadian University but many ended up going to BCIT, NAIT, SAIT, etc. to actually be able to get a professional job in industry and nobody told us this. We had to find out the hard way that our first and most expensive degrees were actually useless paper.

There is a lack of information for parents, coaching in highschools, and information from University to help teenagers make the right informed decisions about their future careers and how valued their degrees are in the real world of today. The unversities just want to take in as much tuition as possible .

Taking rhetoric classes at a graduate level has helped me IMMENSELY in my chosen profession.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by peter12

Taking rhetoric classes at a graduate level has helped me IMMENSELY in my chosen profession.

Message board poster?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by GGG

Message board poster?

No, no. That's probably not it.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by peter12

No, no. That's probably not it.

Sartorial Satirist?

[Hack&Lube]

In all seriousness, my number one piece of advice I give to any students today is to always apply for co-ops and internships while they are in school because that practical experience will mean far more than an employer than what they have on their degree unless they have a specific STEM field or specific business degree.

I love the classics and I wish that it was part of today's well rounded education as for centuries it was the basis for common thought and framing of western civilization but outside of writer, lawyer, or politician, I find little utility in today's workplace for a classical education.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

I love the classics and I wish that it was part of today's well rounded education as for centuries it was the basis for common thought and framing of western civilization but outside of writer, lawyer, or politician, I find little utility in today's workplace for a classical education.

This is exactly the attitude I bemoaned in my earlier post. Take courses in philosophy, for example. Students learn about formal logic and how to form cohesive arguments. That should rightly be seen as valuable to any profession. It doesn't matter if you're an engineer or a business manager or a doctor, rhetorical skills are immensely important to everyone. And yet so many people are like, "Why are you wasting your time and money studying Plutarch and Solon? What use is that in today's workplaces? Enjoy your career as a barista, Epicurus! STEM master race forever amirite? LOL!"

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

In today's world, how does a classical education help anybody climb the ladder quicker? Today's employers do not value the classical education, they value degrees that specifically apply to their lines of business and for the majority of University courses and degrees, there is no one-to-one translation outside of STEM and Business School.

That is the biggest problem I saw and getting into the STEM and business schools was so competitive, many kids who don't belong in university settled for Communications and Culture or Psychology or History or other liberal arts degrees which left them utterly dazed and confused about how to find a job that they would be happy with.

For a vast majority of my cohorts and friends who went to post secondary in the 2000s, many of us have a undergraduate degree from a Canadian University but many ended up going to BCIT, NAIT, SAIT, etc. to actually be able to get a professional job in industry and nobody told us this. We had to find out the hard way that our first and most expensive degrees were actually useless paper.

There is a lack of information for parents, coaching in highschools, and information from University to help teenagers make the right informed decisions about their future careers and how valued their degrees are in the real world of today. The unversities just want to take in as much tuition as possible.

Agree with a lot of what you say here. A classical education provides a foundation in the areas where leaders and visionaries need to excel. For some, that classical education starts much earlier in life than others. I've worked with people who went to prep schools whose classical education was much deeper and formative than people who went through grad school in specific humanities. That classical education just prepares you better for having a deeper appreciation for the human condition and making tough decisions that impact others. It also makes you appreciate more than just the bottom line thinking that comes out of business school.

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

In all seriousness, my number one piece of advice I give to any students today is to always apply for co-ops and internships while they are in school because that practical experience will mean far more than an employer than what they have on their degree unless they have a specific STEM field or specific business degree.

I love the classics and I wish that it was part of today's well rounded education as for centuries it was the basis for common thought and framing of western civilization but outside of writer, lawyer, or politician, I find little utility in today's workplace for a classical education.

I can hire a hundred people who can twist a widget or tell me our profit motive, but our organization struggles to find people who are true visionaries or can be effective evangelists for our message. That is where that classical education comes into play. Being in touch with our humanity, understanding the larger human condition, and being able to appreciate, interpret, and communicate those conditions in relation to the goals and objectives of our interest, and qualities that are priceless. As I said, education is for everyone, but a classical education is not for everyone. Most people would be fine with a tech school education.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Agree with a lot of what you say here. A classical education provides a foundation in the areas where leaders and visionaries need to excel. For some, that classical education starts much earlier in life than others. I've worked with people who went to prep schools whose classical education was much deeper and formative than people who went through grad school in specific humanities. That classical education just prepares you better for having a deeper appreciation for the human condition and making tough decisions that impact others. It also makes you appreciate more than just the bottom line thinking that comes out of business school.



