Working With Your Hands vs Going to College

[Jason76]

Iv'e seen some Facebook memes on this - normally by conservative type guys. Anyway, even though I disagree with much conservatives say - I have to sort of agree with this one. I mean, when did being a carpenter or plumber - or even a janitor become a thing of shame? Also, aren't degrees often rip-offs? I mean, if you can beat the market as a plumber or plumber business owner - who cares about a college degree?

 

[Lamb]

When I took my daughter for her Orientation, a lady got up on stage in the auditorium and told us that our children were there for the "college experience". I wanted to walk out at that point. No. My daughter was there to learn how to get a job and make money. My daughter ended up earning 2 degrees but not after changing her mind a couple times on what she wanted to do.

I'm all for trade schools after hearing that "college experience" schpiel. I spent over $100,000 in tuition and cost of living for my daughter to have an experience????

 

[NewCreation435]

in many cases, people go to college and fail out the first semester because they aren't mature enough to deal with the freedom of college. I saw it a lot when I started college people would show up for one semester, join a fraternity and stop going to class and end up failing out. It's a waste of money for them.

 

[Albion]

I am left wondering why $100,000 and six years or so were invested in a college education when learning a trade was the objective from the start.

 

[tango]

Iv'e seen some Facebook memes on this - normally by conservative type guys. Anyway, even though I disagree with much conservatives say - I have to sort of agree with this one. I mean, when did being a carpenter or plumber - or even a janitor become a thing of shame? Also, aren't degrees often rip-offs? I mean, if you can beat the market as a plumber or plumber business owner - who cares about a college degree?

It is a great shame that having a trade rather than a profession has become something to be embarrassed about rather than something to be proud of. After all, we'd notice if the guy who collects the garbage goes on strike long before we'd notice lawyers going on strike. What's also a shame is the way more and more jobs are starting to demand a degree - I'm wondering how long it will be before there's a degree course in mopping the floor at McDonalds (needless to say there would be a different course in mopping the floor at Burger King, so the skill wasn't considered transferable). In the UK it was particularly noticable in a profession like nursing, where a huge part of what is needed is to care for patients. But over time the qualification side of things got bigger and bigger, to the point you started to see nurses with a degree in nursing but little sense of caring. And of course because they had a degree the day-to-day aspects of nursing were considered beneath them, so they didn't want to be cleaning up after a sick patient. Sick patients need care, they may need things like blood, saliva and vomit cleaned up and someone has to do it because the patient is too sick to do it themselves.

There's also a huge difference in usefulness based on subject and long term plan. If you want to be a nuclear physicist you'll probably need at least one degree in physics and a higher degree in nuclear physics. If you spend six figures and four years pursuing a degree in gender studies, what (if any) doors does that open for you later on? Chances are you'll be down six figures and trying to figure out how to repay your student loans based on employment that didn't need the degree in the first place.

I think part of the equation is the "college experience". The freedom of living away from home for the first time, having more independence, being responsible for yourself and your studies. Sure, some people will blow all their money in the first month because suddenly having money in the bank (even if borrowed money) goes to their head and they buy a new stereo, not figuring that they still have to pay rent for the next six months before they get their next payment, but sooner or later people will learn. It's really no different to the way some people will have a beer or two and then stop but a few will drink so much they can't even stand up. The flip side is that if "the college experience" becomes the primary focus then the whole system has lost its way.

I remember it said (during my university days) that "university is a fountain of knowledge where people go to drink".

 

[Albion]

I think part of the equation is the "college experience". The freedom of living away from home for the first time, having more independence, being responsible for yourself and your studies. Sure, some people will blow all their money in the first month because suddenly having money in the bank (even if borrowed money) goes to their head and they buy a new stereo, not figuring that they still have to pay rent for the next six months before they get their next payment, but sooner or later people will learn. It's really no different to the way some people will have a beer or two and then stop but a few will drink so much they can't even stand up. The flip side is that if "the college experience" becomes the primary focus then the whole system has lost its way.

