The things I've learned this semester:

[false_Aest]

I taught at 2 vastly different higher ed institutions this semester.

Long Beach City College vs Loyola Marymount University.

I loved it. Absolutely love teaching.

BUT

Let me share my final thoughts.

1) A college degree is new HS degree. It means almost nothing
2) Parents and schools have babied children to the point that they have a hard time thinking for themselves and stepping up to a challenge.
3) I think there's a correlation between affluence, lack of imagination and laziness. In other words, the poor kids at LBCC worked hard and were willing to refine their crazy creative ideas whereas the affluent kids I worked with at LMU were quite happy to stay on campus, take boring pictures and turn it in.


All this leads me to believe that the "better life" parents have tried to give their kids is actually just going to screw them in the end.

TFT

[slowandsteady]

Amen :crap:

[akelman]

When I was a kid, I had to bike a century through the snow to get to school every single day! Up a mountain! In both directions! And the roads were covered with broken glass! And I still had a smile on my face the whole time! Because we were that much better and tougher back then! Seriously, (rich) kids these days! They need to get off my lawn!

Kidding aside, I teach at the collegiate level in the same state you do. Some of my students come from privileged backgrounds. Others don't. And the one thing I've learned from observing them is that anecdotes shouldn't be mistaken for data. Which is to say, some of the wealthy kids are workers, and some of the working-class kids are lazy. But on balance, despite the stereotypes that are out there, they don't seem to be any more coddled than they were when I started my career almost two decades ago. If anything, they work, both inside and outside the classroom, harder than ever, because all of them know that the economy stinks. Moreover, I've never had a single student go running to mommy and daddy when there's a problem. I mean, I'm sure some spoiled kids are out there. They must be. But they seem to stay away from me and vice versa.

[SoCalSteve]

I taught at 2 vastly different higher ed institutions this semester.

Long Beach City College vs Loyola Marymount University.

I loved it. Absolutely love teaching.

BUT

Let me share my final thoughts.

1) A college degree is new HS degree. It means almost nothing
2) Parents and schools have babied children to the point that they have a hard time thinking for themselves and stepping up to a challenge.
3) I think there's a correlation between affluence, lack of imagination and laziness. In other words, the poor kids at LBCC worked hard and were willing to refine their crazy creative ideas whereas the affluent kids I worked with at LMU were quite happy to stay on campus, take boring pictures and turn it in.


All this leads me to believe that the "better life" parents have tried to give their kids is actually just going to screw them in the end.

TFT

Funny story...My first marriage (many, many moons ago) was to a young lady who came from a very wealthy family. Her family spent time with other very wealthy families and their completely f$cked up kids....I mean, truly messed up...

Money, affluence, whatever has nothing to do with how well kids are raised. The "better" life that the parents were able to afford for their children did NOTHING to help them become independent, hard working young adults...absolutely NOTHING. It was quite sad to see.

[Grant McLean]

Mileage may vary.

I'm back at university to finish my degree after a 17 year "break".
Not sure about your "high school" comment... i'd say that not much
has changed. Some of my classmates are bright, engaged, hard working,
and focused... others not so much.

I don't see a relationship with income, although without data to back up
a claim like that, I put it down to knowing their "direction".
Lots of students don't know why they're in school, beyond the idea that
more learning is good. The motivated ones know what they like,
and why they're there. People are good at what they like to do,
and many students haven't figured out what they want to do.

-g

[Ahneida Ride]

I sincerely doubt I would ever step into a class room again.

I once asked a student why the student could not pass the tests.
Since the tests consisted of homework problems and full solutions to the
HW problems were available in the library. They could even bring in a
"cheat sheet" to the exam.

I was informed the one had to walk up a flight of stairs to the library. :eek:
I had no response as I was left speechless.

I could go on .... but I'll stop here. :crap:

I might add that my "students" were from mostly affluent families.

[biker72]

Mrs.72 works part time at a local community college. She is amazed at the number of high school graduates that have to take remedial courses before they can start taking credit classes.

[Karin Kirk]

I have taught at both ends of the spectrum as well, and I agree with Akelman that one can anecdotally make the case either way. There are always students that have all the ingredients for success and are a joy to work with. And there are others who just baffle you in how persistently they avoid learning or working. Part of the fun of teaching comes from reaching the resistant students and pulling them over to the bright side of the equation. That is incredibly satisfying.

False Aest, good for you for finding a job you love. That is the best part by far! :)

[bicycletricycle]

I just graduated from a very expensive school. Almost all of the hardest workers were people who were paying for it themselves or those who's parents could barely afford it. I feel that the more directly the debt is felt the more likely people are to work hard and squeeze the most value out of their time.

