Slashdot Mirror

Doing a quick search reveals that even the cheapest universities tuition and fees run $5K per year. Tuition runs between 10-24K depending upon in/out of state tuition. However, if you're wanting to go to an accredited university, you can look at 10K / year as a minimum, if you're in-state, and that was checking two known "cheap" universities for in state tuition. It's more than 21K / year if you're out of state.

Quite a big chunk still:
https://www.topuniversities.co...

Then you have people going to college before they know what they want to do so they stay there, building up debt.
https://www.edvisors.com/colle...

So lets say 4-5% yearly interest and 4 years at a in-state public college. 4*20k = 80k.. 4% of that is $3200 per year in interest plus paying it off.. So if we say 20 years to pay it off.. Thats $4000 for the first year and then slowly dropping down. Quite a bit of money for most people that just got out of school and started their first job..

I would say scrap all publicly funded/partly funded colleges and have the state offer scholarships in areas needed by the society as a whole... And only allow student-loan financed degrees in areas that are in demand in the work-force. And offer self-studying people to just pay for the tests to get the degree, if they can manage to study on their own.

Kindly read the stuff you quote first

That's just your problem - I did.

Good good good. I see you're ready for the next course then: reading comprehension. Comes after reading. You're making progress here !

If you'd just read my post, you might notice that I don't claim you'll jump into the top 1% as a result of a university education.

See above. Bootstrap bullshit is still bullshit.

Sorry, but I think that bootstrap statistics is a bit too advanced at this point. Let's focus on percentiles for now. I think that subject still needs some work.

American kids have all the opportunities they need to go to university

Not without people like you sneering at them a second time for taking out student loans they couldn't afford, if their degree/career choice doesn't pay out.

I would never do that. Fortunately all Ivy Leage universities offer grants. See e.g. http://www.thebestschools.org/... Means tuition plus living costs are paid for you, without the need to take out a loan. Of course you need to be exceptional to very very good (I personally don't think I would have qualified). So let's skip the subject of scholarships ... I can see why that might not be applicable in your case ... and discuss tuition fees.

For the top schools they're horrendous, meaning you fall into a great big black hole if you don't finish the course. I'd be plenty scared of that myself. So yes, you have a point there.

There are some universities that charge relatively low fees though: see here. http://www.usnews.com/educatio...

If you're hard up for cash there are universities for "ordinary" folk that also provide full tuition, sometimes supplemented by 15 hr a week plus 40 hr workweeks during breaks. See here: http://affordableschools.net/2... Not the easiest route, and you need to show financial need, but doable.

If that's not to your liking, then lets discuss alternatives. For example: getting an education through the military. See here: https://www.topuniversities.co...

That's decidedly not for everyone. You'll need to enlist, you need prove yourself to the military (not the easiest proposition) and you bind yourself to complete your term of service, regardless of whether you pass the course. See here: https://www.topuniversities.co... If you don't mind serving in the military (risk of being send abroad and shot at, must adapt to life in the military) in return for a scholarship (and are confident that you can actually do it), it's a really nice deal.

So, in summary, there are four ways to go to university if you're hard up for cash and don't want to risk a huge loan: (1) through a scholarship or grant (requires high to exceptional talent) (2) by choosing a less well-known university added to (slightly) above average talent and hard work (3) the military, (requires special aptitude). (4) Choosing an inexpensive university and working on-and-off (quite hard, but not impossible).

You're an alcoholic, cocaine abusing draft dodger with a 2.0 gpa? To the White House with you - after being handed a few multimillion dollar businesses to run into the ground, because of your last name.

Yes, that's right. I applied to the White House with evidence of

Kindly read the stuff you quote first

That's just your problem - I did.

Good good good. I see you're ready for the next course then: reading comprehension. Comes after reading. You're making progress here !

If you'd just read my post, you might notice that I don't claim you'll jump into the top 1% as a result of a university education.

See above. Bootstrap bullshit is still bullshit.

Sorry, but I think that bootstrap statistics is a bit too advanced at this point. Let's focus on percentiles for now. I think that subject still needs some work.

American kids have all the opportunities they need to go to university

Not without people like you sneering at them a second time for taking out student loans they couldn't afford, if their degree/career choice doesn't pay out.

I would never do that. Fortunately all Ivy Leage universities offer grants. See e.g. http://www.thebestschools.org/... Means tuition plus living costs are paid for you, without the need to take out a loan. Of course you need to be exceptional to very very good (I personally don't think I would have qualified). So let's skip the subject of scholarships ... I can see why that might not be applicable in your case ... and discuss tuition fees.