I agree with much of what you've written here. It is disheartening to know that people who will have strong ideas about politics, history, current events, language, and etc. for the rest of their lives, and are not reluctant to present them to anybody willing to listen, also think that learning anything about them is a waste of time.

Put another way, being a plumber is no hindrance to voting, sounding off online, or just arguing over the back fence about history, religion, society, and etc., BUT people with college degrees generally are much less likely to pontificate about which pipe wrench is the best. Why is that? Is "the college experience" a factor?

 

[Josiah]

Iv'e seen some Facebook memes on this - normally by conservative type guys. Anyway, even though I disagree with much conservatives say - I have to sort of agree with this one. I mean, when did being a carpenter or plumber - or even a janitor become a thing of shame? Also, aren't degrees often rip-offs? I mean, if you can beat the market as a plumber or plumber business owner - who cares about a college degree?

As one with a doctorate, I hold that education has value - beyond how it may or may not impact one's income.



As a Lutheran, I hold that ALL vocations are holy ministries - quite equal in value (the Lutheran teaching of "vocation"). There's everything holy and sacred about being a plumber or janitor or trash collector or dentist or businessman or policeman or housewife or student..... all vocations are divine CALLINGS and are our ministry for God. As a Lutheran, this is very important to me.


But just because one can be a plumber and be illiterate and entirely ignorant of all but some plumbing information and skills does NOT mean that ergo it is meaningless to be literate and informed.


Go to school..... don't drop out..... pay attention..... LEARN! And if it is allowed to you, if you are so blessed, include college (and grad school). It will bless you and others.


I have a Ph.D. in physics. For some years, I directly used my degree working in science/technology. But now I'm a businessman, working in a field that has little to do with physics (well, EVERYTHING involves physics!), but I rejoice in my education.... I use the skills I gained there every minute of my work.... and it blessed my personal life just as much.




- Josiah

 

[tango]

I agree with much of what you've written here. It is disheartening to know that people who will have strong ideas about politics, history, current events, language, and etc. for the rest of their lives, and are not reluctant to present them to anybody willing to listen, also think that learning anything about them is a waste of time.

This is very true but it's not as if going to an expensive college is the only way to learn about them. If someone wants to take the time to think and read they can learn an awful lot without ever setting foot in a lecture theatre. If anything I'd be inclined to suggest that it's better to rad broadly than to sit in a lecture theatre and listen to the same person presenting lots of material because, even without the concerns often raised today about academia being a hotbed of leftism, it's inevitable that getting a lot of information from one person will result in a degree of their bias showing through. We all have biases, so it seems like a good idea to try and balance the overall bias as far as possible.

Put another way, being a plumber is no hindrance to voting, sounding off online, or just arguing over the back fence about history, religion, society, and etc., BUT people with college degrees generally are much less likely to pontificate about which pipe wrench is the best. Why is that? Is "the college experience" a factor?

Perhaps because to most people with college degrees it makes little difference which pipe wrench is the best - if they don't pay someone to do that sort of thing they will do it sufficiently infrequently that it makes little difference. I have two pipe wrenches, both of them selected because that's what the local hardware store had available. I have two because they are different sizes - I bought one and for a subsequent job realised I needed a bigger one, so bought the second. I use my pipe wrench sufficiently little it doesn't matter if I could have got a better one, whereas the guy I call on for heating related stuff uses his all the time so probably takes much more of an interest. On the other hand the difference between political outlooks, levels of taxation and public service, degree of regulation etc, affects all of us. The plumber is just as vulnerable to being regulated out of business as anyone else, so has just as much reason to have a view on an appropriate level of government involvement in our lives as the brain surgeon.

 

[tango]

As one with a doctorate, I hold that education has value - beyond how it may or may not impact one's income.

I have a degree, just not a doctorate. I agree entirely that there is more to the value of education than merely what is learned in class. That said it is important to put a value on the overall process and, to be honest, given the rising cost of college education compared to what looks like an increasing struggle to repay the loans I have to wonder whether it really is a good value proposition for many would-be students. I don't see any problem with saying something has value, just not enough value to warrant taking out six figures of debt to fund it.

