Thinking Ahead.....tuition Free Higher Education

[Samson]

Germany has returned to a policy of tuition free universities.

Germany Free college education for everyone Tuition unjust -- Society s Child -- Sott.net

Smart. This is an investment with great returns for the citizenry.

We ought to be doing the same thing.

Sounds like Socialism

Higher education should be reserved for those who can afford it....it is the American way

No excuses.. You can get a 1/2 tuition waiver with Lottery funds even in a "backwards" Red State like my Tennessee if you can keep a B average. In California, you can get a 2 year degree for the cost of owning cable and cell phone. No WAY I would want to do more than that for people who insist on wasting their parent's money. It's a proposal that ALL those bitter Liberal Arts students amongst us just love..

I know...because American students are just like their parents. dumb and lazy and looking for a handout

It is a cornerstone of the Republican platform

Always nice to hear from the Partisan Rabble.

Thanks

 

[Bush92]

Germany has returned to a policy of tuition free universities.

Germany Free college education for everyone Tuition unjust -- Society s Child -- Sott.net

Smart. This is an investment with great returns for the citizenry.

We ought to be doing the same thing.

Sounds like Socialism

Higher education should be reserved for those who can afford it....it is the American way

No excuses.. You can get a 1/2 tuition waiver with Lottery funds even in a "backwards" Red State like my Tennessee if you can keep a B average. In California, you can get a 2 year degree for the cost of owning cable and cell phone. No WAY I would want to do more than that for people who insist on wasting their parent's money. It's a proposal that ALL those bitter Liberal Arts students amongst us just love..

I know...because American students are just like their parents. dumb and lazy and looking for a handout

It is a cornerstone of the Republican platform

Nobody has ever said that you stupid fucking asshole. Hard workers will ride regardless of where they start in life.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Hiring managers can determine the intelligence of a candidate within minutes of an interview: No general intelligence test or degree is necessary

Slate:

The evidence is overwhelming. Take tank gunners. You wouldn't think intelligence would have much effect on the ability to shoot straight, but apparently it does. Replacing a gunner who'd scored Category IV on the aptitude test (ranking in the 10-30 percentile) with one who'd scored Category IIIA (50-64 percentile) improved the chances of hitting targets by 34 percent. (For more on the meaning of the test scores, click here.)

In another study cited by the RAND report, 84 three-man teams from the Army's active-duty signal battalions were given the task of making a communications system operational. Teams consisting of Category IIIA personnel had a 67 percent chance of succeeding. Those consisting of Category IIIB (who'd ranked in the 31-49 percentile on the aptitude test) had a 47 percent chance. Those with Category IV personnel had only a 29 percent chance.

The same study of signal battalions took soldiers who had just taken advanced individual training courses and asked them to troubleshoot a faulty piece of communications gear. They passed if they were able to identify at least two technical problems. Smarts trumped training. Among those who had scored Category I on the aptitude test (in the 93-99 percentile), 97 percent passed. Among those who'd scored Category II (in the 65-92 percentile), 78 percent passed. Category IIIA: 60 percent passed. Category IIIB: 43 percent passed. Category IV: a mere 25 percent passed.

The pattern is clear: The higher the score on the aptitude test, the better the performance in the field. This is true for individual soldiers and for units. Moreover, the study showed that adding one high-scoring soldier to a three-man signals team boosted its chance of success by 8 percent (meaning that adding one low-scoring soldier boosts its chance of failure by a similar margin).

Smarter also turns out to be cheaper. One study examined how many Patriot missiles various Army air-defense units had to fire in order to destroy 10 targets. Units with Category I personnel had to fire 20 missiles. Those with Category II had to fire 21 missiles. Category IIIA: 22. Category IIIB: 23. Category IV: 24 missiles. In other words, to perform the same task, Category IV units chewed up 20 percent more hardware than Category I units. For this particular task, since each Patriot missile costs about $2 million, they also chewed up $8 million more of the Army's procurement budget.​

You appear to be trying to make a point that a intelligence test is good.

This is not a counterpoint to the statement that hiring managers can assess intelligence within minutes of an interview.

Evidence please.

 

[Samson]

We need our manufacturing base back in the United States. Not everyone wants or needs a college degree. Leave tuition up to the states. In some states if a student maintains a high enough GPA they get all or some of their tuition paid at any STATE school. If you want to go to Princeton and live in New Mexico then you better get scholarship money. The federal student loan program is corrupt.

You are completely correct.

1. Ever try to talk to a HS counselor about a trade school option after graduation? They look at you like you're from another planet.

2. Even if they're on the same planet, FEW opportunities for preparing for trades are offered in HS. There is One option. Either accept that you will be warehoused until reaching 18 yo, or take college prep courses.