If parents want their kids to eventually pay their own way through life then the sooner they cut them off the better. Why would you work hard and stress yourself out for anything if you knew (or thought you knew) you would never have to worry about money?

Trust fund rich kids always tended to be lazier but who can blame them? I used to be all worked up about this but then i realized that it is the natural outcome of those circumstances. Most people are motivated to work hard because they need to make a living. Take away the need to make a living and the only hard workers are the small amount of over achiever/thirst for knowledge types like myself.

I say give the lazy rich kids a break, if i were rich i would be lazier too.

[Frankwurst]

Our chidren were denied video games. I maintained there was to much to learn by reading or being outdoors playing. As they grew older we explained to them the importance of good education and also told them their education would be bought and paid for with no less than a 3.0 grade point average. They have both graduated with honors from college and continue to point out my short comings in the land of higher education but still come to Mom and Dad to answer questions to which they don't have the answers to. Life is O.K in the Wurst house :beer:

[1happygirl]

All this leads me to believe that the "better life" parents have tried to give their kids is actually just going to screw them in the end.

TFT

Ditto

[TimmyB]

Some of my students come from privileged backgrounds. Others don't. And the one thing I've learned from observing them is that anecdotes shouldn't be mistaken for data. Which is to say, some of the wealthy kids are workers, and some of the working-class kids are lazy.
Exactly! As a current college student, I have been in contact with a wide range of people with all sorts of different economic backgrounds and work ethics. But in my experience there is no correlation between them.

At least here at Cal, people seem to be pretty freaking motivated to get their work done and do it well. That includes people of all income levels. Then again, I don't really care (or ask) what people's financial backgrounds are when I become friends with them :rolleyes: .

Mostly because it doesn't freaking matter! Wealth does not determine work ethic or how good of a person anyone is. I have never understood why some people are so fixated upon other people's income levels and feel the need to draw rationals for why people are or aren't a certain way based on their $$$.

As for bicycletricycle's experience at brown (I'm assuming that's where you're referring to?): I have a couple friends that go there. One of whom is one of my best friends from highschool. She works harder in school than just about anyone I know. She also comes from a wealthy household. The other kids I know who go there are all fairly affluent and just as hardworking.

[bicycletricycle]

RISD not Brown. There is a whole bunch of hard workin' rich kids too. I think that is who the ivy league is there for.

[Grant McLean]

Why would you work hard and stress yourself out for anything if you knew (or thought you knew) you would never have to worry about money?


Firstly, not many people on this planet don't have to worry about money.
But the reason to do anything, is because you like to do it.
Why would anyone ride a bike when they can drive a car?

The attitude that some people are "lazy" and some "work hard" reminds me
of the parents who yell at their good for nothing kid who lays around all day,
playing music. Funny how that same kid will spend all night practicing with
their band, or spend hours on end recording or editing their music, or
travelling hours to play with their band live, or talk about music for hours
with their friends.

The motivation to do something for money isn't that effective if your goal
is to have any happiness. If it is just about the money, I feel sorry for you.

-g

[130R]

1) A college degree is new HS degree. It means almost nothing


well yeah... if they are majoring in photography :rolleyes:

[thegunner]

RISD not Brown. There is a whole bunch of hard workin' rich kids too. I think that is who the ivy league is there for.

hahahahahahahaha... :p

wait no... seriously though - hahahahaha

[avalonracing]

well yeah... if they are majoring in photography :rolleyes:

Them's fightin' words!
What you are supposed to say is, "Well yeah... if they are majoring in digital imaging".


On a side note, I was talking a walk over the weekend when I passed by two women talking. I overheard one say the following to the other: "Well, she is just about to finish her thesis in decorative arts". It just struck me as funny.

[130R]

Them's fightin' words!
What you are supposed to say is, "Well yeah... if they are majoring in digital imaging".



not at all. If anything it was him who is telling me that the degree I'm pursuing is useless. From my point of view, anyone studying Physics/Engineering/Chemistry will know the definition of hard work if they haven't already.

It doesn't matter whether the student came from money or not. What matters is PREPARATION.

[TimmyB]

RISD not Brown. There is a whole bunch of hard workin' rich kids too. I think that is who the ivy league is there for. I see. Well, the friend I was referring to was planning to do the double major program through RISD and Brown last time I talked to her ;) .

And I know a handful of kids who aren't rich and go to ivy league schools... :bike:

[CaptStash]

At least here at Cal, people seem to be pretty freaking motivated to get their work done and do it well.

