Re: Degree or Not Degree?

[Margaret Spurgin <mspurgin -at- IS -dot- COM>]

Fascinating.  You manage to take the two least interesting threads STILL
circulating, braid them together, and tie on a Marxist bow.

If that weren't enjoyable enough, you contradict your central thesis
that there is no inherent value in a degree with the comment that you
are working on another degree "because I think it will be an intensive
way for me to gain some of the skills I seek to have."

Admit it. You just want to show up your comrades.

-Margaret Spurgin
-Integrity Solutions


Mc Jdub wrote:
>
> It is an established fact that, on average, those who hold degrees make
> more money over the course of their lives than those who do not.  Often
> twice as much. And, the more advanced the degree, the more money.
>
> This is true not because there is any inherent value in holding a degree
> per se, but only because we live in a classist society that seeks to
> oppress people by pitting them one against the other in whatever way(s)
> possible to exploit them to the greatest degree possible (npi) without
> inciting outright revolt.
>
> It's interesting that the issue of dress code is running in parallel
> with the topic of "to degree or not to degree," because dress, too, is a
> way of differentiating people one from the other based on (hu?)man-made
> distinctions that have no relation to worth. It's a system of
> oppression, a holdover from earlier times when to be a "gentleman" or a
> "lady" was to be privileged in ways that others were not, and was
> signified by things such as dress, or inclusion in the "professions,"
> defined narrowly.  Don't kid yourself: attitudes such as these exist
> even today -- even more so, I would venture, than most of us are willing
> either to believe or acknowledge.
>
> But maybe this is starting to change with more rational attitudes toward
> dress in the workplace and more enlightened attitudes about what it
> means to be "educated" to do a particular job. What could it possible
> matter what a tech writer is wearing while writing? (And the same of
> course holds true for *most* jobs/professions.) What could it possibly
> matter where a tech writer gained his or her skills? Isn't the end
> result the same -- having the skills? We need to resist the temptation
> to agree that these things ultimately matter, or that they have any
> relevance to doing a particular task.
>
> I have a degree, and I'm getting another one. I choose to do this
> because of the fact initially mentioned, and because I think it will be
> an intensive way for me to gain some of the skills I seek to have. I
> also feel privileged to have the opportunity to do so.  However, I don't
> think this makes me any "better" than someone who has earned their
> knowledge in other ways. Bickering over whether a degree makes one
> "better" -- better qualified, better educated, etc. -- only perpetuates
> divisions that already exist, divisions that we, as members of a
> profession (widely defined), should always seek to eradicate.
>
> $.02 and IMHO,
> Jeff Wiggin
> wiggnje -at- pssch -dot- ps -dot- ge -dot- com
>
> > ----------
> > From:         Phillip Winn[SMTP:pwinn -at- S7 -dot- COM]
> > Sent:         Monday, July 21, 1997 5:50 PM
> > To:   TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> > Subject:      Re: Degree or Not Degree?
> >
> > >I heard a radio report this morning about a study that showed that
> > those
> > >with a college degree do much better financially than those without.
> > They
> > >said that a college degree indicated that a person was able to learn,
> > which
> > >is what companies want, and that companies have to take more of a
> > risk to
> > >hire a person without a degree. The person without a college degree
> > may
> > >also be able to learn, but colleges provide certification of learning
> > >ability.
> > >
> > >Of course, the study was funded by a group of private colleges and
> > >universities, so that might have skewed their conclusions.
> >
> > Gee, just maybe. Of course, my perspective is somewhat limited, but
> > here it
> > is:
> > I was one of three roommates, all of which were software engineers,
> > one of
> > which had a little more emphasis on physics, one on programming, and
> > one
> > tended toward the creative writing side of life (that's me!). The
> > physicist
> > was going to college, incurring student loan debt, while working part
> > time
> > at a great company, while the other two of us went straight from high
> > school to jobs. We both earned far more than the third roommate, but
> > he
> > kept telling us to watch out, because he was getting a huge raise once
> > he
> > graduated and became a full-fledged physicist. He did, but by then the
> > other two of us had received a couple of merit-based raises, and we
> > still
> > out-earned the third by a good bit, not even counting the fact that he
> > had
> > student loans to pay off. It's been a few years now, and both of us
> > still
> > out-earn him.
> >
> > An isolated example, I know. I moved from California to the Midwest,
> > where
> > I took two more high-school-educated people and turned them into
> > technical
> > wizards. One of them is now a programmer, while the other does
> > technical
> > installation and documentation of large phone systems. Both of them
> > are
> > making excellent money, more than anybody their age that they know.
> >
> > All isolated incidents, I know. Anecdotal evidence does not
> > necessarily
> > invalidate a documented trend, but I would definitely suspect any
> > research
> > in this area performed by a university. Perhaps larger employers would
> > be
> > more likely to be objective?
> >
> > Another move, this time to Dallas, and yes, I still earn more than any
> > of
> > my college-educated friends, and I still don't have any student loans.
> >
> > I'm not saying that degrees are bad, just wondering when exactly they
> > are
> > supposed to pay for themselves. Keep in mind that more than 80% of
> > degreed
> > people end up working in a field unrelated to their degree.
> >
> >
> >
> > |- Phillip Winn -|- Strategy 7 -|- vox 972.458.2817 -|
> > |- pwinn -at- s7 -dot- com -|- Dallas, TX -|- fax 972.458.2218 -|
> >
> > ~~
> >  TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a
> > message
> > to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send
> > commands
> >    to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
> >   Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
> > browse the archives at
> > http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
> >  Send list questions or problems to the listowner at
> >
>
>  TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
> to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
>    to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
>   Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
> browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html