As a Lutheran, I hold that ALL vocations are holy ministries - quite equal in value (the Lutheran teaching of "vocation"). There's everything holy and sacred about being a plumber or janitor or trash collector or dentist or businessman or policeman or housewife or student..... all vocations are divine CALLINGS and are our ministry for God. As a Lutheran, this is very important to me.

I personally wouldn't describe everything as a holy ministry and don't see anything sacred about whatever trade or profession we choose. I do agree with the sentiment that we should choose a path and then do what we do to the best of our ability, whether it be brain surgery or taking out the trash.

But just because one can be a plumber and be illiterate and entirely ignorant of all but some plumbing information and skills does NOT mean that ergo it is meaningless to be literate and informed.

Also true, but there's no requirement to go to college to be literate and informed. For myself I have a growing concern that the educational system increasingly appears (from what I can see from the outside) to be teaching students what to think rather than how to think. To what extent the growing chatter about "safe spaces", "trigger warnings" etc represent a youth increasingly unable to even consider opposing viewpoints and to what extent they are the right's equivalent to the left seeing discrimination behind every corner seems unclear. What I have noticed over the years is that there are growing expressions of concern at university level that the first year is increasingly spent covering material that students used to know before going to university, while employers have increasingly complained that people leave school clutching all sorts of pieces of paper bearing qualifications while lacking the basic skills required to be useful at work.

It's not as if social media is the final arbiter of a society but looking at the rising level of failure to grasp basic English constructs I wonder whether schools even bother to teach correct grammar any more. When I was at school misuse of homonyms (your/you're, they're.their/there etc) would result in red ink from the teacher. Now I see more and more posts that I have to read multiple times to figure out just what someone is trying to say - between a total lack of punctuation, severe spelling issues and use of incorrect homonyms some text is all but unintelligible.

Of course that's the part where people often say "ah yes, but maybe English isn't their first language". That's a fair point, although my experience is that people who do speak English as a foreign language are keen to get it right whereas people who only speak English are more likely to become indignant at even a mention that what they have written is difficult to follow. I remember a guy I worked with a few years ago whose first language was Spanish. He spoke pretty good English although sometimes irregular verbs caught him out. He might say something like "you bringed this yesterday" - it was perfectly understandable what he meant but he hadn't grasped the irregular past tense of the verb. I wasn't sure whether to correct him on it (it was just the two of us chatting) but figured I'd mention it. He appreciated me telling him, practised saying "brought" a couple of times, and from there his English was just a little better. He also taught me a few words of Spanish, although his English was incomparably better than my Spanish.

Go to school..... don't drop out..... pay attention..... LEARN! And if it is allowed to you, if you are so blessed, include college (and grad school). It will bless you and others.

And keep learning. I think one of the biggest problems we have today is the idea that learning is done in a classroom. I wonder how many people are interested in teaching themselves something new.

I have a Ph.D. in physics. For some years, I directly used my degree working in science/technology. But now I'm a businessman, working in a field that has little to do with physics (well, EVERYTHING involves physics!), but I rejoice in my education.... I use the skills I gained there every minute of my work.... and it blessed my personal life just as much.

On balance I consider my university experience to have been beneficial to me. If it had come with a six-figure price tag I'd reassess the benefit. For me having a degree opened some doors - some jobs want evidence of ability to study and process at a certain level even if they don't care much for the subject - but every single thing I have done professionally has been something I mostly taught myself.

 

[Josiah]

This is very true but it's not as if going to an expensive college is the only way to learn about them.

1. IMO, "expensive" has little to do with things. The MAIN advantage of a degree from Dartmouth or Princeton is not the quality of education (although that IS better than most, mainly due to the level demanded) but the CONNECTIONS. I graduated from the University of California (one of the best in the USA) but while the education was excellent, the connections are non-existent. I had a co-worker with a doctorate from MIT. The quality of our education was similar but even before he graduated, he was a KEY part of a family, a community.... that support each other, mentor each other, hire each other. Of course, I graduated with no debt and he likely with LOTS of debt.... but I'm SURE he'd insist he gets a lot for that.


