[shanacarp]

I'm reminded of the U of C's Aims of Education Address when this discussion comes up.

EG: https://aims.uchicago.edu/node/83

I tend to think that many things that are now in college degree programs are actually things that should be in trade programs - we've turned everything into a degree, and in the process, stopped realizing what the value of a degree is and/or what the purpose of a theory driven/liberal arts education is.

(TL:DR if you don't end up reading the link - to think, to create the ability to teach yourself, to encounter new ideas and figure out which ones are hot air and which ones are not. To learn how to create good new ideas for yourself! To become a better human being and citizen in order to better participate in this world)

If we separated out the trade school aspect, well, it becomes very hard to value an education in the traditional degree/liberal arts sense - and it becomes easier to tell what's the value of that immediate trade school diploma by market forces. In that, then the government could apply a limit on loans to what is very knowable (market forces) and apply some other metric because of the public good gained by aiming towards education in general

[hyperion2010]

Was there in person for that address (was that 10 years ago...). In my view if you go to college today and don't get a real liberal education (distribution requirements!) then you have waisted your time and probably your money.

[shanacarp]

you're lucky. My year didn't have nearly as entertaining a speech.

I still think his points hold (as do many of the speeches points, most of which in some ways are similar).

However, attaching liberal education to everything may or may not be a good idea - and with the trade-ism of college, liberal education is sort of conceptually odd