Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thank you for the cheap and condescending moralizing -- we will both agree that US students excel there.

What a well-rounded person would do is to look for data to either corroborate or refute my point -- look, I just did it for you:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/top_performers/2016/03/us_workforce_skills_even_worse_than_we_thought.html

Supposedly better-rounded Americans are worse at Problem-solving, Numeracy AND Literacy than adults in the majority of other industrialized nations.

I read the article. I've seen others over time (pretty much all of the past 20 years or so) and it's always putting down US education. However, in those 20 years, I have not seen any other country produce the amount of business or innovation as the US. Something does not compute. Where's the gap in my understanding?

Anonymous wrote:
Thank you for the cheap and condescending moralizing -- we will both agree that US students excel there.

What a well-rounded person would do is to look for data to either corroborate or refute my point -- look, I just did it for you:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/top_performers/2016/03/us_workforce_skills_even_worse_than_we_thought.html

Supposedly better-rounded Americans are worse at Problem-solving, Numeracy AND Literacy than adults in the majority of other industrialized nations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well rounded education is good to a point, that point being HS, or in the case of some European countries, at 15. Beyond that, it's not necessary, hence the much lauded German model of split tracks (vocational vs college) starting at 16. Similar in the UK.

If you are a STEM major but like history and art, you can always take electives, and vice versa.

As our economy gets more specialized, we need more specialists, not generalists like we did in the 20th century. I'm not saying we don't need ANY such folks, but we certainly don't need as many as we used to.

That puts the "Higher Ed Bidness" in a quandry. The easiest way for them to make money is to keep the kids stay as long as possible. That has worked well in the US. As another pp pointed out, the kids need to get a MS to be on par with their European peers when it comes to depth. Why miss out on that?

I don't really get the need for "well roundedness" for everyone. A lot of tech companies are run by Indians (Google, Microsoft and Adobe to name a few). There are 1000's of them at the C-level and below in Silicon valley. Most were educated in India where the focus is NOT on well roundedness. How are they able to do what's supposedly a skillset they were not taught? So, in most cases, you either have it or you don't.

I'm also sure that most kids if given the opportunity to graduate in 3 years will focus only on the core courses and skip all the fluff. "Fluff" may be Calculus for a Exercise Therapy major and Psychology for an electrical eng major.

I'm the PP and also the poster who stated the American college students need a masters degree to be on par with European undergrads in their fields. I talked to my DC about going to college in the UK (DC has dual citizenship). When I told DC that in the UK you can graduate in 3 years (for the most part) and skip the GE classes, DC was *thrilled* and is seriously considering going to the UK for college. DC wants to major in STEM field. Cheaper too, yes, even with the airfare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well rounded education is good to a point, that point being HS, or in the case of some European countries, at 15. Beyond that, it's not necessary, hence the much lauded German model of split tracks (vocational vs college) starting at 16. Similar in the UK.

If you are a STEM major but like history and art, you can always take electives, and vice versa.

As our economy gets more specialized, we need more specialists, not generalists like we did in the 20th century. I'm not saying we don't need ANY such folks, but we certainly don't need as many as we used to.

That puts the "Higher Ed Bidness" in a quandry. The easiest way for them to make money is to keep the kids stay as long as possible. That has worked well in the US. As another pp pointed out, the kids need to get a MS to be on par with their European peers when it comes to depth. Why miss out on that?

I don't really get the need for "well roundedness" for everyone. A lot of tech companies are run by Indians (Google, Microsoft and Adobe to name a few). There are 1000's of them at the C-level and below in Silicon valley. Most were educated in India where the focus is NOT on well roundedness. How are they able to do what's supposedly a skillset they were not taught? So, in most cases, you either have it or you don't.

I'm also sure that most kids if given the opportunity to graduate in 3 years will focus only on the core courses and skip all the fluff. "Fluff" may be Calculus for a Exercise Therapy major and Psychology for an electrical eng major.

Anonymous wrote:Well rounded education is good to a point, that point being HS, or in the case of some European countries, at 15. Beyond that, it's not necessary, hence the much lauded German model of split tracks (vocational vs college) starting at 16. Similar in the UK.

If you are a STEM major but like history and art, you can always take electives, and vice versa.

As our economy gets more specialized, we need more specialists, not generalists like we did in the 20th century. I'm not saying we don't need ANY such folks, but we certainly don't need as many as we used to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.

you live in a distant past.

the number of people in the US with foreign degrees is constantly rising as is the number of Americans working abroad. you think that American colleges create well rounded kids while in fact they create entitled brats with few useful skills. best professors are no more coming to the US - in fact Americans phds are increasingly looking for job abroad. the only thing American colleges are doing better than foreign ones is writing. it's an important skill for sure but not worth it.

+1 Americans need masters degree to "master" their field whereas Europeans only need the 3 to 4 years in undergrad where they spend their entire time studying that particular field.

Also, human beings aren't plug and plays.

And what is wrong with commuter schools exactly as long as the professors are good?

Are Canadian schools closer to the European model or the US model when it comes to "teaching well roundedness"?