2. SOME of the advantages of a good education is learning to learn and to critically evaluate. The problem (IMO) with too many uneducated persons being "educated" via the internet is they may swallow rather than learn and not critically evaluate. Another advantage is humility ("the more you learn, the more you realize what you don't know") . While this can lead to relativism, it often does lead to a willingness to listen, to realize my views may be wrong. Well.... IF the education was good, lol. The problem with too many "self - educated" high school drop outs is they are too apt to swallow what is not well-founded... and then egotistically propagate it. Of course, that often happens with college grads, too (LOL) but SHOULDN'T.


Especially in my grad years, my physics education was in large part how to spot flaws, problems. We looked at scientific papers (etc.) and our TASK was to note the problems, where evidence was lacking or misapplied, etc. It's a big part of being a scientist. And the reverse. I never was much of a scientists, my BEST was third author on ONE paper that got published..... but I remember WELL (very well) the sleepless nights POURING over our stuff, looking for what was weak, what errors we may have made.... looking very critically at it, before the publisher TORE it to pieces (which they did - and yup, we had to go back and rethink things) and then after it was published, the conversations with scientists who pointed out things we missed. AND YET, at some point, you got to submit it, go it with, and take responsibility. Embarrassing when flaws are found? NO! It MADE us think.... and it advanced science. I no longer work in science.... I'm a businessman.... but I can look at proposals, I can have a lunch conversation, and evaluate in ways I learned to do in grad school Could I learn this otherwise? Of course, but it DOES help. AND.... I bring to my position a lot of humility..... I'm the new guy on the block.... I KNOW I need to learn a lot..... I pay attention to our staff

If someone wants to take the time to think and read they can learn an awful lot without ever setting foot in a lecture theatre. If anything I'd be inclined to suggest that it's better to rad broadly than to sit in a lecture theatre and listen to the same person presenting lots of material because, even without the concerns often raised today about academia being a hotbed of leftism, it's inevitable that getting a lot of information from one person will result in a degree of their bias showing through. We all have biases, so it seems like a good idea to try and balance the overall bias as far as possible.

You have some valid points..... and you are certainly correct about the "leftist" pov. Truth is, higher education is rarely what it should and can be. Ironic, but my Dad who attended college right in the middle of all the "free speech" movement and campus protests.... those "hippies" now run the college (they now ARE "the Man" - how ironic) and are worse than the administrators and teachers they protested when they were students. It's how revolution tends to go (YUP! I took a history course, History 422,
"Revolution") they often go "full circle." But while I freely admit to this flaw, I also believe it too can be a lesson students LEARN. MANY times, I recognized the error and bias in my profs.... and realized I have mine too..... now, a smart student probably keeps his mouth shut and regruitates what the prof said on the final.... but LEARNS. Including to evaluate self.


THIS, btw, was one of the "problems" I faced. I took college classes when I was 13, 14, 15 years old.... when I still thought adults were smart just cuz they were adults.... when I tended to think the teacher knows cuz he's the teacher. And too young to do the THINKING I needed to do. It took some time for me to realize, "Hey, wait a minute....." But I did. For me, this happened with religion teachers, too.

But your point is valid. One CAN learn this independent of formal education (indeed, the level I'm talking about is a very recent thing). Abe Lincoln was one well-educated man - with almost no formal education. I fully affirm that. I just think a GOOD formal education is very helpful. At least my life has experienced that.




- Josiah



.

 

[Albion]

This is very true but it's not as if going to an expensive college is the only way to learn about them. If someone wants to take the time to think and read they can learn an awful lot without ever setting foot in a lecture theatre.

Oh dear. Maybe one person in a hundred can do that, but its rare. Sure, anyone can learn something about almost any discipline, but I doubt that any of us would choose to have surgery or legal advice or even psychological counselling, courtesy of some self-taught person. The same holds true for history, fine arts, and other disciplines although it is not as obvious to the average person.

