|
|
|
|
|
by bryang
3997 days ago
|
|
It makes quite a bit of sense to go back to more archaic learning methods. I don't mean that in a snarky way, but only for lack of a better term to describe very very old. Apprenticeships were how the average population learned prior to colleges becoming a normal thing. If you wanted to learn how to make chainmail, you had to get an apprenticeship with a blacksmith - learning was done on-the-job. You didn't go to college and learn how to make armor, farm, write literature and then just get whatever job when you got out. You started at a filthy young age in that one craft. Nowadays, college educations are worth basically nothing. You're not thought to be any smarter than the next guy and unless you go to a really well known institution that provides you esteem and wealthy connections, it's essentially just an advanced High School degree. The point I'm getting at is - and I've seen this in the occasional job search I've done - the Generalist role is dead. In theory, it makes sense, wouldn't 5 people with general knowledge more slowly build a worse product than 5 different experts? Experts are always wanted and that only comes through years of dedication to that craft. And you simply cannot get that in college. On a side note... I think College is just a 6 figure right-of-passage into adulthood and learning how to feed yourself, become responsible enough to wake up on time, and find good friends. |
|
The real advantage of a high level generalist education is it enables on the job training. Someone with a 2.5 GPA from a reputable collage can do most jobs in the US with an additional 1 year of training. But, someone with a 8th grade education plus 8 years working as a landscaper is far more limited should say a back problem force them into a more sedentary occupation.