career

[Dylan King]

And my favorite Dennis article...

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/denn ... 0323.shtml

[Rick Denney]

There is not a better place in America to get a good brain wash than the university system.

If your brain is dirty, you can get it washed anywhere. I see quite a bit of laundering on some of the websites you've linked us to, heh, heh. Everyone has a slant on things, and it's up to us and our principles to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Don't blame colleges because parents don't instill principles in their kids. Yes, some colleges have become narrow-minded in many ways. I endured many classes taught from perspectives I didn't agree with, but still survived and made decent grades without them infecting me. It's perhaps a little more challenging now, but it's still the same process.

Dr. Sloan of these pages once made a good statement during a visit. He said that any educated person can find a way to make a decent living for themselves. Being educated is far more than being trained for a job, and it's a process of learning how to sift knowledge through the filter of principles.

Most of the great artists I've admired (in any art) have been educated, even though many of them were not educated in the standard ways. C. S. Lewis had trouble in schools and ended up being tutored privately before learning how to thrive in school and then college. Ansel Adams would probably have been labeled ADD these days and drugged into submission, but instead fought against schooling and ended up teaching himself, the hard way, as an adult, after music (the photography came later) forced him to reckon with his own discipline. Vaughan Williams threw himself into his schooling from the start and was a careful and dedicated student, yet it didn't ruin his music any at all. William F. Buckley was also a disciplined student and admirer of academic rigor and I can't tell that it limited his ability to think and write in any way, despite that his views then and now flowed sharply against the current of most universities, then and now. I know of very few true artists, even those so talented they needed no real training at all, who did not still ended up remarkably well educated. (Italics are the edit--and that one really needed editing, heh, heh.)

The paths to education are varied and college isn't the only one, but it's certainly one of the more efficient ways of getting an education. It's an opportunity easy to waste and hard to regain once wasted.

While in school, the "job" is to do it well.

Rick "who had to fill lots of gaps in his own education" Denney

[Doug@GT]

There is not a better place in America to get a good brain wash than the university system.

Not to get too off topic, but...

...I challenge anyone who alleges that "brain-washing" is the norm in American Universities to check these allegations out first hand. Get ready to be proven wrong, though.

Here's a truth that may come as a shock to those who read nothing but Ann Coulter all day: someone expressing a contrary opinion is not brainwashing.

I view a liberal professor as a challenge. If I can successfully defend my position, then I can be confident that I know what I'm talking about. If the professor cooks my goose, then I'm just more motivated to go study and beat them next time.

At the same time, unless we're discussing a controversial issue, I don't care who my professor voted for in the last election.

I've been in a class where such "brain-washing" was alleged to have occurred. The professor expressed an opinion that some students disagreed with, and they complained to the administration. Never mention the fact that they were failing the class before then (on the basis of a test load with such ideologically loaded questions as "Describe the budget process"). Those of us who actually put in some time studying instead of devising ways to instigate controversy made A's, while the whiners were (unfairly) allowed to drop the course.

"Brain-washing" is a myth. Pure and simple. Rick probably said it better in his post, but I had to throw in my two cents.

Doug "most of you know my personal political views, anyway"

[Dylan King]

I certainly did the "job" for many years. I had a 4.0 GPA in high school and a combined 3.7 GPA at UCLA. And yes, I dropped out because I didn't want to complete the language requirement. But there were more reasons than just that.

I came into college a die hard liberal. I campaigned for Clinton with the Bruin Democrats. I loved Jesse Jackson and Al Frankin, and I didn't even know why. Perhaps because my parents are lefitists. It sure didn't help things having a bunch of socialist minded professors.

It was my required sociology course that turned me around. I actually started thinking, because I couldn't believe the hatred that was expressed to white males in the class. I didn't even understant it. I had black friends. All colors of the rainbow, but the professor seemed to believe that I was racist because of the color of me skin. It all seemed so strange.

Fortunately I started listening to people like Larry Elder, Dennis Prager, and Art Bell on talk radio. I thought to myself that I was learning REAL things for a change, and when I got into class at UCLA, I got more and more frustrated at the crap they were telling us. I was getting a far better education from the radio than I was at school. Could this even be possible? Could all the things I believed in be a big lie?

Don't get me wrong. The music education I received at UCLA was fantastic. Tommy Johnson is one of those people who turned me on to the truth, and got my brain dirty for the first time in my life. I was also blessed to receive a full scholatship for tuba and play in all of the top ensembles, and I wouldn't take any of it back. I learned plenty in college, but probably the most important thing I learned was to think, challenge, and be an individual. Therefore, with a big eight units to go, I packed up my stuff and got out. I'm sure the good people at UCLA loved that, after spending all that money on my scholarships. Well, I guess that's too bad. I'm never going back.