For the top schools they're horrendous, meaning you fall into a great big black hole if you don't finish the course. I'd be plenty scared of that myself. So yes, you have a point there.

There are some universities that charge relatively low fees though: see here. http://www.usnews.com/educatio...

If you're hard up for cash there are universities for "ordinary" folk that also provide full tuition, sometimes supplemented by 15 hr a week plus 40 hr workweeks during breaks. See here: http://affordableschools.net/2... Not the easiest route, and you need to show financial need, but doable.

If that's not to your liking, then lets discuss alternatives. For example: getting an education through the military. See here: https://www.topuniversities.co...

That's decidedly not for everyone. You'll need to enlist, you need prove yourself to the military (not the easiest proposition) and you bind yourself to complete your term of service, regardless of whether you pass the course. See here: https://www.topuniversities.co... If you don't mind serving in the military (risk of being send abroad and shot at, must adapt to life in the military) in return for a scholarship (and are confident that you can actually do it), it's a really nice deal.

So, in summary, there are four ways to go to university if you're hard up for cash and don't want to risk a huge loan: (1) through a scholarship or grant (requires high to exceptional talent) (2) by choosing a less well-known university added to (slightly) above average talent and hard work (3) the military, (requires special aptitude). (4) Choosing an inexpensive university and working on-and-off (quite hard, but not impossible).

You're an alcoholic, cocaine abusing draft dodger with a 2.0 gpa? To the White House with you - after being handed a few multimillion dollar businesses to run into the ground, because of your last name.

Yes, that's right. I applied to the White House with evidence of

The sheer size of the US (we're the third most populous country in the world) means we aren't going to go away. But we do face the question of whether we want to hit above our weight, as Germany does and we did in the past, or below our weight, as India does.

There are many factors in play, India is slowly developing and is rife with growing pains from infrastructure to social issues, which no country is immune. German used to be the language of science at the turn of the last century. California pupils used to perform very well then prop 13 passes and funding declines among other things times and people change.

Germany is worth looking into. It has about 1% of population of the Earth, but that 1% has a massively oversized tech footprint. Perhaps because it has almost 10% of the top 200 universities in the world. Which cost about a hundred bucks a semester to attend. These facts are very likely NOT unrelated.

University isn't a right to attend, unlike higher education in the US where all that's required is a pulse you must test in otherwise you're off to a vocational school. The US also has more top ranking universities and is home to many tech giants, why is that? BTW your parent post is fantastic.

What is this World University Rankings which is referenced? Because I quickly did a review of the University Rankings for Computer Science Programs at http://www.topuniversities.com... (http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/computer-science-information-systems#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=) and came up with a number of India Schools in the Top 250 slots.

"Submitter here. This is precisely the kind of self-unaware elitism that I am talking about."

Except you're talking nonsense. The fact is that many western jobs simply aren't replaceable by offshoring, the fact is that most offshoring talent is of a low quality. That isn't arrogance, that isn't "American exceptionalism" or similar (I'm not American anyway FWIW) it's simply fact.

You see, the problem is this, in the West, we have the leading companies in just about all services industries, we also have leading universities. Offshoring necessarily can't replace the folks who are driving that lead, because of the very fact that they're leading it - if the folks leading it were trivially replaceable by folks overseas, then those overseas companies would instead be leading, but they're not, because they do not have the necessary environment to lead - that environment is a geographical thing. You need proximity to good universities, where corporations and academia can produce cutting edge work. You need the high quality of communications that are only granted by face to face discussions to drive these things.

So whilst India talks a good talk about how it has 1.2 billion people, and how that means it has more graduates than America has people or whatever, none of that counts for shit when the quality of graduates is incredibly low. Having 1.2 billion people is useless when you only have 7 universities in the global top 500, and your first entrant doesn't roll in until 222:

http://www.topuniversities.com...

All the while we have a country like the UK, population only 65 million with 48 universities in the top 500, 19 of which are in the top 100, and 31 are higher ranked than India's best university.

Whilst it's true that Western universities have a lot of overseas students, they're still ultimately a minority at the end of the day and that ironically in itself brings in a lot of foreign money that helps maintain those university's leads over their competitors back home in places like India.