I can hire a hundred people who can twist a widget or tell me our profit motive, but our organization struggles to find people who are true visionaries or can be effective evangelists for our message. That is where that classical education comes into play. Being in touch with our humanity, understanding the larger human condition, and being able to appreciate, interpret, and communicate those conditions in relation to the goals and objectives of our interest, and qualities that are priceless. As I said, education is for everyone, but a classical education is not for everyone. Most people would be fine with a tech school education.

Do you think this is because the people that possess these skills typically take a more entrepreneurial path?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by you&me

Do you think this is because the people that possess these skills typically take a more entrepreneurial path?

That's a possibility. It is also because so few people are pursuing the classical education. You see it in this tread. STEM, STEM, STEM. SAIT, SAIT, SAIT. You are talking the difference between the architect and the draftsman. There are few architects out there, but there are ton of draftsmen. Same thing goes with the skills in question. Once you gain these skills you have an obvious advantage, especially when it comes to projecting vision and enticing investment. So that does fit your with your comment. On the other hand, so few people are pursuing what would be considered that classical education - humanities focused - that they are unicorns. Nothing wrong with that.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

That's a possibility. It is also because so few people are pursuing the classical education. You see it in this tread. STEM, STEM, STEM. SAIT, SAIT, SAIT. You are talking the difference between the architect and the draftsman. There are few architects out there, but there are ton of draftsmen. Same thing goes with the skills in question. Once you gain these skills you have an obvious advantage, especially when it comes to projecting vision and enticing investment. So that does fit your with your comment. On the other hand, so few people are pursuing what would be considered that classical education - humanities focused - that they are unicorns. Nothing wrong with that.

I'm not sure I agree a humanities focused classical education makes an architect. Imo that's a STEM degree.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

That's a possibility. It is also because so few people are pursuing the classical education. You see it in this tread. STEM, STEM, STEM. SAIT, SAIT, SAIT. You are talking the difference between the architect and the draftsman. There are few architects out there, but there are ton of draftsmen. Same thing goes with the skills in question. Once you gain these skills you have an obvious advantage, especially when it comes to projecting vision and enticing investment. So that does fit your with your comment. On the other hand, so few people are pursuing what would be considered that classical education - humanities focused - that they are unicorns. Nothing wrong with that.

What are you defining as a classical education?

We are still cranking out BAs out of every university in Canada.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

This is exactly the attitude I bemoaned in my earlier post. Take courses in philosophy, for example. Students learn about formal logic and how to form cohesive arguments. That should rightly be seen as valuable to any profession. It doesn't matter if you're an engineer or a business manager or a doctor, rhetorical skills are immensely important to everyone. And yet so many people are like, "Why are you wasting your time and money studying Plutarch and Solon? What use is that in today's workplaces? Enjoy your career as a barista, Epicurus! STEM master race forever amirite? LOL!"

I think those are important subjects for students to learn. They transmit our cultural history, and (ideally) foster critical thinking in citizens.

However, I think we need to be honest with students about the job prospects of someone entering the workforce with a degree in Women’s Studies, English Lit, or Anthropology. It doesn’t do any of us any good if students rack up debt and feel resentful or cheated when they discover that their hopeful path to a middle-class livelihood was delusional.

Better to foster critical thinking and cultural literacy by making more humanities and social sciences classes mandatory for all degree programs, including STEM. So fewer degrees in classical philosophy, but more graduates with some understanding of classical philosophy.

Then there’s the matter raised in the CBC story of the decline in critical thinking. Are the programs that are supposed to be teaching critical analysis and rationalist rigour doing the job? Not to derail the thread, but some programs in Canadian universities seem to have veered away from skeptical and critical rigour and into dogma and advocacy. Which I suppose fulfills the need of some students for purpose, meaning, and belonging. But that’s yet another role universities have taken on that is at odds with its other roles.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Agree with a lot of what you say here. A classical education provides a foundation in the areas where leaders and visionaries need to excel. For some, that classical education starts much earlier in life than others. I've worked with people who went to prep schools whose classical education was much deeper and formative than people who went through grad school in specific humanities. That classical education just prepares you better for having a deeper appreciation for the human condition and making tough decisions that impact others. It also makes you appreciate more than just the bottom line thinking that comes out of business school.