 

[Samson]

Hiring managers can determine the intelligence of a candidate within minutes of an interview: No general intelligence test or degree is necessary

Slate:

The evidence is overwhelming. Take tank gunners. You wouldn't think intelligence would have much effect on the ability to shoot straight, but apparently it does. Replacing a gunner who'd scored Category IV on the aptitude test (ranking in the 10-30 percentile) with one who'd scored Category IIIA (50-64 percentile) improved the chances of hitting targets by 34 percent. (For more on the meaning of the test scores, click here.)

In another study cited by the RAND report, 84 three-man teams from the Army's active-duty signal battalions were given the task of making a communications system operational. Teams consisting of Category IIIA personnel had a 67 percent chance of succeeding. Those consisting of Category IIIB (who'd ranked in the 31-49 percentile on the aptitude test) had a 47 percent chance. Those with Category IV personnel had only a 29 percent chance.

The same study of signal battalions took soldiers who had just taken advanced individual training courses and asked them to troubleshoot a faulty piece of communications gear. They passed if they were able to identify at least two technical problems. Smarts trumped training. Among those who had scored Category I on the aptitude test (in the 93-99 percentile), 97 percent passed. Among those who'd scored Category II (in the 65-92 percentile), 78 percent passed. Category IIIA: 60 percent passed. Category IIIB: 43 percent passed. Category IV: a mere 25 percent passed.

The pattern is clear: The higher the score on the aptitude test, the better the performance in the field. This is true for individual soldiers and for units. Moreover, the study showed that adding one high-scoring soldier to a three-man signals team boosted its chance of success by 8 percent (meaning that adding one low-scoring soldier boosts its chance of failure by a similar margin).

Smarter also turns out to be cheaper. One study examined how many Patriot missiles various Army air-defense units had to fire in order to destroy 10 targets. Units with Category I personnel had to fire 20 missiles. Those with Category II had to fire 21 missiles. Category IIIA: 22. Category IIIB: 23. Category IV: 24 missiles. In other words, to perform the same task, Category IV units chewed up 20 percent more hardware than Category I units. For this particular task, since each Patriot missile costs about $2 million, they also chewed up $8 million more of the Army's procurement budget.​

You appear to be trying to make a point that a intelligence test is good.

This is not a counterpoint to the statement that hiring managers can assess intelligence within minutes of an interview.

Evidence please.

Its my opinion.

You have no contradictory evidence?

 

[Rikurzhen]

Unobserved Ability and the Return to Schooling

The correlation between ability in school and ability in the market is found to be high (0.95). Holding market ability constant, we find a strong positive correlation between average returns and school ability, = 0:80. This positive correlation implies that, holding market ability and family background variables constant, those endowed with higher school ability will also experience higher average returns. This is an illustration of the discount rate bias. As expected, and contrary to school ability, the partial correlation between market ability and schooling is negative, = -0.84.​

 

[Rikurzhen]

Its my opinion.

You have no contradictory evidence?

It's impossible to assess someone's intelligence by merely talking to the person. One can certainly guess quite accurately on binary choices - "is he intelligent or not" - but that's not an assessment, it's just a crude sorting.

 

[Samson]

Its my opinion.

You have no contradictory evidence?

It's impossible to assess someone's intelligence by merely talking to the person. One can certainly guess quite accurately on binary choices - "is he intelligent or not" - but that's not an assessment, it's just a crude sorting.

So what?

Life is a Crude Sorting.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Hiring managers can determine the intelligence of a candidate within minutes of an interview: No general intelligence test or degree is necessary

Slate:

The evidence is overwhelming. Take tank gunners. You wouldn't think intelligence would have much effect on the ability to shoot straight, but apparently it does. Replacing a gunner who'd scored Category IV on the aptitude test (ranking in the 10-30 percentile) with one who'd scored Category IIIA (50-64 percentile) improved the chances of hitting targets by 34 percent. (For more on the meaning of the test scores, click here.)

In another study cited by the RAND report, 84 three-man teams from the Army's active-duty signal battalions were given the task of making a communications system operational. Teams consisting of Category IIIA personnel had a 67 percent chance of succeeding. Those consisting of Category IIIB (who'd ranked in the 31-49 percentile on the aptitude test) had a 47 percent chance. Those with Category IV personnel had only a 29 percent chance.

The same study of signal battalions took soldiers who had just taken advanced individual training courses and asked them to troubleshoot a faulty piece of communications gear. They passed if they were able to identify at least two technical problems. Smarts trumped training. Among those who had scored Category I on the aptitude test (in the 93-99 percentile), 97 percent passed. Among those who'd scored Category II (in the 65-92 percentile), 78 percent passed. Category IIIA: 60 percent passed. Category IIIB: 43 percent passed. Category IV: a mere 25 percent passed.

