tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post5151955044565442124..comments2024-03-27T23:06:03.736-05:00Comments on The Music Salon: Higher EducationBryan Townsendhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09482696991279345516noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-80459435396817116282017-07-12T08:07:34.506-05:002017-07-12T08:07:34.506-05:00Anonymous, that is a very good point. Philosophica...Anonymous, that is a very good point. Philosophically I am more of a libertarian than a supporter of big government, so your critique may have uncovered a serious inconsistency! More proof that we arrive at the truth, or close to it, by debate.<br /><br />No, really not trying to make a pro-government case, not consciously. Let me try and sort this out. One's own biography can be a barrier to understanding, it seems. Yes, hefty state subsidies for unmotivated students who are not college material seem a poor investment. It turns out that I was not so unmotivated, as my academic career was fairly good. So I guess the question is, how can the admissions officers make a valid judgement. In my case, there was little to show that I would become a good scholar until I actually got to university, when my intellectual life took off. To what extent does performance in a high school environment reveal university potential? Are there statistics on that? The case of a friend of mine comes to mind. He and I went through high school together and he was a high-achiever while I pretty much hated it. He went on to university and flunked out of first year. He tried twice more at different institutions with the same result. I worked for a couple of years then went to university and did very well. Our high school records were contra-indicative of our college performance. So how do admissions officers take that into account?Bryan Townsendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09482696991279345516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-77844236866448427322017-07-11T23:14:34.483-05:002017-07-11T23:14:34.483-05:00I was not talking about your own education. You st...I was not talking about your own education. You stated your preference for the easy-admission/hard-graduation model like the one McGill favored. This implies a high dropout rate. So my question is, Why should the state subsidize college dropouts? Why shouldn't it, instead, screen carefully at admission time so that its subsidies don't get wasted on students who never graduate?<br /><br />I understand you're trying to make a pro-government case. You tell us that, without the helpful governments of BC and Quebec, you would have been uneducated. You've done very well and you're the poster child of big government. I get that and I support that. I think it's a good use of taxpayer's money to help citizens from every background achieve their potential. What I don't understand is why you would also support state subsidies for unmotivated students who are not college material. To me that's socialism run amok. Why are you supporting it?<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-45729303781667664862017-07-11T17:40:09.167-05:002017-07-11T17:40:09.167-05:00I have a smart friend who graduated McGill then go...I have a smart friend who graduated McGill then got doctorate at Oxford. Yale School of Music is free to anyone who gets in, and they cannot fake or privilege their way through, the musicians there are plainly among the best! Thomas Friedman's latest book, Thanks For Being Late, discusses the relative obsolescence of college/university for many careers, and even collected info on free sources of technical education that qualify for good jobs anybody who completes the trainings. So many college graduates are buried in debt and either unemployed or in a miserable cubicle --I tell my son go to community college cheap, get all your basic courses there, and don't even think about an expensive school unless you show me a serious career plan that requires it.Will Wilkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997868915978439364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-57289595422639026312017-07-11T14:10:49.697-05:002017-07-11T14:10:49.697-05:00That's a very interesting perspective! I'm...That's a very interesting perspective! I'm not a dropout, at least not from the Bachelors and Concert Diploma programs. I have both those degrees. So I guess the appropriate response would be, why should the government subsidize programs that only let in the well-connected and don't give them much of an education? Or am I missing something?<br /><br />McGill isn't free, but it sure is cheap!Bryan Townsendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09482696991279345516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-41508513781067844692017-07-11T11:55:12.694-05:002017-07-11T11:55:12.694-05:00The easy-admission/difficult-graduation model only...The easy-admission/difficult-graduation model only works for state schools that don't mind spending taxpayer's money. McGill is essentially free for Quebec residents (Harvard's tuition is 20 times bigger!) Why should the government subsidize college dropouts?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com