I can hire a hundred people who can twist a widget or tell me our profit motive, but our organization struggles to find people who are true visionaries or can be effective evangelists for our message. That is where that classical education comes into play. Being in touch with our humanity, understanding the larger human condition, and being able to appreciate, interpret, and communicate those conditions in relation to the goals and objectives of our interest, and qualities that are priceless. As I said, education is for everyone, but a classical education is not for everyone. Most people would be fine with a tech school education.

I'm not sure if I would draw a direct correlation between a classical education and the ability to make strategic or visionary decisions or the ability to suddenly become a convincing orator. At best, it would give you some exposure to forming rhetoric and some debate practice. At worst, it's a waste of tuition money and time for a youth whose objective is to get a job in the real world.

I see the classical education as providing the common language and framework which our laws, art, and culture (from a western perspective) were built on but I can't think of a single visionary entrepreneur who would say that his ability see the big picture or sell a product was based on his knowledge of the classics and philosophers. The more I work in the cosmopolitan world, the more I realize how narrow that line of western tradition is as well.

I can't think of the last time I tapped into a 2500 year old Greek philosopher to present something to management or argued against scraping instituted systems in a project because of Burke's rebuttal of the French Revolution. You can teach vision and selling in a marketing course which has far more direct utility and value on a resume than wasting a student's tuition on spending a semester reading thousand year old translated philosophy.

I will agree with you on a point that I personally appreciate my liberal arts background in the sense that I feel it made me more observant and critically minded of world events in the view of the overall human condition and the parallel lessons of history that most people have no idea about. That's purely on a personal basis though and has nothing to do with my professions both entrepreneurial (I sucked horribly) and in corporate (which I attribute to trade school after the BA proved as useful as nipples on a breastplate on the resume).

[GreenLantern]

Definitely a few problems with our University system. There should be more 'apprenticeship' that occurs through out your program. It's classes on top of classes then here is your piece of paper with your name on it but without any practical experience now go find a job (in most cases, not all).

I went through two degrees including a Masters that could have been done from behind a computer screen, but my prof was adamant that a student goes out and gains practical real world experience related to their topic of research. So he facilitated all of that, but I graduated beside students that had none of that.

I had a job right out of the gate, they didn't. It is a huge problem and shouldn't be dependent just on the professors, but systematically set up.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I'm not sure I agree a humanities focused classical education makes an architect. Imo that's a STEM degree.

That's not what Lanny is saying. His point is that completing a purely STEM-focused degree will turn out a graduate who is perfectly capable of designing structures and drawing blueprints, but if you want someone to create something that is a beautiful example of both form and function, they're going to also take "useless" liberal arts courses in subjects like Art History, Philosophy, Literature, Classics, etc.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

That's not what Lanny is saying. His point is that completing a purely STEM-focused degree will turn out a graduate who is perfectly capable of designing structures and drawing blueprints, but if you want someone who is can create something that is a beautiful example of both form and function, they're going to also take "useless" liberal arts courses in subjects like Art History, Philosophy, Literature, Classics, etc.

From this thread, I would summarize the main topic of debate is about the utility of modern universities and the value of the dollars and time we are putting into the tuition and education.

STEM and practical degrees have very real certifications and accreditations that empower careers from the get go. Liberal arts degrees do not afford young students the same vectors at all and contain subjects and achievements that can be learned on your own or for self-enrichment if you have the time and money to also take those courses as well. Historically those classical educations were also for the leisured classes who had the time and wealth to indulge in them.

If I was a parent, I'd say they would be better off spending their hard-earned tuition and time in their youth getting the STEM degree for the engineering background and then work on their portfolio as a passion project through much more affordable art classes and free study of art history and classical architecture on the internet, then parlay that into an architectural field.

At least they would be able to get an internship and a job to pay the bills while they worked on artistic passions - Or they could be an art student and work at Starbucks and get a personal internship with the anomie and depression they are also learning about in their sociology and psychology classes.