The Devaluation of College Degrees
I was reading a post somewhere written by a PhD student in physics. He was lamenting on how degrees have been "dumbed-down" and are no longer for the elite. They have become easier to obtain because of less requirements. Instead of being for the very intelligent and hard-working, those with less than above-average abilities can get college degrees.
He said that there are many people who persue master's and doctoral degrees in sciences who don't have big questions they want to answer. It is bad for science to have people studying it who are not passionate enough about what they do. Also, since the degrees have become easier to get, there is not as much knowledge behind that diploma as there used to be.
I remember hearing the same thing said by V.S. Naipaul. When I was an undergraduate student, I went to see him speak just after he won the Nobel Prize. During a question and answer period, he stated that it would be better for students to obtain science degrees rather than arts and humanity degrees, because many of the requirements for them have been taken away. For example, students of English literature used to have to learn Old English and now no longer have to. Instead of degrees going to elite people, they are able to be given to more of the population. That idea stayed with me. I had never thought about that.
Yet still, most people haven't been highly educated. I do know that the vast majority of the population, even in industralised nations, do not have college degrees. The higher the degree, the less percentage of people there are that have them. In 2005 27.7% of U.S. citizens had a bachelor's degree, 8.9% had a master's degree, and 3% had a doctoral degree. Those figures are similar or less in many other industralised nations.
Obtaining a degree shouldn't just be about getting a piece of paper to get a job, it must also be to want to learn something we are passionate about. If we aren't passionate about what we study, then we should just study something else or stop studying altogether. Yet so many people are just after a piece of paper. Of course, with that piece of paper comes many job opportunities, which without that piece of paper they would not exist.
I do wonder how many people who get accepted into Master's or PhD programmes are just in it for a degree. How many of those people want to be scholars, experts in their fields, or how many just want job advancement?
I do doubt that quality standards will ever be the way they were many years ago. Nobody wants to be told "no", so things will still be made easier so more people can get the degrees.
He said that there are many people who persue master's and doctoral degrees in sciences who don't have big questions they want to answer. It is bad for science to have people studying it who are not passionate enough about what they do. Also, since the degrees have become easier to get, there is not as much knowledge behind that diploma as there used to be.
I remember hearing the same thing said by V.S. Naipaul. When I was an undergraduate student, I went to see him speak just after he won the Nobel Prize. During a question and answer period, he stated that it would be better for students to obtain science degrees rather than arts and humanity degrees, because many of the requirements for them have been taken away. For example, students of English literature used to have to learn Old English and now no longer have to. Instead of degrees going to elite people, they are able to be given to more of the population. That idea stayed with me. I had never thought about that.
Yet still, most people haven't been highly educated. I do know that the vast majority of the population, even in industralised nations, do not have college degrees. The higher the degree, the less percentage of people there are that have them. In 2005 27.7% of U.S. citizens had a bachelor's degree, 8.9% had a master's degree, and 3% had a doctoral degree. Those figures are similar or less in many other industralised nations.
Obtaining a degree shouldn't just be about getting a piece of paper to get a job, it must also be to want to learn something we are passionate about. If we aren't passionate about what we study, then we should just study something else or stop studying altogether. Yet so many people are just after a piece of paper. Of course, with that piece of paper comes many job opportunities, which without that piece of paper they would not exist.
I do wonder how many people who get accepted into Master's or PhD programmes are just in it for a degree. How many of those people want to be scholars, experts in their fields, or how many just want job advancement?
I do doubt that quality standards will ever be the way they were many years ago. Nobody wants to be told "no", so things will still be made easier so more people can get the degrees.
Comments