Essay 1: Analysis of Learning by Degrees

While Learning by Degrees does have many points on the American education system, the article has two main effective points that support the argument for keeping the American education system the way it is. The first main idea is the financial stability these jobs produce, as mentioned by the author.. The second idea is that people with higher education skills, ones that can be taught with a bachelor’s degree, are more likely to get a satisfying job. The author, Rebecca Mead, is a journalist and writer for the New Yorker and grew up in London. This background gives her an outside view of the education system in America. On the other hand, since she did write for the New Yorker and went to school at Oxford and New York University, this gives her some insight to the education system in America. She also lives in Brooklyn, thus understands the environment of being surrounded by schools and businesses. Overall, the author offers many perspectives over this controversial issue on whether high schools and colleges should prepare students for the workplace or for their field of study.

The article talks about the probability of getting a satisfying job for the class of 2010. Mead explains that the safest jobs are accountants and engineers of all kinds, which tells us that STEM jobs are being more and more in demand because of the growth of technology and scientific knowledge that are in demand in developed nations.  also Mead discusses that high schools and colleges make students spend money on something they might not even use. An example she uses to support the opposite claim is that fifteen percent of mail carriers have a bachelor’s degree (source?). They could have spent the money from their education to buy a house instead, explained…. Then the author describes how intellectuals start trouble in this world, with an example from Barrack Obama presidential office run. The article shows that Obama’s degrees from prestigious universities make him unfit for office. This statement is controversial because if Obama got his education and knowledge from very intellectual and well-educated schools, doesn’t that make him better fitted for the oval office? That is just common sense.

The first effective idea presented by the author was the financial stability certain jobs presented by Mead. These jobs consist of mostly STEM professions that provide the math and problem-solving skills that Rebecca Mead said were more likely to get these STEM majors hired. On the other hand, according to the New Yorker, “Eight out of the ten job categories that will add the most employees during the next decade—including home-health aide, customer-service representative, and store clerk—can be performed by someone without a college degree” (Source?). This proves that we need to have a higher education system that prepares students for the workplace, not for something that will not be in demand in the future. The article needs to have more evidence as to how colleges and high schools plan on making these changes to allow for an education in the workplace and career stability. The article doesn’t address this issue and would work wonders if Mead added the how. Mead addresses the what and why of…  but fails to address the how and when these changes are going to occur.

The second effective idea presented by the author was that high schools and colleges need to prepare students for the workplace and not college. Meanwhile, the author is stating that Americans do not have good financial management skills. This is stated when Professor Vedder is quoted as saying, “The argument put forth by Professor Vedder (Ph.D., University of Illinois) is, naturally, economic: of those overly schooled mail carriers, he said, “Some of them could have bought a house for what they spent on their education” (Mead, 3). This shows the poor structure of high school teaching and how they do not teach financial decision making and economic wisdom. This is something the article needs to discuss in more detail. If the article could make a stronger claim for this argument, then more people might agree with Mead’s claim.

Overall, the takeaways are that the author has a narrow viewpoint on how high schools prepare for college and the workplace. An example of this is when she talks about what high schools and colleges should focus on teaching. Mead explains that colleges and high schools should prepare students for their careers they will be doing until retirement and potentially a lifetime. As Professor Lerman has stated, , of American University (Ph.D., M.I.T.), told the Times that high schools, rather than readying all students for college, should focus on the acquisition of skills appropriate to the workplace. According to the Times, these include the ability to ‘solve problems and make decisions,’ ]resolve conflict and negotiate,’ ‘cooperate with others,’ and ‘listen actively’,” (Learning by Degrees, 3). So, whether high schools and colleges prepare students for the workplace or their field of study, there needs to be a change in the American education system.

Help Received: Learning by Degrees, and https://www.prhspeakers.com/speaker/rebecca-mead