When millions of students are attending postsecondary schools, whether that be community colleges, four-year universities, or graduate schools, it is reasonable to ask for justification of a student 's education. In “Live and Learn: Why we have college,” the author, Louis Menand, proposes several answers to the question of what is the return of higher education. Menand, a university professor, was asked by one of his students, “why did we have to buy this book?” (74). This question was asking Menard to “justify the return on investment in a college education,” and led him to develop three theories, each one being a view a person could hold on the value of collegiate education (74). Throughout the article, he uses pieces of evidence pulled from
…show more content…
In a society where you cannot pick out the smartest person in the room based on appearances, there needs to be a sorting mechanism in place to do that. If you are a theory one person, you believe “college is, essentially, a four-year intelligence test” where a student’s abilities are tested, and after four years, “graduates get a score, the G.P.A.” (74). This score is used by employers to weigh the intelligence, and everything that goes with it, of an applicant, so they can effectively rule out less qualified people. A theory one person should be worried about how college has become a possibility for everyone because it will devalue a degree. If the degree is devalued, the sorting mechanism will be flawed because it can no longer separate people. In summary, theory one takes a meritocratic approach to higher education and uses college in society to select the more intelligent …show more content…
Theory one is impossible to disagree with because it is true, but it is not mutually exclusive to the other theories. While college is a way to sort people based on intelligence, it also is life-training and vocational training. When comparing the basis of theory two to the basis of theory three, both seem to be separate, and Menand tries to emphasize their differences. He works so hard to separate them, but eventually he even acknowledges their combination. He mentions a Beverage Management major from the University of Nevada Las Vegas. It requires “two courses in English (Composition and World Literature), one course in philosophy, one course in either history or political science, courses in chemistry, mathematics, and economics, and two electives in the arts and humanities” (78). This highlights that most majors will require some form of general education. He tries to separate the two theories by asking “if your professional goal is, let’s say, running the beverage service at the Bellagio, how much effort are you going to put into that class on World Literature?” (78). Although this may be true for some students, it does not separate the theories, and it neglects to acknowledge students like myself. I am getting a bachelor’s degree in secondary mathematics education, and I am required to take 42 credits of general education. I care a lot about my education and will
In a society where you cannot pick out the smartest person in the room based on appearances, there needs to be a sorting mechanism in place to do that. If you are a theory one person, you believe “college is, essentially, a four-year intelligence test” where a student’s abilities are tested, and after four years, “graduates get a score, the G.P.A.” (74). This score is used by employers to weigh the intelligence, and everything that goes with it, of an applicant, so they can effectively rule out less qualified people. A theory one person should be worried about how college has become a possibility for everyone because it will devalue a degree. If the degree is devalued, the sorting mechanism will be flawed because it can no longer separate people. In summary, theory one takes a meritocratic approach to higher education and uses college in society to select the more intelligent …show more content…
Theory one is impossible to disagree with because it is true, but it is not mutually exclusive to the other theories. While college is a way to sort people based on intelligence, it also is life-training and vocational training. When comparing the basis of theory two to the basis of theory three, both seem to be separate, and Menand tries to emphasize their differences. He works so hard to separate them, but eventually he even acknowledges their combination. He mentions a Beverage Management major from the University of Nevada Las Vegas. It requires “two courses in English (Composition and World Literature), one course in philosophy, one course in either history or political science, courses in chemistry, mathematics, and economics, and two electives in the arts and humanities” (78). This highlights that most majors will require some form of general education. He tries to separate the two theories by asking “if your professional goal is, let’s say, running the beverage service at the Bellagio, how much effort are you going to put into that class on World Literature?” (78). Although this may be true for some students, it does not separate the theories, and it neglects to acknowledge students like myself. I am getting a bachelor’s degree in secondary mathematics education, and I am required to take 42 credits of general education. I care a lot about my education and will