Based on the description here, aren't Canadian schools pretty much commuter schools after year 1 anyways?

Frankly, the main thing that is truly "well-rounded" among US undergrad students is their ignorance.

Europeans (and Canadians) may prioritize just one or two key things -- but they master them for life.

I have experience through family and friends with both European (UK and other European nations) and Canada and I think they are great institutions and people receive great educations. It is a different learning system and, yes, students master a subject with great in-depth knowledge. This I agree with. However, when you write unnecessary BS like the above bolded portion, you lose your argument and simply come across and arrogant and rude. As I've always told my kids, avoid people who must put you down in order to make themselves feel better. You have fallen into this category and it's not a good place to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.

you live in a distant past.

the number of people in the US with foreign degrees is constantly rising as is the number of Americans working abroad. you think that American colleges create well rounded kids while in fact they create entitled brats with few useful skills. best professors are no more coming to the US - in fact Americans phds are increasingly looking for job abroad. the only thing American colleges are doing better than foreign ones is writing. it's an important skill for sure but not worth it.

+1 Americans need masters degree to "master" their field whereas Europeans only need the 3 to 4 years in undergrad where they spend their entire time studying that particular field.

Also, human beings aren't plug and plays.

And what is wrong with commuter schools exactly as long as the professors are good?

Are Canadian schools closer to the European model or the US model when it comes to "teaching well roundedness"?

Based on the description here, aren't Canadian schools pretty much commuter schools after year 1 anyways?

Frankly, the main thing that is truly "well-rounded" among US undergrad students is their ignorance.

Europeans (and Canadians) may prioritize just one or two key things -- but they master them for life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.

you live in a distant past.

the number of people in the US with foreign degrees is constantly rising as is the number of Americans working abroad. you think that American colleges create well rounded kids while in fact they create entitled brats with few useful skills. best professors are no more coming to the US - in fact Americans phds are increasingly looking for job abroad. the only thing American colleges are doing better than foreign ones is writing. it's an important skill for sure but not worth it.

+1 Americans need masters degree to "master" their field whereas Europeans only need the 3 to 4 years in undergrad where they spend their entire time studying that particular field.

Also, human beings aren't plug and plays.

And what is wrong with commuter schools exactly as long as the professors are good?

Are Canadian schools closer to the European model or the US model when it comes to "teaching well roundedness"?

Based on the description here, aren't Canadian schools pretty much commuter schools after year 1 anyways?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.

you live in a distant past.

the number of people in the US with foreign degrees is constantly rising as is the number of Americans working abroad. you think that American colleges create well rounded kids while in fact they create entitled brats with few useful skills. best professors are no more coming to the US - in fact Americans phds are increasingly looking for job abroad. the only thing American colleges are doing better than foreign ones is writing. it's an important skill for sure but not worth it.

+1 Americans need masters degree to "master" their field whereas Europeans only need the 3 to 4 years in undergrad where they spend their entire time studying that particular field.

Also, human beings aren't plug and plays.

And what is wrong with commuter schools exactly as long as the professors are good?

Are Canadian schools closer to the European model or the US model when it comes to "teaching well roundedness"?

Based on the description here, aren't Canadian schools pretty much commuter schools after year 1 anyways?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.

you live in a distant past.

the number of people in the US with foreign degrees is constantly rising as is the number of Americans working abroad. you think that American colleges create well rounded kids while in fact they create entitled brats with few useful skills. best professors are no more coming to the US - in fact Americans phds are increasingly looking for job abroad. the only thing American colleges are doing better than foreign ones is writing. it's an important skill for sure but not worth it.

+1 Americans need masters degree to "master" their field whereas Europeans only need the 3 to 4 years in undergrad where they spend their entire time studying that particular field.

Also, human beings aren't plug and plays.

And what is wrong with commuter schools exactly as long as the professors are good?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.

you live in a distant past.

the number of people in the US with foreign degrees is constantly rising as is the number of Americans working abroad. you think that American colleges create well rounded kids while in fact they create entitled brats with few useful skills. best professors are no more coming to the US - in fact Americans phds are increasingly looking for job abroad. the only thing American colleges are doing better than foreign ones is writing. it's an important skill for sure but not worth it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody cares about the difference in going to a #27 school v a #28 school.

The Canadian schools are known well by those who need to know about them. Doing well is what matters (here or there).

Such as? I'm interested in how they are perceived in the US once the kid decides to come back for Grad school or look for work..

They do fine. It is as if they went to a US school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing, unhooked students can get into a world-ranked university in Canada, and aren't penalized the way they are by the holistic admissions process in the US.

same for Europe. Nobody cares about your struggles or a demographic profile. Not to mention they are much cheaper.

European universities are large commuter schools. Kids take few courses outside their major, resulting in really lopsided educations that don't enable you to switch jobs easily. They are a poor fit for the US economy. I find that Europeans know a lot about their fields and are mind bogglingly ignorant about other things.

Also, the professors are paid little, so the best ones come to the US.

At the graduate level, it's worse. Unless its from Oxbridge, a foreign PhD really isn't taken seriously in the US.