No one is arguing that there aren't a lot of jobs that can be offshored, basic development doesn't even need university level education and is trivially replaced by offshoring. But you're extending that job to the idea that all jobs can be offshored and claiming anyone who thinks otherwise is somehow deluded, or has an overly high opinion of themselves. This simply isn't true, it doesn't matter how many graduates India can provide how cheaply, there reaches a point whereby quality necessarily matters for a company to maintain a qualitative edge in the global marketplace, and that quality cannot be built in a place that doesn't have the necessary infrastructure to produce the driving forces behind that quality - i.e. good education, and communities of top of their game individuals meeting face to face to continue to drive their industry forward.

But the GP's point that you're arguing with is even more simple than this, all he is saying is that if you take a job in your home country in the West, being brought up under a high quality Western education system, knowing the language and culture inside out, and fail to get a job over someone coming from overseas without the advantages you had, then that's entirely your fault for not taking enough advantage of those advantages to be better than that outsider. If they are a better candidate than you despite not having the advantages you did then you can't blame anyone but yourself. He's absolutely right.

Yes there are lots of jobs that can be outsourced easily, no that doesn't mean all jobs can be which is the extreme you've jumped to. In fact, companies have mostly realised this - you use the number of HFT jobs in India to back your argument, but 15 years ago we were being told that by now, Mumbai would be the largest financial sector in the world. Well guess what? Where did it end up exac

There are excellent universities in Europe too, in fact four of the top ten are British: http://www.topuniversities.com...

Europe has more freedom, a better quality of life, things like free healthcare and a wider variety of cultures that EU citizens can experience. A lot of Chinese people come to Europe to study, particularly the UK but also other countries. It's mainly a language thing, they all want to speak English.

>Women in other countries are somewhat more well represented in technology and more likely to go into STEM fields - so what are those other countries doing differently?

Which one?

However, within individual subjects, there are still major gender imbalances – and engineering seems to be the most extreme case.

In all 97 of the countries included in the World Bank report, the engineering, manufacturing and construction category is dominated by men.

Agriculture, sciences and services are also typically more male-dominated domains.

On the other hand, in 84% of countries assessed, women dominate the education sector, and in 82% of countries there are more women in health and welfare.

Arts and humanities are also more likely to be dominated by women, while relatively gender-neutral fields include social sciences, business and law.

I was curious, so I did a quick search. The first result seems to indicate that 7 of the top 10 universities globally are based in the US (MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Yale, University of Chicago, Caltech, and Princeton). The others that round out the top 10 are all UK schools. Of the top 25, the US has 14, but they start to drop off after that, gaining only 5 more in the next 25 ranks, bringing them to having 19 schools in the top 50, though that's still 11 ahead of the UK, which was next closest in the top 50, having 8 schools ranked that high.

It seems you may be arguing that US schools aren't as well-funded as others (I'm not sure what "quality of tuition" means), and that may very well be the case, but that wasn't what the person you were responding to was talking about. They were talking about the quality of the school itself, not the "quality of tuition" which you were talking about, and in terms of the quality of the schools themselves, the US is still the (admittedly, declining) world leader, even if the schools may not be as well-funded as other world-class schools.

Any idea what the names of those are? Maybe you have a better source, but I don't see any listed here:
http://www.shanghairanking.com/SubjectCS2013.html
or here:
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2013/computer-science-and-information-systems
or here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/09/best-university-computer-science_n_2439697.html
or here:
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2011/sep/05/top-100-universities-world-computer-science-and-information-systems-2011

In the top 4 universities 2 are American and 2 are British (Chose top 4 to be fair as it is an even split)
Yearly cost Undergrad, postgrad
MIT average $42000-$44000, $42000-$44000
Cambridge $26000-$28000, $26000-$28000
Yale $40000-$42000, $38000-$40000
UCL $24000-$26000, $28000-$30000

And for the UK those are the unsubsidised international rates (Domestic rates are significantly less and most people won't pay those as undergrads). So why do the American universities cost SO much more?

http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2012

But also remember that most of the rankings like this one count research quite heavily resulting in worse that expected results for pure teaching universities. Even though those specialise in education

What I simply don't understand is why US universities are so expensive. It's gotten to the point where it seems that any sort of education can only be gotten my pretty much taking on so much debt that you will be lucky to pay it back - which then forces the government to start putting in copious amounts of scholarships/funding to keep students there.

Degree Costs in Australia

Over here, a degree (not counting the really expensive ones like medicine) costs $15-30k and a masters $20-37k.

The average cost (excluding the notoriously expensive universities) in the US is $28k per year.

Seriously, why?