That's why the quacks proliferate in the area of religion--because it is mainly a matter of opinion, so anyone can make his claim and say God is behind it. You cannot do that with most professions.

If anything I'd be inclined to suggest that it's better to rad broadly than to sit in a lecture theatre and listen to the same person presenting lots of material because, even without the concerns often raised today about academia being a hotbed of leftism, it's inevitable that getting a lot of information from one person will result in a degree of their bias showing through. We all have biases, so it seems like a good idea to try and balance the overall bias as far as possible.

But this is a different issue. Not every college costs $100,000; few of them do, in fact. And if you don't want the left-wing indoctrination, you can choose a school known for having a conservative orientation. When we start talking about these things, we are not really talking about a college education but about WHICH college education.

 

[vince284]

Trades are different from each other, I have been reading this thread and a lot of it makes sense, I have a few friends that are licensed plumbers. They took the route of having a high school education, then went through an apprenticeship which normally takes 4-5 years, they spent 3 hours of class time once a week (book time as they called it). Then one friend went on to get his associate degree another 2 years and plenty of cost. But to get a full license they both had to have 2 years of experience, after their apprenticeship, in their trade. That's a lot of learning and training for an uneducated plumber. The cost, certainly not 6 figures but there still was a cost.

 

[Jason76]

Well, high schools are horrible in many places. I think high school should be improved to the level of the first two years of college - and then after that - college, at least if intended as a thing to get a job - should be reserved for people with a high chance of landing employment.

However, as saying, if someone wants to study something for fun (in college) - they're free to, as long as the state isn't paying.

 

[tango]

Oh dear. Maybe one person in a hundred can do that, but its rare. Sure, anyone can learn something about almost any discipline, but I doubt that any of us would choose to have surgery or legal advice or even psychological counselling, courtesy of some self-taught person. The same holds true for history, fine arts, and other disciplines although it is not as obvious to the average person.

It's certainly not a solution to everything. As you quite rightly point out there are some professions where formal qualifications are needed. My point was that much education doesn't have to be in a classroom. I don't know that I'd agree that only one person in a hundred can teach themselves, although increasingly these days it seems relatively few are inclined to even try. And of course there's also the degree of knowledge one can gain, which can match their own requirements when learning from books rather than simply following a course curriculum. Most of what I know about electrics has come from reading books and working it out myself, with a few gaps in understanding the minutae of local codes filled in from a couple of friends who are working electricians. Based on what I know in this context I wouldn't necessarily look to be rewiring someone else's house but it would be a much shorter step to get licensed/registered from here than from not knowing anything at all.

That's why the quacks proliferate in the area of religion--because it is mainly a matter of opinion, so anyone can make his claim and say God is behind it. You cannot do that with most professions.

Sadly quacks and cowboys persist in just about every area of trade and business. Of course an area that is largely a matter of opinion and interpretation is particularly vulnerable but the way the public at large increasingly knows little to nothing about anything other than their own area means that even objective facts can be blurred and ignored. If your customer doesn't know anything about what you are doing you have plenty of opportunity to take advantage of their ignorance, if you are so inclined.

But this is a different issue. Not every college costs $100,000; few of them do, in fact. And if you don't want the left-wing indoctrination, you can choose a school known for having a conservative orientation. When we start talking about these things, we are not really talking about a college education but about WHICH college education.

I guess a lot depends on just what you are studying and how long the course is. A friend of mine managed to run up nearly $70,000 in two years for a masters degree without even considering an Ivy League college. As for the indoctrination, don't you think it's pretty sad that it's even a consideration? Shouldn't a higher education be about challenging viewpoints, reasoning around ideas, discussing opposing ideas etc, rather than having opportunities to hide from ideas that might be considered disagreeable?

 

[Lamb]

Well, high schools are horrible in many places. I think high school should be improved to the level of the first two years of college - and then after that - college, at least if intended as a thing to get a job - should be reserved for people with a high chance of landing employment.

