Is it possible?
-
-
I did it (class of '75) from Gtown. $3,500 a year. By playing in a band (which had a certain fanbase) and also playing Barry Manilowesque songs on a twelve string (to women of a certain age.)
My older daughter did it at U of Florida through scholarships (non-dependent on parental income), a BM and a MBA.) (Her junior year she netted us $139.34!)
My younger daughter--pay, pay, PAY. ;-(
-
I don't it's realistic for most students to do all this. My son did two years at community college (commuting about 50 miles each way), which reduced the debt, and worked full-time for year, but you can't realistically hope to earn enough to pay off all the debt.
Also, this isn't a zero-sum game. If you work long hours as well as studying it's going to have an impact on your grades, as well as your social life and possibly your mental health.
And not to be a techno-snob, but the author is an associate professor of English. I'm sure English has many challenges but it's not the same as mechanical engineering, law or medicine. OK, I am being a snob. But clearly not all subjects are equal.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Is it possible?:
And not to be a techno-snob, but the author is an associate professor of English. I'm sure English has many challenges but it's not the same as mechanical engineering, law or medicine. OK, I am being a snob. But clearly not all subjects are equal.
The first rule of Dunning–Kruger is that no one escapes Dunning–Kruger.
Don't knock what you yourself can't do.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Is it possible?:
And not to be a techno-snob, but the author is an associate professor of English. I'm sure English has many challenges but it's not the same as mechanical engineering, law or medicine. OK, I am being a snob. But clearly not all subjects are equal.
The first rule of Dunning–Kruger is that no one escapes Dunning–Kruger.
Don't knock what you yourself can't do.
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is it possible?:
Don't knock what you yourself can't do.
I'm actually fairly sure I would have been better at English than I was at mathematics and physics. I'm completely sure I would have enjoyed it more. Not many people go into engineering for fun, and fewer still go into English for the money. You're right, though, I didn't walk a mile in their shoes so I can't really comment.
However, I also saw how hard people studying mechanical engineering and medicine had to work, and it was noticeably more than I was doing. Theoretical physics might have been conceptually more difficult, but the hours of hard slog put in was quite a bit less.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is it possible?:
Don't knock what you yourself can't do.
I'm actually fairly sure I would have been better at English than I was at mathematics and physics. I'm completely sure I would have enjoyed it more. Not many people go into engineering for fun, and fewer still go into English for the money. You're right, though, I didn't walk a mile in their shoes so I can't really comment.
However, I also saw how hard people studying mechanical engineering and medicine had to work, and it was noticeably more than I was doing. Theoretical physics might have been conceptually more difficult, but the hours of hard slog put in was quite a bit less.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Is it possible?:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is it possible?:
Don't knock what you yourself can't do.
I'm actually fairly sure I would have been better at English than I was at mathematics and physics.
Do you mean better at studying English, or better working in a related industry? I ask because just about no one outside of those who do that kind of work knows what the work actually entails—including hacks who were exceptional English students.
There are indeed myriad bullshit humanities programs throughout the world, and the humanities in general are rife with wastebasket degrees. But that's a mark against the institutions, not the field of study. (By the way, it wasn't conservatives who made them that way.)
But if you want to quantify the relative intellectual merit of fields of study, you can't, because It's apples and oranges. For example, Dave Chappelle may not have made it as far as differential equations in mathematics, but that doesn't make him a dipshit. And if you're exceptional in mechanical engineering or a savant of a surgeon, it doesn't mean you can tell a joke to save your life.
However, I also saw how hard people studying mechanical engineering and medicine had to work, and it was noticeably more than I was doing.
Chappelle put in a good decade's worth of crappy comedy before anyone paid any attention to him. When he was younger, he was booed out of the Apollo.
But for that decade he was working on his stand-up, he was doing so in nightclubs and on stages. Where there were no, say, business majors studying for their degrees. The hard work isn't known to them. And so when the business majors graduate, get jobs that afford them a Netflix subscription and they see Chappelle on TV, those who like his stand-up like to claim that he's just naturally talented and some people are just like that.
Our collective narratives about hard work and talent are canards.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Is it possible?:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is it possible?:
Don't knock what you yourself can't do.
I'm actually fairly sure I would have been better at English than I was at mathematics and physics.
Do you mean better at studying English, or better working in a related industry? I ask because just about no one outside of those who do that kind of work knows what the work actually entails—including hacks who were exceptional English students.
There are indeed myriad bullshit humanities programs throughout the world, and the humanities in general are rife with wastebasket degrees. But that's a mark against the institutions, not the field of study. (By the way, it wasn't conservatives who made them that way.)
