I also don't approve of how this student behaved while under the pressure to learn. But I do think he was unable to learn it. Every school has “that student”, or those “few students”. The ones who don't want to be there, and become aggravated when forced to learn. I no longer believe that those students are “not trying hard enough”. Just because you can do something, along with a huge majority of the population, doesn't necessarily mean every single individual is capable of doing it as well.

There are unlimited examples, though here are a few:

You and I are physically and mentally capable of learning to play a violin, and so can everbody. Does that really mean “everybody” is physically and mentally capable of learning to play a violin? I'm sure there are a few who can't.

You and I are physically and mentally capable of learning to speak and read a foreign language, and so can everbody. Does that really mean “everybody” is physically and mentally capable of learning to speak and read a foreign language? I'm sure there are a few who can't.

You and I are physically and mentally capable of learning to do weightlifting workouts, and so can everbody. Does that really mean “everybody” is physically and mentally capable of learning to do weightlifting workouts? I'm sure there are a few who can't.

It's easy to say without doubt, “everybody is physically and mentally capable of learning, and doing any of those activities listed”, but I think it's inaccurate to assume “everybody” is. Then we say knowing how to do a certain activity is a “required standard” for “all” members of society? Nobody would set a certain height as a “standard”, then tell the people who suffer from dwarfism to “try harder” to grow. And I believe this is essentially what happens at schools, children with simpler minds are being forced to learn topics beyond their abilities.

Doctor Venkman;158680
Do you think that people who go back to college and get a PhD or a Master's shouldn't make more money than those who went to college and got a BA or BS?

Certainly not. Anyone who went through the effort, and actually got the job he went to college for, should make the money that job pays.

Though it's important to keep in mind that colleges only provide information. Lots of people can memorize provided information, and so get a degree for that at a college. It's not much different from reading a book and memorizing the information. Does that make someone an “expert”? There should be millions of experts in language, law, and other subjects, if so.

However, we aren't seeing any progress in these areas. Why? Perhaps it's do to the human nature of competing with one another. Many college graduates only use their degrees as a tool to impress others. Schools and colleges tell students of how important graduating is all the time. Instead, these institutes should tell students that true talents and special abilities are only shown by using the information to actually do something useful.

-

I don't understand how hating the hundreds of people who brag about their degrees can make me, or anyone else a “loser”. The non-college graduates are “losers” attitude is a sign of how status driven this world is. Most graduates seem to have degrees for the sake of acting arrogant, and many of whom don't even work in the field they prepared for in college. So what's their superior education doing for them and the rest of us?

Sure, graduates may feel good about their right to brag, but I still think they're saying, “My life is so lame that the greatest thing I have to feel proud about is my college degree.”

Graduating is not that big of an achievement anymore. Clearly if graduating was such an incredible achievement, only a few people would have the capability of achieving it. When a significant percentage of the population is capable of doing something, it can't be that much of an achievement.

So why am I in college if I feel this way? I had the same attitude towards college as everyone else… so I went. And now that I've already started college, I'll finish it. I'm not struggling anymore than other students. I'm not jealous of other students, nor of the ones who have already graduated. My academic record is full of good grades. Because I do just as I'm told at college, and pass classes that I'm not good at, and even hate. I don't have an issue with authority and with being told to do things. Though I do have an interest to question and examine the world, along with seeing the world with more than one prospective.

After examining how much time and money people spend, versus what they learn and achieve in college, I saw a new prospective. I may be told that I'm sounding immature, jealous, negative, and so on, but this doesn't change my mind, or make me feel as though I've been proven wrong.

BigMac;158692
Graduating is not that big of an achievement anymore. Clearly if graduating was such an incredible achievement, only a few people would have the capability of achieving it. When a significant percentage of the population is capable of doing something, it can't be that much of an achievement.

I wouldn't call less than 30 percent of the U.S. adult population that earned a college degree a significant percentage.

From the Census Bureau:

the U.S. Census Bureau has released data proving the substantial value of a college education in the United States. Workers 18 and over sporting bachelors degrees earn an average of $51,206 a year, while those with a high school diploma earn $27,915. But wait, there's more. Workers with an advanced degree make an average of $74,602, and those without a high school diploma average $18,734.
According to a new census report titled Educational Attainment in the United States: 2004, 85 percent of those age 25 or older reported they had completed at least high school and 28 percent had attained at least a bachelor’s degree — both record highs.

As Dr. Venkman points out, as well as statistics, you're better off “financially” with a college degree. Does it mean you're happier or successful? No, that's up to you and how you define happiness and success. If you want others to gauge your success by your degree(s) and job, so be it. It's how you make and define yourself is all that matters. I hate to make the statement that we've been there before, trust our judgment, but you have your own set of circumstances and objectives in life, that it's up to you alone to decide what you want to do in life. Others will count on you, whether it's a boss or subordinates, or even family members or your own children, that you will have to provide for and be a role model.