Previous posts have been right about the college experience. It's about finding yourself, what you want to do, and who you want to be. But be very careful while you are there. Just because someone has a big fancy degree doesn't mean the crows won't run away. One must search for truth in this world as much as they can. Life is short, and it isn't all fun and games. Go for the good grades if you wish. I found that part easy, but surprizingly unrewarding. But more importantly, give yourself a chance to be you. And take that ride wherever it leads.

-MSM

[Joe Baker]

One thing you hint strongly at, MSM, that I'd like to emphasize: do NOT go to college to find out who you are! There are any number of people there who will be glad to tell you who you are; problem is, no two of them will agree! Know your values, know your morals going in. Examine your beliefs before, during and after college; but don't let the teachers OR the other students redefine who you are. This was the worst mistake I made in college. I gave in to the pressure to conform to the typical collegiate lifestyle, and did things that I not only regret personally, but that damaged me academically.

The plus side of this is that you can SHED any part of your identity from high school that you want to be rid of (unless you're going to college with all your high school chums). If you were known for some bad habits, you can get a fresh start. If you picked up a stupid nickname in elementary school and never did shake it, you can get rid of it. Just be sure YOU decide to "change who you are", and don't let someone else decide for you!
____________________________
Joe Baker, who wishes someone had warned him about this before college.

[adam0408]

... The government no longer cares about us,...

When did it?

And why should it?

Besides, you say yourself that the government will hand out gobs of student loan money, in addition to $5000 per year in grant money. That's significant largesse, if you ask me, especially considering that the general welfare isn't notably enhanced by the addition of more college-trained tuber players (though one's right to pursue happiness certainly includes the right to try to be a tuber player).

What I don't understand is how someone who has this golden opportunity -- it sounds like a college degree that will wind up costing less than $20,000 -- would allow themselves to have a GPA in the low 2's! I hope, Adam0408, that you aren't doing that. People who have any interest in developing their own full potential surely would avail themselves of the opportunity to LEARN some art, literature, history, science, mathematics, economics, etc., AND to give themselves that "Plan B" mentioned earlier.
______________________________
Joe Baker, who is sympathetic to the challenges of paying for college, but cautions that one must care for ONESELF, rather than expecting to be cared FOR.

There are many people who, for whatever reason, decide to let their grades slip down into the 2's. This system is set up so that people that get into college with poor study habits can salvage their experience before it goes completely down the toilet. I have not had this experience. However, this last year was really painful for me academically because I tried working (bartending mostly) and going to school at the same time first semester, and what with jazz, combos, band council, concerts, working, and trying to study, I got really really burned out. This really threw me off, along with a time when I really soured on the whole college experience.

The reason I am so peeved at the government and its tuition hikes is because:

1. They ignore people ages 18-25 as a possible voting pool with actual pull in the "real world" -therfore, tuition hikes always resulting in more debt for students because politicians dont care.

2. I go to a state college. A really good state college at that. State colleges were set up so everyone has a shot at a college education, regardless of financial status. Thats how the government looked out for us in the past. Hikes in tuition and drops in grant money makes state colleges much closer to private institutions in price/debt acquisition.

3. As tuition costs raise, a four year degree is becoming more and more useless. Everyone has a college degree these days, and it seems that if you want to be a manager a target, you need at least a B.A. So therefore, the logical conclusion is to go get a masters degree to set yourself apart from the flock of ordinary people. However, the further you go up the educational ladder, the more specialized you become, and the more worthless your education becomes in general society. Thats me being bitter.....

Education has become a big huge catch 22 in America today. These are things every parent should be concerned about, and something I think that very few people think about BEFORE they enter college.

HOWS THAT FOR OFF TOPIC!

[Joe Baker]

If you picked up a stupid nickname in elementary school and never did shake it, you can get rid of it. Just be sure YOU decide to "change who you are", and don't let someone else decide for you!

Yeah Stinky,

I totally agree!

If you only knew my real nickname...

Let's just say "Stinky" would have been a step up!
______________________________
Joe Baker, who ain't talkin'!

[Biggs]

Go for the good grades if you wish. I found that part easy, but surprizingly unrewarding. But more importantly, give yourself a chance to be you. And take that ride wherever it leads.

-MSM

I identify completely with that statement. However I have also found that getting good grades opens up more opportunities to let me do what I find to be rewarding.

[Ames0325]

As a college student paying for my own education I understand the pain of tuition hikes but wanted to point something out:

1. They ignore people ages 18-25 as a possible voting pool with actual pull in the "real world" -therfore, tuition hikes always resulting in more debt for students because politicians dont care.

there's a simple solution to this one: VOTE!!!! and get all your friends to vote too.