But if you want to quantify the relative intellectual merit of fields of study, you can't, because It's apples and oranges. For example, Dave Chappelle may not have made it as far as differential equations in mathematics, but that doesn't make him a dipshit. And if you're exceptional in mechanical engineering or a savant of a surgeon, it doesn't mean you can tell a joke to save your life.
However, I also saw how hard people studying mechanical engineering and medicine had to work, and it was noticeably more than I was doing.
Chappelle put in a good decade's worth of crappy comedy before anyone paid any attention to him. When he was younger, he was booed out of the Apollo.
But for that decade he was working on his stand-up, he was doing so in nightclubs and on stages. Where there were no, say, business majors studying for their degrees. The hard work isn't known to them. And so when the business majors graduate, get jobs that afford them a Netflix subscription and they see Chappelle on TV, those who like his stand-up like to claim that he's just naturally talented and some people are just like that.
Our collective narratives about hard work and talent are canards.
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is it possible?:
Do you mean better at studying English, or better working in a related industry? I ask because just about no one outside of those who do that kind of work knows what the work actually entails—including hacks who were exceptional English students.
I meant studying English. I don't really know about related jobs. I have worked with technical writers and people who put marketing literature together, but I don't know if that's what you're talking about.
As far as college to work goes, I studied maths and physics, but I don't use that in my work at all. Like, zero relevance. My job is mostly basic high-school level electronics, communication and applying what Liam Neeson referred to as a very particular set of skills. I learnt those by doing the job.
Also, I wasn't trying to imply that English majors are less intelligent. I was just saying that in my own personal experience an English degree isn't as labour-intensive as some highly technical degrees, which makes it more difficult to work a job as well as do the degree and get good grades. My feeling was that the mechanical and civil engineering undergraduates I knew were put through an unnecessarily intense 3 years - this was in a college school in the UK where a bachelors is only 3 years, but also where there is very little study outside the major discipline, so a little different from the US. So, maybe the fault lies with the engineering school rather than the English department.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is it possible?:
Do you mean better at studying English, or better working in a related industry? I ask because just about no one outside of those who do that kind of work knows what the work actually entails—including hacks who were exceptional English students.
I meant studying English. I don't really know about related jobs. I have worked with technical writers and people who put marketing literature together, but I don't know if that's what you're talking about.
As far as college to work goes, I studied maths and physics, but I don't use that in my work at all. Like, zero relevance. My job is mostly basic high-school level electronics, communication and applying what Liam Neeson referred to as a very particular set of skills. I learnt those by doing the job.
Also, I wasn't trying to imply that English majors are less intelligent. I was just saying that in my own personal experience an English degree isn't as labour-intensive as some highly technical degrees, which makes it more difficult to work a job as well as do the degree and get good grades. My feeling was that the mechanical and civil engineering undergraduates I knew were put through an unnecessarily intense 3 years - this was in a college school in the UK where a bachelors is only 3 years, but also where there is very little study outside the major discipline, so a little different from the US. So, maybe the fault lies with the engineering school rather than the English department.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Is it possible?:
I meant studying English. I don't really know about related jobs. I have worked with technical writers and people who put marketing literature together, but I don't know if that's what you're talking about.
Well, there are various tiers, like anything else. For marketing literature, for example, there's a world of difference between using a Canva template to make a social media post for a B2B webinar, and coming up with the concepts that will make the average person who's cagey about their attention and has never heard of you eager to learn. A staggering number of people in those positions can't actually do the latter, because it's hard. Just not hard in the way that engineering or medicine is hard.
As far as college to work goes, I studied maths and physics, but I don't use that in my work at all. Like, zero relevance.
I did, too. I was a math/physics major when I started undergrad.
Also, I wasn't trying to imply that English majors are less intelligent. I was just saying that in my own personal experience an English degree isn't as labour-intensive as some highly technical degrees, which makes it more difficult to work a job as well as do the degree and get good grades. My feeling was that the mechanical and civil engineering undergraduates I knew were put through an unnecessarily intense 3 years - this was in a college school in the UK where a bachelors is only 3 years, but also where there is very little study outside the major discipline, so a little different from the US. So, maybe the fault lies with the engineering school rather than the English department.
The screening processes, curricula and academic standards in many English departments are definitely laughable. But not for all of 'em.
-
I did it (class of '75) from Gtown. $3,500 a year. By playing in a band (which had a certain fanbase) and also playing Barry Manilowesque songs on a twelve string (to women of a certain age.)
My older daughter did it at U of Florida through scholarships (non-dependent on parental income), a BM and a MBA.) (Her junior year she netted us $139.34!)
My younger daughter--pay, pay, PAY. ;-(