However, as saying, if someone wants to study something for fun (in college) - they're free to, as long as the state isn't paying.

Inner city high schools are the worst! Money isn't handled wisely and the children suffer because of it. I'm not even sure if those high schools offer the type of college courses at the high school level that my daughter's high school did. My daughter had college credits earned while in high school because of various types of offerings even though I did have to pay a fee for them.

 

[Albion]

I guess a lot depends on just what you are studying and how long the course is. A friend of mine managed to run up nearly $70,000 in two years for a masters degree without even considering an Ivy League college.

He still must have chosen an institution that was way, way, out of the norm. There are such schools, but it is easy to find a quality one that isn't like that!

As for the indoctrination, don't you think it's pretty sad that it's even a consideration?

I surely do, and the number of relatively safe institutions is, honestly, rather low.

 

[Josiah]

Well, high schools are horrible in many places. I think high school should be improved to the level of the first two years of college - and then after that - college, at least if intended as a thing to get a job - should be reserved for people with a high chance of landing employment.

However, as saying, if someone wants to study something for fun (in college) - they're free to, as long as the state isn't paying.

In the USA, the government began picking up the tab for education about 200 years ago - originally just for elementary school, because that's all that was considered essential (high schools - if they existed at all - charged tuition to cover the full cost). State by state, this was extended through high school about 100 years ago as greater education was considered good. IMO, it's time to advance this through college. REGARDLESS of whether this is specific "job training" (how is elementary school specifically training for a specific job?), simply because an educated society is a good thing.


Actually, when my father attended a state university, there was no tuition charged. He paid for books and an "education fee" but it was only like $200 per quarter. That same school is over 12K per year now in just tuition, PLUS that "education fee." In the USA, we're actually moving in the wrong direction. Quite recently, when I attended community college, there was no tuition. There is now.


An educated public helps a country. It's why the USA began picking up the tab 200 years ago for elementary schools and 100 years ago for high schools - REGARDLESS of whether such education specifically trained one to be a plumber or nurse or farmer, simply because an educated public is a good thing.


Many countries (much poorer than the USA) have extended this through college.... we need to be moving in that direction (rather in the opposite direction). Among the MANY nations that have NO tuition whatsoever for college include: Kenya, Malaysia, Panama, Uruguay, Turkey, and Egypt (and of course nearly all western European countries). Others have tuition so low that the typical registration fee is higher than their total charge for an entire year of college. Once the world's leader in education, we're being passed by.



- Josiah




.

 

[Josiah]

A friend of mine managed to run up nearly $70,000 in two years for a masters degree without even considering an Ivy League college.

MY experience....

I completed my first two years of college at a local community college. I got a very good education! At the time, there was no tuition at all (but there is a small one now). So the cost was primarily books and that absurdly high parking fee.

I did my last two years at one of the top 10 best public university in the USA (according to Newsweek). The total tuition and fees there NOW is about $14K per year (it was less than half of that a few years ago) but VERY few actually pay that, most get at least some level of grant. I got a 100% one, I never paid any tuition at all. For me, the cost was just the education fee (I think it was about $300 per quarter) and some other minor fees - and that absurdly high parking fee. Actually, my room and board was much more expensive than my college.

I did my doctorate work at the same school. It not only cost me nothing (I suspect there was tuition - I honestly don't know - but I never got a bill) instead, I was paid between 2000 and 2800 per month (it was raised each year), the university paid me to go there. Why? Because the physics department does a LOT of research and the school gets a lot of money for this. I worked in a lab (as all grad physics students are required to do) and I was paid to do so.


My sister, with a Ph.D. in biology, had a similar experience. She is now a researcher at an Ivy League college (she's not on faculty, she simply works in a lab). Her income as a grad student was a little bit above mine since because hers was a better funded lab. Once she got her Ph.D. and finished her post doc work, her income more than doubled so maybe before that, half was going to tuition??? At her school, the tuition (alone) is about $50K but according to her, the ONLY people who pay that are children of zillionaires who can afford it and are just fine doing so. Nearly all students get at least a 50% grant. Still very expensive but this is an Ivy League school. People read these tuition rates (which SHOULD be zero!) and think people actually pay that. FEW do.