The pattern is clear: The higher the score on the aptitude test, the better the performance in the field. This is true for individual soldiers and for units. Moreover, the study showed that adding one high-scoring soldier to a three-man signals team boosted its chance of success by 8 percent (meaning that adding one low-scoring soldier boosts its chance of failure by a similar margin).

Smarter also turns out to be cheaper. One study examined how many Patriot missiles various Army air-defense units had to fire in order to destroy 10 targets. Units with Category I personnel had to fire 20 missiles. Those with Category II had to fire 21 missiles. Category IIIA: 22. Category IIIB: 23. Category IV: 24 missiles. In other words, to perform the same task, Category IV units chewed up 20 percent more hardware than Category I units. For this particular task, since each Patriot missile costs about $2 million, they also chewed up $8 million more of the Army's procurement budget.​

You appear to be trying to make a point that a intelligence test is good.

This is not a counterpoint to the statement that hiring managers can assess intelligence within minutes of an interview.

an

an intelligence test

 

[Rikurzhen]

Its my opinion.

You have no contradictory evidence?

It's impossible to assess someone's intelligence by merely talking to the person. One can certainly guess quite accurately on binary choices - "is he intelligent or not" - but that's not an assessment, it's just a crude sorting.

So what?

Life is a Crude Sorting.

Because employers want more than a crude sorting. Even with tank gunners, the finer your evaluation on IQ the more accurate your tank gunners perform. That's why testing came about - the IQ tests are validated continuously to make for more accurate predictions.

Secondly, even for the crude sorting, the IQ of the hiring official is a limiting factor. The 105 IQ manager might be able to sort out the 80 IQ and the 90 IQ and the 100 IQ people from each other but he's going to have an impossible task to sort out the 115 IQ from the 125 IQ from the 135 IQ people.

 

[Samson]

Its my opinion.

You have no contradictory evidence?

It's impossible to assess someone's intelligence by merely talking to the person. One can certainly guess quite accurately on binary choices - "is he intelligent or not" - but that's not an assessment, it's just a crude sorting.

So what?

Life is a Crude Sorting.

Because employers want more than a crude sorting. Even with tank gunners, the finer your evaluation on IQ the more accurate your tank gunners perform. That's why testing came about - the IQ tests are validated continuously to make for more accurate predictions.

Secondly, even for the crude sorting, the IQ of the hiring official is a limiting factor. The 105 IQ manager might be able to sort out the 80 IQ and the 90 IQ and the 100 IQ people from each other but he's going to have an impossible task to sort out the 115 IQ from the 125 IQ from the 135 IQ people.

Most employers need a very crude sorting of IQ for entry level positions. A simple interview will suffice. Of course if hiring managers are not terribly smart themselves, then that serves as something of a baseline for the job.

I'm not saying IQ tests are worthless; I'm just saying they are unnecessary for most employment positions.

 

[Pop23]

FREE STUFF!

Our new national slogan

 

[Rikurzhen]

Its my opinion.

You have no contradictory evidence?

It's impossible to assess someone's intelligence by merely talking to the person. One can certainly guess quite accurately on binary choices - "is he intelligent or not" - but that's not an assessment, it's just a crude sorting.

So what?

Life is a Crude Sorting.

Because employers want more than a crude sorting. Even with tank gunners, the finer your evaluation on IQ the more accurate your tank gunners perform. That's why testing came about - the IQ tests are validated continuously to make for more accurate predictions.

Secondly, even for the crude sorting, the IQ of the hiring official is a limiting factor. The 105 IQ manager might be able to sort out the 80 IQ and the 90 IQ and the 100 IQ people from each other but he's going to have an impossible task to sort out the 115 IQ from the 125 IQ from the 135 IQ people.

Most employers need a very crude sorting of IQ for entry level positions. A simple interview will suffice. Of course if hiring managers are not terribly smart themselves, then that serves as something of a baseline for the job.

I'm not saying IQ tests are worthless; I'm just saying they are unnecessary for most employment positions.

You don't need to be Einstein to be a tank gunner, but if you are Einstein then it's likely that you're going to be a more effective and accurate tank gunner.