From what I hear they are the latter. Although in the interest of full disclosure I do live fairly close to it and have a few friends who have attended. The place is regarded fairly well, although it has dropped a little in recent years. http://www.topuniversities.com/node/2253/ranking-details/world-university-rankings/2012

Right, so you took 5 years to pay back for an education that will benefit you for some 50 years of life. seems like a no brainer.

Besides, you don't seriously think it only costs 9k/student to run a university, do you? Think of how many people you interact with, teachers and staff, grounds, facilities. I ran across this infographic on Univ of Alaska. Presumably their heating bills (and maybe staff retention) are higher than most but I would expect this to be indicative of any institution. http://www.uafsunstar.com/archives/10184. Given roughly 35k students at that institution, that comes to about 24k / student / year.

another good article along the same lines is here; http://www.topuniversities.com/studying-abroad/advice/how-much-does-it-really-cost-study-us

Truthfully, i don't understand what the griping about the 9k/year rates is about. this is taken in the form of a loan from teh government which doesn't need to be paid back until you have a good job. Basically, the society is making a bet that each student will be successful. If the student is successful, they have to pay back that loan. If the student isn't successful, they don't pay it back and the state eats the cost. this seems completely reasonable for the state to take the risk and for the student to pay back if it works.

I was looking at http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings. How can you take a ranking table seriously which puts Oxford above Cambridge? ;)

The grade school system is terrible and needs improvement. Luckily they do not run the university system. The US consistently has more top universities than any other country.

US News and World Report: http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-rankings/top-400-universities-in-the-world ARWU (compiled by Shanghai Jiao Tong University): http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp QS World Rankings (compiled by a London corp): http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011

One Small example, Stanford, who is #3 in several rankings, has 8 Nobel laureates and 1 Fields Medal among its alumni, pretty good isn't it?

However, this example is completed with the École normale supérieure - Paris (usually out of the top30), despite being very small (compared to the number of Stanford students), it has 12 Nobel laureates and 10 Fields medal.

In France, research isn't as strictly linked to the university (due to the way legal setting is there), as it is in the US, I guess that makes such universities decrease their ratings, and gives US unviersities an advantege in the evaluation (papers and citations generated from the university are evaluated and have weight).

The grade school system is terrible and needs improvement. Luckily they do not run the university system. The US consistently has more top universities than any other country.

US News and World Report: http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-rankings/top-400-universities-in-the-world
ARWU (compiled by Shanghai Jiao Tong University): http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp
QS World Rankings (compiled by a London corp): http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011

6 out of the 10 top Universities are American, the other 4 are English..Note that at No. 1 is Cambridge: http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011

Less than 1% here in England drive an American car because, in the main, they're just too shite for words.

I have an iPhone, but it's made in China, as is my PC. My gogglebox comes from Korea, my motah from Germany, my desk from Sweden & my rug from Iran. Oh, I've just taken stock & the only American object I own is a bloody Weber barbeque.

Except in the UK they will lose, and lose big. Frivolous lawsuits are looked down upon.

Taking on one of the largest universities in the world, with alumni who are incredibly powerful, is not a good idea.

It's not one of the largest in the world, but it is currently ranked as the best university. (at least according to the ranking criteria used by that site)

The US isn't one of the best centres of education anymore.

The US is not trying to be the best center of education. It is trying to allow people to pursue their own goals and interests, free from compulsion by those who think they know better. At least that was the original intention. It is probably because of that that it actually is the best center of education at least when it comes to the university level education: http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2009/results On the other hand there are countries where the government's explicit goal is to improve education by regulating it top to bottom and making it "free" (ha ha) to the students, like Germany. See how it ranks on the list above.

As a European, I'd like to add my thoughts since I agree with half of what you say but you seem to simplify a lot.

1. USA has a constitutional system that did not produce a dictatorship in the last 234 years since it was introduced. Europe has had dozens including some of the world's worst ones since then and still has some.

You compare a single country to a continent.

2. Inherent individual liberty (not by government grant) is still heavily on the agenda in the USA even though it is being gradually eroded. In Europe it is a completely forgotten concept.

You're not entirely wrong but you are definitely exaggerating.

3. USA leads the world in innovation by far in virtually all technical fields. Take Nobel prize in physics: USA: 73, next highest country Germany: 21 (most of which looong time ago). Take computer technology. Take medical science, biotechnology, you name it.

Once again, you're not wrong but you're leaving something out. Europe had to be rebuilt, the US was intact after the war.

4. USA leads the world by far in arts and culture. New York is the world capital of arts, not Paris or London any more. Hollywood is the world capital of popular culture. Europe for the most part copies the USA.