- Josiah

 

[Lamb]

Josiah, how did you manage to get a grant to pay so much of your tuition? My niece didn't get very much in grant money and her mom's income wasn't very high and there were 3 children in the household. I'm not sure how this grant stuff works when people who need it don't often get the money.

 

[Josiah]

Josiah, how did you manage to get a grant to pay so much of your tuition? My niece didn't get very much in grant money and her mom's income wasn't very high and there were 3 children in the household. I'm not sure how this grant stuff works when people who need it don't often get the money.

I was lucky.... my parents PURPOSELY did not have a "college savings account" but "hide" that money.... my parents had two other kids in college (although one also had full aid, which they didn't know)... and yes, while I paid no tuition, the school DID expect me and/or my parents to pay for room, board, books, fees, etc. Never does a school expect the student and parents to contribute nothing, no matter what the situation. And remember: While I paid no tuition, I still had to cover over 50% of the cost of college because I still had room and board, fees, books, personal expenses, etc. I cover about half that my working and my parents covered about half.


For the two years I was doing my upper division work..... I think the tuition then was around $7,000 per year (far from the only expense)... I was in an "auto transfer" program through my community college. I had to take very prescribed classes and keep a 3.0 but I had a 4.0 (all "A's"). I got a 100% scholarship (based on ability; finances was not specifically an issue). I was lucky, lol, although I had a couple of good friends in the same program and they also got 100% scholarships (and they didn't have 4.0's). Just as significant as the free tuition was that it was automatically renewable, so (with sufficient GPA) I had all this solved for both years.

But then I know lots of folks who got full rides (including my sister) - never paying a dime in tuition. Buy my sister worked HARD on this. Most students rely entirely on the college Financial Aid Office and mostly what they do is arrange loans and get the student very in debt. It's just what they do. There is a certain "budget" for this - and they dole that out - but then it's loans. I told my financial aid office I would not take out any loans. Here's what I learned from students not as lucky as me: you need to take an ACTIVE role in this..... research, meet with aid folks OFTEN (everyone must know you by first name).... remember the proverb, "You do not have because you do not ask".... when you get something, THANK THEM (not just the office) - amazing how many will renew the grant simply because they were thanked (almost no students bother). There are private agencies that will search and get money but they are expensive, most students can do this on their own. Many stress to find something about you that adds to diversity at the school, but my sis and I did well as 100% white. I think many students simply think LOANS and since that's very easy for the college to arrange, that's what they get, and then graduate with a big debt to pay back.



ADVISE TO PARENTS: Do NOT have a college savings plan. Financial aid offices will simply see that Mom and Dad can pay for this on their own. Yes, start saving for college but "hide" the money. There are ways to do this (I'm told) so that the money is either not known to the college or can't be considered by the college. Worse thing is the world is to have $50K sitting in some bank account sacrificially created by the parents and grandparents (your kid won't get a dime).


ADVISE TO STUDENTS: Besides the financial aid advise above, until the US enters the modern world and eliminates tuition, you gotta deal with this. When I was in college, I knew a LOT of students entirely putting themselves through school - and this was at a university where the tuition was over twice that of a state college. Nothin' holy about graduating in 4 years (hard to do at a lot of colleges anyway with the over-crowding). WORK. You can work 20 hours a week during school EASILY and 40-60 over the summer. Many do. This can easily cover the room and board, books, fees, personal expenses. If you can get aid for 50% of the tuition, that means parents may only be "out" $2K or 3K per year (they can probably handle that - hey, they aren't feeding you!). I didn't work during the school year (although I certainly COULD have!), but I had TWO jobs during the summers. A lot of students do this with little to nothing from Mom and Dad. You can't do this at Harvard.... but you certainly can at South Iowa College. Maybe you graduate in 5 years instead of 4; doesn't matter much. But MY advise: Never take out a loan.



Well... back to the topic....




.