Yeah, college sucks. It's frustrating sometimes. Bear with it, get your degree, and choose how you want to live your life and where you want your life to go. Like you said:

Though I do have an interest to question and examine the world, along with seeing the world with more than one prospective

Keep that line of thinking… you're a better person for thinking like that.

About a year ago I researched the financial benefits of going to college. I didn't like what I saw.

John Stossel Is College Worth It? 20/20 ABC News


This article has more information about financial problems do to college.

“The Great College Hoax”
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/0202/060_3.html

“Penn and Teller's: Bullshit!” also did a good piece on the usefullness of college.

Attitudes like this are why we now have the bullshit “only 50% rule” coming into high schools.

No student can get lower than a 50% on an assignment or a test now in some school districts. If they don't do it, thus doing literally 0% of the work, they still get credit for doing half of the work. This is the message that is being sent to kids now-a-days, because little Johnny No Name cried and threw a chair because he “couldn't get it” and it ruined his self-esteem. Obviously I'm not blaming it on this one kid so please don't go there. My point should be clear.

This shit is what's wrong with society. People expect to not have to work for something, and that it should just be given to them cuz they said so. While the people who truly work hard at achieving something are no longer given an edge because too many people bitch and moan about the challenges of college and school being “too hard” and unfair that the students who get it are rewarded as such. Now all of these douchebag students who are just lazy and don't actually care about learning will be given 50% on assignments for literally not doing any work at all.

College is supposed to be hard. That's why you get rewarded with a valuable degree at the end of it, and that degree gives you an edge, AND SHOULD GIVE YOU AN EDGE, over the people who chose to not put out the effort of going to college. Yes, obviously there are some people who simply don't have the resources to go to college, but with student loans, scholarships, and everything else, there are ways to go to college if you truly desire to better yourself and your career.

The problem is the lazy students want things to just be even. “Oh, well I'm not as smart as them, I don't get it, so what? Why should the smarter students get an edge over me?” UM, BECAUSE THEY'RE SMARTER! Lazy, uneducated, not as bright students should not be given the same treatment (post high school) as the smarter, hardworking students who decided to go to college and things like that. Does that mean that the students who “don't get it” should be treated badly during high school? Absolutely not. They should be given the same opportunities to learn as the smarter students. If they choose to grab those opportunities and run with them, and apply themselves, and show effort, that effort will get noticed and they will be rewarded as such.

People who choose to go to college, and learn more skills and gain more knowledge should absolutely be given an edge over someone who decided not to go to college, and did not apply themselves. Whether or not the student who did not go to college has a “good job” is for him, and him only, to decide. If he is happy working wherever he is, and he makes enough money to live comfortably and provide for his family and kids should he decide to have those things, then all power to him. Good for him for choosing his path in life and being happy with his decisions. But to suggest that people who make more money are only happy because they make more money and that that is the key to happiness… That's not true. For some, obviously it is. But for a lot of people, they go to college so that they have a degree that will earn them more money so that they can live comfortably in whatever style they determine to be comfortable and be able to afford things for their family. That is not saying money is happiness. That is saying that money makes life easier, and that having a degree from a University can get you more money, so that will make your life easier. How you go about making your life happy is up to you.

Didn't want to bother with starting a new thread to point out this almost amusing concept I heard, so I figured I'd just say it here since it ties in with money/material wealth.

A man who works a minimal wage job today most likely lives in what we refer to as a crappy little apartment. However, this apartment has more luxury features than even a king could have had centuries ago. TV, warm/cold shower, air conditioning, electric lighting, and so on weren't even available to the wealthy centuries ago.

At the rate we're going now, the poor people of the future will have more technologically advanced homes, cars, and appliances than we could ever imagine today, and yet they'll still feel as though they don't have enough, and they'll spend time wishing they could have more. Just as the poor people of today do.

My required textbook for accounting is a pile of papers about an inch thick, packaged in shrink wrap, and priced at $127.40.

I searched the Internet with the book's ISBN#, and I also searched by title and author but found nothing. I saw lots of accounting books during my searches, and even saw some by the same authors who made the book the school is requiring us to get.

Is it just a coincidence that with all the books to choose from, they chose a book that doesn't exist outside of the college?

The professor told us that the book was designed to be more convenient for us. He said students complained about the book being very big and heavy before, and that it was difficult to carry. But it's convenient now, because we can takeout only the chapter we are reading, rather than carry the whole book.

How is this more convenient? What if I want to see the index or glossary, or some other part of the book? Do I need to take those pages out separately as well? And what do I do if I takeout a lot of pages, or even worse, the pages fall and become disorganized?

Obviously it's not a convenience to not bind the pages for a book together. And obviously the binding process was skipped to reduce costs for the college. But the college still charges us as much as what the book would cost if it was actually completed in the manufacturing process.

If the professors at the college really think it's convenient to not bind books, why don't they just skip binding all books? All those thick math books, management book, economic books, and so on, could be left as piles of paper.