Business is concerned with productivity. So yes, you're right we don't NEED to sort by intelligence for most employment positions, we can put bodies into the job positions and the work will kind of get down, in one fashion or another, and the companies will be inefficiency hellholes and go bankrupt. From the Slate article:

Smarter also turns out to be cheaper. One study examined how many Patriot missiles various Army air-defense units had to fire in order to destroy 10 targets. Units with Category I personnel had to fire 20 missiles. Those with Category II had to fire 21 missiles. Category IIIA: 22. Category IIIB: 23. Category IV: 24 missiles. In other words, to perform the same task, Category IV units chewed up 20 percent more hardware than Category I units. For this particular task, since each Patriot missile costs about $2 million, they also chewed up $8 million more of the Army's procurement budget.
​

Just like that - $8 million in missiles consumed. This is what I'm talking about in terms of productivity and efficiency.

 

[rightwinger]

Germany has returned to a policy of tuition free universities.

Germany Free college education for everyone Tuition unjust -- Society s Child -- Sott.net

Smart. This is an investment with great returns for the citizenry.

We ought to be doing the same thing.

Sounds like Socialism

Higher education should be reserved for those who can afford it....it is the American way

No excuses.. You can get a 1/2 tuition waiver with Lottery funds even in a "backwards" Red State like my Tennessee if you can keep a B average. In California, you can get a 2 year degree for the cost of owning cable and cell phone. No WAY I would want to do more than that for people who insist on wasting their parent's money. It's a proposal that ALL those bitter Liberal Arts students amongst us just love..

I know...because American students are just like their parents. dumb and lazy and looking for a handout

It is a cornerstone of the Republican platform

Always nice to hear from the Partisan Rabble.

Thanks

Not only are American College students lazy, but they take majors that nobody wants to hire.....French literature, basket weaving and "liberal arts"

Rush Limbaugh told me so

 

[rightwinger]

Germany has returned to a policy of tuition free universities.

Germany Free college education for everyone Tuition unjust -- Society s Child -- Sott.net

Smart. This is an investment with great returns for the citizenry.

We ought to be doing the same thing.

Sounds like Socialism

Higher education should be reserved for those who can afford it....it is the American way

No excuses.. You can get a 1/2 tuition waiver with Lottery funds even in a "backwards" Red State like my Tennessee if you can keep a B average. In California, you can get a 2 year degree for the cost of owning cable and cell phone. No WAY I would want to do more than that for people who insist on wasting their parent's money. It's a proposal that ALL those bitter Liberal Arts students amongst us just love..

I know...because American students are just like their parents. dumb and lazy and looking for a handout

It is a cornerstone of the Republican platform

Nobody has ever said that you stupid fucking asshole. Hard workers will ride regardless of where they start in life.

I hear the number is somewhere around "47%"

 

[martybegan]

Germany has returned to a policy of tuition free universities.

Germany Free college education for everyone Tuition unjust -- Society s Child -- Sott.net

Smart. This is an investment with great returns for the citizenry.

We ought to be doing the same thing.

Because more people with degrees that don't get them well paying jobs is a good idea????

More people with education is always a good idea. Well paying jobs isnt their fault now is it...Sounds like an argument to raise wages oooorrrrrr complain about low wages and be PRO keeping those wages low

Why do we need plumbers and IT guys with degrees in basketweaving?

Nice fucking strawman there.

There is literally no down side to a more educated public.

Yes there is. If you cannot find them employment up to the level of their education, its a waste, they feel underutilized, underpaid, and you end up with conflict.

If the education was only directed towards knowledge society needs it would be one thing, but we can only have so many marketing, womyn's studies, and communications majors.

 

[martybegan]

Every dollar spent on higher eduction returns at least 2 dollars in tax revenue. Often more. It is an investment.

The GI bill is proof that the idea works.

Link please?

and yes, that Barista at Starbucks with the art history degree that cost $150k to get really returns to the tax base......

 

[Darkwind]

Germany has returned to a policy of tuition free universities.

Germany Free college education for everyone Tuition unjust -- Society s Child -- Sott.net

Smart. This is an investment with great returns for the citizenry.

We ought to be doing the same thing.

Because more people with degrees that don't get them well paying jobs is a good idea????

More people with education is always a good idea. Well paying jobs isnt their fault now is it...Sounds like an argument to raise wages oooorrrrrr complain about low wages and be PRO keeping those wages low

Why do we need plumbers and IT guys with degrees in basketweaving?

Nice fucking strawman there.

There is literally no down side to a more educated public.

Apply some critical thinking to that last statement and get back to Me when you come up with a better answer.

 

[Desperado]

Because in Germany it is more important that students be educated than to fill the bank coffers of the interest of student loans.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Every dollar spent on higher eduction returns at least 2 dollars in tax revenue. Often more. It is an investment.

The GI bill is proof that the idea works.

Link please?

and yes, that Barista at Starbucks with the art history degree that cost $150k to get really returns to the tax base......