This is a great article, even though I disagree with most of it. I think it's a great article because the conventional wisdom about college does need to be challenged. Just like the notion that you have to attend a prestigious college to be successful needs to be debunked, the notion that you have to attend college at all should be challenged.
I'd agree wholeheartedly with anyone who said that college should not be a default choice. There are all kinds of amazing opportunities for learning now that don't require a degree. He had me while he was arguing that college can be a big waste of time for a lot of people - but he starts to lose me when he starts to argue against college.
Personally, I have my doubts about anyone learning advanced math or physics without an intellectual environment similar to the one you'll get at college. I learned from my peers in a study group at least as much as from my professors. I suppose you don't strictly have to be enrolled - and maybe you could view webcasts and form a general study group outside the university - but that would be an argument against a formal degree, not an argument against a college education.
One thing to add - he's not totally off base about the 400K price tag. If you could earn 50K/year as a high school grad, that's 200K in lost earnings (though it would be taxed). Stanford's tuition is about 40K/year now, right? So there's another 160K. Not too far off (I wouldn't count living expenses, because those would be incurred regardless of whether you were in college).
A high school grad with no skills isn't going to earn 50K a year as a dishwasher. But someone smart enough to get through Computer Science at MIT might easily blow through the 50K/year estimate. So the opportunity cost could actually be much higher than 400K.
I think including potential wages is at least a little weaselly. Besides the fact that you can work while going to school, get scholarships, etc, you could just as easily say that any lost earning potential while taking classes should quickly be made up by the difference in your wages from having a degree.
Even if you do, 50K/year as a high school graduate (at least in the US) is being pretty optimistic. I don't think most of my friends in non-technical programs didn't even make that out of college. The average starting salary for a BS CS grad even is probably still only around 50K.
This is why the right answer is "it depends". And it's why I liked the original article, even though I disagree with the conclusion that college is a waste of time. It might be a waste of time, it might be useful but not worth the cost, and it might be enormously useful and well worth the cost.
I have a feeling a really good hacker who can do consulting work, or join a startup, could easily earn more than 50K, and might be ahead of college grads by the time they do enter the workforce. Think of it this way - you might make more with PhD than a BS, but you won't necessarily earn more than you would with a BS+6years experience, and even if you do, you have to account for lost earnings.
Of course, High School only vs. BS is a very very different equation from BS only vs Ph.D. Personally, I do think that smart people who want a career in a technology related field would be well advised to attend college.
Comments
This is a great article, even though I disagree with most of it. I think it's a great article because the conventional wisdom about college does need to be challenged. Just like the notion that you have to attend a prestigious college to be successful needs to be debunked, the notion that you have to attend college at all should be challenged.
I'd agree wholeheartedly with anyone who said that college should not be a default choice. There are all kinds of amazing opportunities for learning now that don't require a degree. He had me while he was arguing that college can be a big waste of time for a lot of people - but he starts to lose me when he starts to argue against college.
Personally, I have my doubts about anyone learning advanced math or physics without an intellectual environment similar to the one you'll get at college. I learned from my peers in a study group at least as much as from my professors. I suppose you don't strictly have to be enrolled - and maybe you could view webcasts and form a general study group outside the university - but that would be an argument against a formal degree, not an argument against a college education.
One thing to add - he's not totally off base about the 400K price tag. If you could earn 50K/year as a high school grad, that's 200K in lost earnings (though it would be taxed). Stanford's tuition is about 40K/year now, right? So there's another 160K. Not too far off (I wouldn't count living expenses, because those would be incurred regardless of whether you were in college).
A high school grad with no skills isn't going to earn 50K a year as a dishwasher. But someone smart enough to get through Computer Science at MIT might easily blow through the 50K/year estimate. So the opportunity cost could actually be much higher than 400K.
I think including potential wages is at least a little weaselly. Besides the fact that you can work while going to school, get scholarships, etc, you could just as easily say that any lost earning potential while taking classes should quickly be made up by the difference in your wages from having a degree.
Even if you do, 50K/year as a high school graduate (at least in the US) is being pretty optimistic. I don't think most of my friends in non-technical programs didn't even make that out of college. The average starting salary for a BS CS grad even is probably still only around 50K.
This is why the right answer is "it depends". And it's why I liked the original article, even though I disagree with the conclusion that college is a waste of time. It might be a waste of time, it might be useful but not worth the cost, and it might be enormously useful and well worth the cost.
I have a feeling a really good hacker who can do consulting work, or join a startup, could easily earn more than 50K, and might be ahead of college grads by the time they do enter the workforce. Think of it this way - you might make more with PhD than a BS, but you won't necessarily earn more than you would with a BS+6years experience, and even if you do, you have to account for lost earnings.
Of course, High School only vs. BS is a very very different equation from BS only vs Ph.D. Personally, I do think that smart people who want a career in a technology related field would be well advised to attend college.