If you think I am over reacting, imagine how you would feel. Imagine walking into a store to buy a book. After you see the book, you discover that its pages have no binding. You then ask why it is like that, and you are told that it is like that for your convenience.

The professors at the college should be ashamed of this.

To top it off, guess who published the textbook? The same publisher who started that “My Math Lab” scam, which a complained about at the start of this thread.

My required textbook for accounting is a pile of papers about an inch thick, packaged in shrink wrap, and priced at $127.40.

I searched the Internet with the book's ISBN#, and I also searched by title and author but found nothing. I saw lots of accounting books during my searches, and even saw some by the same authors who made the book the school is requiring us to get.

Is it just a coincidence that with all the books to choose from, they chose a book that doesn't exist outside of the college?

The professor told us that the book was designed to be more convenient for us. He said students complained about the book being very big and heavy before, and that it was difficult to carry. But it's convenient now, because we can takeout only the chapter we are reading, rather than carry the whole book.

How is this more convenient? What if I want to see the index or glossary, or some other part of the book? Do I need to take those pages out separately as well? And what do I do if I takeout a lot of pages, or even worse, the pages fall and become disorganized?

Obviously it's not a convenience to not bind the pages for a book together. And obviously the binding process was skipped to reduce costs for the college. But the college still charges us as much as what the book would cost if it was actually completed in the manufacturing process.

If the professors at the college really think it's convenient to not bind books, why don't they just skip binding all books? All those thick math books, management book, economic books, and so on, could be left as piles of paper.

If you think I am over reacting, imagine how you would feel. Imagine walking into a store to buy a book. After you see the book, you discover that its pages have no binding. You then ask why it is like that, and you are told that it is like that for your convenience.

The professors at the college should be ashamed of this.

To top it off, guess who published the textbook? The same publisher who started that “My Math Lab” scam, which I complained about at the start of this thread.

My required textbook for accounting is a pile of papers about an inch thick, packaged in shrink wrap, and priced at $127.40.

I searched the Internet with the book's ISBN#, and I also searched by title and author but found nothing. I saw lots of accounting books during my searches, and even saw some by the same authors who made the book the school is requiring us to get.

Is it just a coincidence that with all the books to choose from, they chose a book that doesn't exist outside of the college?

The professor told us that the book was designed to be more convenient for us. He said students complained about the book being very big and heavy before, and that it was difficult to carry. But it's convenient now, because we can takeout only the chapter we are reading, rather than carry the whole book.

How is this more convenient? What if I want to see the index or glossary, or some other part of the book? Do I need to take those pages out separately as well? And what do I do if I takeout a lot of pages, or even worse, the pages fall and become disorganized?

Obviously it's not a convenience to not bind the pages for a book together. And obviously the binding process was skipped to reduce costs for the college. But the college still charges us as much as what the book would cost if it was actually completed in the manufacturing process.

If the professors at the college really think it's convenient to not bind books, why don't they just skip binding all books? All those thick math books, management book, economic books, and so on, could be left as piles of paper.

If you think I am over reacting, imagine how you would feel. Imagine walking into a store to buy a book. After you see the book, you discover that its pages have no binding. You then ask why it is like that, and you are told that it is like that for your convenience.

The professors at the college should be ashamed of this.

To top it off, guess who published the textbook? The same publisher who started that “My Math Lab” scam, which I complained about at the start of this thread.

My required textbook for accounting is a pile of papers about an inch thick, packaged in shrink wrap, and priced at $127.40.

I searched the Internet with the book's ISBN#, and I also searched by title and author but found nothing. I saw lots of accounting books during my searches, and even saw some by the same authors who made the book the school is requiring us to get.

Is it just a coincidence that with all the books to choose from, they chose a book that doesn't exist outside of the college?

The professor told us that the book was designed to be more convenient for us. He said students complained about the book being very big and heavy before, and that it was difficult to carry. But it's convenient now, because we can takeout only the chapter we are reading, rather than carry the whole book.

How is this more convenient? What if I want to see the index or glossary, or some other part of the book? Do I need to take those pages out separately as well? And what do I do if I takeout a lot of pages, or even worse, the pages fall and become disorganized?

Obviously it's not a convenience to not bind the pages for a book together. And obviously the binding process was skipped to reduce costs for the college. But the college still charges us as much as what the book would cost if it was actually completed in the manufacturing process.

If the professors at the college really think it's convenient to not bind books, why don't they just skip binding all books? All those thick math books, management books, economic books, and so on, could be left as piles of paper.

If you think I am over reacting, imagine how you would feel. Imagine walking into a store to buy a book. After you see the book, you discover that its pages have no binding. You then ask why it is like that, and you are told that it is like that for your convenience.

The professors at the college should be ashamed of this.

To top it off, guess who published the textbook? The same publisher who started that “My Math Lab” scam, which I complained about at the start of this thread.