If Cal is still anything like how it was when I was there in the early 80's, the curriculum was juts plain too hard to slack off. I didn't know anyone there who didn't have to study. A lot.

... LMU doesn't offer Physics/Engineering/Chemistry. Anyone studying these will know the definition of hard work if they haven't already...

Did I misunderstand? I just asked the Google, and sure enough, LMU still offers plenty of Physics, Engineering and Chemistry.LMU Undergraduate Science Stuff (http://cse.lmu.edu/about/departments.htm)

[130R]

whoops. Google gave me the wrong Marymount. All the other stuff I said still stands though.

[akelman]

whoops. Google gave me the wrong Marymount. All the other stuff I said still stands though.

Undergrads these days just don't know how to do research like in the old days! How do I know? Well, this one time there was this one guy on the internet...

[bicycletricycle]

hahahahahahahaha... :p

wait no... seriously though - hahahahaha


are you trying to say that ivy league schools aren't filled with motivated hard working rich kids?

[akelman]

are you trying to say that ivy league schools aren't filled with motivated hard working rich kids?

I think "filled" is doing a lot of work for you in that sentence. Most of the Ivies boast need-blind admissions, which means that there are plenty of non-rich kids filling their undergraduate* ranks, too. For example, if you're middle class** in California, it's often cheaper to send your kid to Harvard, Yale, or Princeton than to a UC. It's weird, but there it is.***

* Graduate students are an entirely different story, of course.

** Yes, I know that's a pretty elastic category.

*** Footnotes in a Serotta site post? I'm afraid I'm that big a doofus.

[thegunner]

are you trying to say that ivy league schools aren't filled with motivated hard working rich kids?

yes. that's exactly what i'm saying. i went to one for undergrad and i go to one for grad, and i can tell you that they definitely aren't OVERFLOWING with privileged hard working individuals.

bright kids? yeah. but a plurality of those kids are lazy, lost, and simply "along for the ride" so to speak. honestly, i used to be disillusioned by the idea of an ivy degree, but after 4-years, i realized that a lot of my classmates represented everything false_aest described - pampered over privileged children who did nothing to earn half of what they were being handed.

edit: i might be slightly cynical after looking at the numbers for the debt i've accrued ;)

[jh_on_the_cape]

I am in my fifth year of teaching higher Ed.

More kids gonto college now. That means there are more kids there who should not be there. 60% of incoming students place into remedial noncredit math. And we set the bar lower than ETS recommends.

I think college is the new associates degree from community college. They learn what they should have in high school then a bit more.

I love teaching but it is discouraging sometimes. I see kids lacking basic math life skills. I feel this was part of the cause of the credit and lending problems in the USA.

2.9% Apr or $2000 cash back? Most of my students have no idea how to approach that decision mathematically.

I could go on and on.

Ivy educated. Now in the basement of the ivory tower.

Check out "basement of the ivory tower" by professor X in the Atlantic magazine. Or something like that.

I do tons of bike examples in my physics courses.

[Dekonick]

RISD not Brown. There is a whole bunch of hard workin' rich kids too. I think that is who the ivy league is there for.

Whuut? Not Rollins College?!?

[Dekonick]

One has to admit that it is much easier to do research today. Nothing like requesting journals from neighboring libraries... months in advance... so you can have the material to write your papers. Waiting in line to use a printer...
How the heck they made an atomic bomb or landed men on the moon is a true demonstration of collective hard work. Today you can google how to do just about anything... sort through some junk entries, click, paste, some editing, add color splash and graphics - print. Simple.

What I don't get is with all of the tech advances, why are our kids not learning what they need to know to have success in school?

:crap:

[kohlboto]

What I don't get is with all of the tech advances, why are our kids not learning what they need to know to have success in school?


maybe this might help answer that question, in part...kind of fits in with the overall gestalt of the thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o

[SoCalSteve]

I am in my fifth year of teaching higher Ed.

More kids gonto college now. That means there are more kids there who should not be there. 60% of incoming students place into remedial noncredit math. And we set the bar lower than ETS recommends.

I think college is the new associates degree from community college. They learn what they should have in high school then a bit more.

I love teaching but it is discouraging sometimes. I see kids lacking basic math life skills. I feel this was part of the cause of the credit and lending problems in the USA.

2.9% Apr or $2000 cash back? Most of my students have no idea how to approach that decision mathematically.

I could go on and on.

Ivy educated. Now in the basement of the ivory tower.

Check out "basement of the ivory tower" by professor X in the Atlantic magazine. Or something like that.

I do tons of bike examples in my physics courses.