Arts is subjective and you won't find many Europeans that agree with your opinion :) Besides, isn't popular culture an euphemism for crappy art?

5. USA has a military that protects both USA and Europe and then some. Europe does not have a military that can protect itself.

There's no doubt about the US having the by far mightiest military in the world but what Europe needs to protect itself from determines whether it can or can't. Terrorism? Both the US and Europe have failed. The US is trying harder but is probably more threatened as well and spies more on its own citizens in trying to protect itself. Nuclear strikes? Neither can at the moment and even with the missile shield, it will still depend on whether it's a couple of missiles from a rogue state or all of Russia's that are coming. The follow-up is of course which is a more likely target - any European country or the US?

6. According to the most reputable (UK based) university ranking system the USA has 13 of the world's top 20 universities: http://topuniversities.com/world-university-rankings Europe has 4 and all of them are in UK. Germany has 0. France has 0.

Yes. But on which side of the pond is the population more educated in general? AFAIK not everyone in the US goes to a a top university and since education here is taxpayer-funded we look down on American universities in general even though we too acknowledge your top universities. Since education is free, costs do not exclude anyone from attending and thus admissions are entirely based on merit. There are a handful of institutions (such as cosmetologist, hairdresser etc.) that are open to anyone that pays for their education and since no merits are required, people usually have a certain dismissive "oh, you had to pay for your education..." attitude towards those and reason the same way about Americans that have paid for their tuition instead of having been admitted entirely on merit.

7. According to the most UN indices that measure human and economic development, USA is actually ahead of large European countries like UK, Germany and France. There are smaller countries like Norway or Sweden that are ahead but those can hardly be compared to the USA in size and diversity.

In other words, you prefer a selective comparison that makes the US look better?

8. Bankrupt European welfare countries like Greece are as we speak begging the World Bank for a bailout, with the rest of the PIIGS to follow. USA has bankrupt welfar

I don't think you're a troll but you are close because your entire post amounts to a simple statement that Europe is "better" than USA in some undefined way. Can you please provide some examples? I can give you top ten reasons why USA is better than Europe:

1. USA has a constitutional system that did not produce a dictatorship in the last 234 years since it was introduced. Europe has had dozens including some of the world's worst ones since then and still has some.
2. Inherent individual liberty (not by government grant) is still heavily on the agenda in the USA even though it is being gradually eroded. In Europe it is a completely forgotten concept.
3. USA leads the world in innovation by far in virtually all technical fields. Take Nobel prize in physics: USA: 73, next highest country Germany: 21 (most of which looong time ago). Take computer technology. Take medical science, biotechnology, you name it.
4. USA leads the world by far in arts and culture. New York is the world capital of arts, not Paris or London any more. Hollywood is the world capital of popular culture. Europe for the most part copies the USA.
5. USA has a military that protects both USA and Europe and then some. Europe does not have a military that can protect itself.
6. According to the most reputable (UK based) university ranking system the USA has 13 of the world's top 20 universities: http://topuniversities.com/world-university-rankings Europe has 4 and all of them are in UK. Germany has 0. France has 0.
7. According to the most UN indices that measure human and economic development, USA is actually ahead of large European countries like UK, Germany and France. There are smaller countries like Norway or Sweden that are ahead but those can hardly be compared to the USA in size and diversity.
8. Bankrupt European welfare countries like Greece are as we speak begging the World Bank for a bailout, with the rest of the PIIGS to follow. USA has bankrupt welfare states too, like California, but it is still by far the largest contributor to the World Bank and the IMF.
9. European heads of state come to the USA to plead for special relationships and get patted on the head like pets. Not the other way around.
10. According to polls Europeans are far more eager to move to the USA than Americans are to move to Europe

Nothing is perfect and USA does need reforms but in the opposite direction of Europe i.e towards less statism, not more.

Something very weird happens here in Mexico.

According to several international studies*, The National Automonous University of Mexico (UNAM), and the National Polytechnics Institute (IPN), the two largest public universities in the country, are the best institutions of higher learning in the country.

Yet it is very common to see "UNAM, IPN, graduates need not apply" in job listings. Why?

Because employers seem to believe that the networking and prestige of the exclusive private schools are worth more than being a graduate of the two institutions that generate 90% of the scientific research in the country!

Sources:
http://www.topuniversities.com/worlduniversityrankings/results/2007/overall_rankings/top_400_universities/
http://www.arwu.org/rank2008/ARWU2008_TopAmer(EN).htm