The Problem:
For over two decades, young people have been turning out to vote in declining numbers. Less than half of eligible young people between the ages of 18 and 24 voted in recent national elections (36.1% in 2000). These are substantially lower participation rates than that of older voters (+/- 70%). Surveys consistently report that young people are unconvinced that voting is an effective tool to better their communities. Since the strength of a democracy is measured by the participation of its citizens, particularly the participation of its younger citizens, this trend points to a troubling future for America's democracy.......
Why Young Voters Are Ignored:
Presidential campaign strategies emphasize a focus on voters that 1) will have a reliable voter turnout for a particular candidate, and 2) will be likely to turnout and vote for that particular candidate. This has been the conventional wisdom of campaigns for many years, and each year as youth voter turnout declines, the rationale is further perpetuated. Because young people don’t vote, campaigns feel they shouldn’t waste resources targeting young voters. As a result, more and more young people feel disengaged in the very process that drives the engine of our democracy.

because the lowest percentage of voters are young people. YOung people will be ignored. Many people say they won't vote becasue politicians don't pay attention but politicians don't pay attention because we don't vote--that's how it works.


Now I know that America's education is fundamentally flawed but whining about it on tubenet is going to do none of us any good so now I am going to go practice.
Amy

[TubaRay]

You go, Amy. Well done! This is one of the older guy, who votes every chance he is offered.

[windshieldbug]

Let's just say "Stinky" would have been a step up!
______________________________
Joe Baker, who ain't talkin'!

Hey- this is a family BBS; let's keep violas out of this!

[Tubaryan12]

TubaRay said:

This is one of the older guy, who votes every chance he is offered.

DITTO!

[rascaljim]

WOW 70% of adults are voting? That's news to me. I'd always heard 30-40% for a total percentage overall.

Southpark had a very good message about voting that relates to this kinda thing well.

Jim

[Joe Baker]

That's 70% of older voters.

I haven't seen the actual numbers, but if you're talking about people 55 or 60 & over, that sounds about right. Those older folks, especially the ones who remember WWII, take their voting rights very seriously.

(Forgive the following tirade; it really has nothing to do with anything that's been said by anyone here, just another one of my cantankerous, bellicose blatherings) I'd be in favor of anyone voting, as long as they spend time really studying to understand the issues, and make a really informed vote. I just want to scream when I hear someone the day of the election saying "everyone should go vote." AAARRRGGHH!!!! NO!! People who haven't been paying attention SHOULD NOT VOTE. I don't care if they're young or old, black, white or purple, men or women -- if you're going to vote, spend time studying both sides of each issue, and hearing what both candidates have to say. If you don't know what powers the candidate will hold, find out. Know their records. Know who is giving them money. You can't learn these things in 15 minutes on election day! It takes time, days and weeks before the election, to minimize the chances that you're being hoodwinked by a smooth talker. Only then can your vote really speak for you, rather than just being a tool in the hands of a salesman!

Uh... how did I get on this soapbox...?
______________________________
Joe Baker, who finds that happening more and more often these days....

[Doug@GT]

That's 70% of older voters.

I haven't seen the actual numbers, but if you're talking about people 55 or 60 & over, that sounds about right. Those older folks, especially the ones who remember WWII, take their voting rights very seriously.

(Forgive the following tirade; it really has nothing to do with anything that's been said by anyone here, just another one of my cantankerous, bellicose blatherings) I'd be in favor of anyone voting, as long as they spend time really studying to understand the issues, and make a really informed vote. I just want to scream when I hear someone the day of the election saying "everyone should go vote." AAARRRGGHH!!!! NO!! People who haven't been paying attention SHOULD NOT VOTE. I don't care if they're young or old, black, white or purple, men or women -- if you're going to vote, spend time studying both sides of each issue, and hearing what both candidates have to say. If you don't know what powers the candidate will hold, find out. Know their records. Know who is giving them money. You can't learn these things in 15 minutes on election day! It takes time, days and weeks before the election, to minimize the chances that you're being hoodwinked by a smooth talker. Only then can your vote really speak for you, rather than just being a tool in the hands of a salesman!

Uh... how did I get on this soapbox...?
______________________________
Joe Baker, who finds that happening more and more often these days....

WARNING--this post may offend some:

Why not have a "real" literacy test at the polls?

For example...

Answer one of the following:
1)Who is the Vice President?
2)How many branches are there in the Federal Government?
3)Name on of your Senators.
4)Identify at least two candidates in any one race in today's election.

And yet, I'm sure someone would find a way to call that racist.

Doug "screw demagogues"

[windshieldbug]

Why not have a "real" literacy test at the polls?

For example...

Answer one of the following:
1)Who is the Vice President?
2)How many branches are there in the Federal Government?
3)Name on of your Senators.
4)Identify at least two candidates in any one race in today's election.

And yet, I'm sure someone would find a way to call that racist.

At least Literist ...