Were dying to know...which choice is better?.... :confused:

[TimmyB]

Were dying to know...which choice is better?.... :confused:
Depends on the size and length of the loan...

[BCS]

yes. that's exactly what i'm saying. i went to one for undergrad and i go to one for grad, and i can tell you that they definitely aren't OVERFLOWING with privileged hard working individuals.

bright kids? yeah. but a plurality of those kids are lazy, lost, and simply "along for the ride" so to speak. honestly, i used to be disillusioned by the idea of an ivy degree, but after 4-years, i realized that a lot of my classmates represented everything false_aest described - pampered over privileged children who did nothing to earn half of what they were being handed.

edit: i might be slightly cynical after looking at the numbers for the debt i've accrued ;)

Don't want to sound too harsh but I disagree.
Not sure where you went but my 8 years of undergrad/graduate school were pretty amazing. Talented people from every socioeconomic corner of society. Even the athletes weren't completely dopey. My impression about people who complain about the privileged after going to an Ivy league school is that they are simply bitter about their own shortcomings.

[thegunner]

Don't want to sound too harsh but I disagree.
Not sure where you went but my 8 years of undergrad/graduate school were pretty amazing. Talented people from every socioeconomic corner of society. Even the athletes weren't completely dopey. My impression about people who complain about the privileged after going to an Ivy league school is that they are simply bitter about their own shortcomings.

am i supposed to be offended by that last statement? maybe you didn't mean it as such, but it reads as a bit of a dig re: my last post. to clarify, i'm not bitter about my own shortcomings at all, i am somewhat disappointed at the demographics at my institutions (columbia and penn). is that fair? or is my anecdotal evidence insufficient to justify my own opinions?

nowhere did i imply that there weren't talented people present, just that there was a healthy percentage of people who most definitely didn't "earn" their spots of admissions - either through their general abilities or their work ethic after enrollment.

btw - you mentioned the athletes... you're right. they're not all "lost causes" so to say, but having been part of a varsity team, seeing the recruitment process, and personally knowing a bunch of them... a large percentage of them are pretty "dopey" as you put it.

[mgm777]

I taught at 2 vastly different higher ed institutions this semester.

Long Beach City College vs Loyola Marymount University.

I loved it. Absolutely love teaching.

BUT

Let me share my final thoughts.

1) A college degree is new HS degree. It means almost nothing
2) Parents and schools have babied children to the point that they have a hard time thinking for themselves and stepping up to a challenge.
3) I think there's a correlation between affluence, lack of imagination and laziness. In other words, the poor kids at LBCC worked hard and were willing to refine their crazy creative ideas whereas the affluent kids I worked with at LMU were quite happy to stay on campus, take boring pictures and turn it in.


All this leads me to believe that the "better life" parents have tried to give their kids is actually just going to screw them in the end.

TFT

#2 strikes a chord with me. As an Air Force Reservist, one of my duties involves respresenting The United States Air Force Academy Admissions Department at college night events at large affluent school districts in Southern CA. Over the past ten years, we have noticed a disturbing trend. More parents are attending these events than students. At a recent event, during the break-out sessions, I had 25 parents and 3 students attend. That ratio remained consistent for all three sessions. Not sure what is happening...kids are too busy with other activities or if the helicopter parent syndrome is applicable here? Reps from the other universities that I have conversed with share similar observations.

[Louis]

Has there ever been a time when folks did not think that the younger generation was not lazy / spoiled / dumb / fat / proof that the end of civilization is near?

[akelman]

Has there ever been a time when folks did not think that the younger generation was not lazy / spoiled / dumb / fat / proof that the end of civilization is near?

No. At least not since we invented the concepts of childhood and then adolescence. I suppose when kids were seen as mini adults things might have been different.

[Louis]

Depends on the size and length of the loan...

And the rate of return of your alternative investments.

NPV was just about the only useful thing I learned in business school.

[Ken Robb]

Were dying to know...which choice is better?.... :confused:
This is a trick question.
The answer is "Let your parents pay". :)

[TimmyB]

And the rate of return of your alternative investments.

NPV was just about the only useful thing I learned in business school.
DOH! Forgot about that. Looks like I fit jh_on_the_cape's profile :crap: .

It's a good thing I didn't decide to pursue an economics degree :rolleyes:

[rwsaunders]

#2 strikes a chord with me. As an Air Force Reservist, one of my duties involves respresenting The United States Air Force Academy Admissions Department at college night events at large affluent school districts in Southern CA. Over the past ten years, we have noticed a disturbing trend. More parents are attending these events than students. At a recent event, during the break-out sessions, I had 25 parents and 3 students attend. That ratio remained consistent for all three sessions. Not sure what is happening...kids are too busy with other activities or if the helicopter parent syndrome is applicable here? Reps from the other universities that I have conversed with share similar observations.

My parents did not get involved with my decision to go to school, other than to reinforce the fact that I was going to school, plain and simple. The choices then were to work in a mill (all closed now) or join the service as a grunt (My Korean conflict-era grunt Dad motivated me to not select that option).

The difference is that I could pay for school by working long and hard in the Summers. In fact, I actually had cash left over every year after room, board and tuition were addressed. The financial burden on my parents was nil and our situation was not uncommon.

With state schools in PA hovering between $18-24K and private schools in the $35-60K plus range, hard work doesn't cut it anymore. You're seeing parents like myself pay very close attention because it is so frickin' expensive and we're looking real hard at the value that a particular institution "claims" to offer.

During the eight campus open houses that we have attended, I haven't seen one school yet boast of their job placement rate. However, all tout the percentage of kids that spend a semester in Europe, and the percentage of educational staff that have achieved terminal degrees in their fields.

My opinion is that most kids really have a limited concept regarding the true costs, as their parents accumulate the heavy debt of higher education, and the kids themselves sign on the line, either not knowing or not caring how the debt will be addressed.

With you representing an institution that offers a fully subsidized education, you better believe that more parents than kids are going to attend your sessions.

[BCS]

Not intended as a "dig" so don't be offended. We clearly had different experiences. In reality, everything written on this thread is anecdotal evidence and not real data.

am i supposed to be offended by that last statement? maybe you didn't mean it as such, but it reads as a bit of a dig re: my last post. to clarify, i'm not bitter about my own shortcomings at all, i am somewhat disappointed at the demographics at my institutions (columbia and penn). is that fair? or is my anecdotal evidence insufficient to justify my own opinions?

nowhere did i imply that there weren't talented people present, just that there was a healthy percentage of people who most definitely didn't "earn" their spots of admissions - either through their general abilities or their work ethic after enrollment.

btw - you mentioned the athletes... you're right. they're not all "lost causes" so to say, but having been part of a varsity team, seeing the recruitment process, and personally knowing a bunch of them... a large percentage of them are pretty "dopey" as you put it.

[rugbysecondrow]

I was a GI Bill student at a public university best described as a "Good Value". My friends worked, had student loans, school year jobs, summer jobs, had grades to maintain for scholarships and seemed to appreciate school. I luckily made it through undergrad and grad school with zero debt, my wife did the same thing. There are hard working students, lazy students, then there are others (like me) who learned to be a smart student. When you work and have to go to school as well, you are forced to be more efficient at what you do. From the first day of school, I knew what classes i could get an easy A, B etc. I knew what class would take 10 hours a week to earn an A but I could work 3 for a B...I would chose the B route because my resources could be more efficiently applied elsewhere (work or another course) . My point is that perceived laziness might be purposeful. Also, and I don't mean to offend, but some classes were taken specifically because the student didn't want to work, a reprieve from other coursework.

I also disagree with the notion of lazy students in general. I can't speak for the truly affluent, but my area is certainly upper middle class. The kids work hard, push for AP classes, extra curriculars and other activities. The average student works harder than the top students did when I was in school. They might work differently, parents more involved, focused on grades rather than learning, but that is a different issue.

As for the math issue, That has nothing to do with wisdom or decision making. There are oodles of resources available, you don't have to be a math genius to seek these out. Frankly, how many people have worked the math formula of balloon or interest only lowns, zero down free money, no interest for two years, variable interest rate blah blah blah only to have the whole thing blow up on them. The mortgage crisis wasn't about people not knowing how to do math is was that they used math to justify a poor decision. They knew math, they lacked the wisdom, they should have studied history a little more. ;)

[Elefantino]

Much has changed in the 35 years since I went to college. Back then, any idiot could get in to Cal (and a lot did, I know, because I came from an "affluent" high school nearby). Those of us who didn't went to Oregon because it was rated as the No. 1 party school and had a journalism program and what better way to spend your formative years than learning how to pretend to be a journalist while selling hash on the side to pay your way through school.

Theoretically.

Now kids have to work extra hard just to keep up. Cruising doesn't work anymore. And people without post-grad degrees are four lengths back entering the stretch with no hope of catching up.

I'm glad I'm not a college student now. Although I enjoy watching my kids in college because they're working harder than I ever did and it's paying off! :banana:

It had better. They're my retirement plan. :eek:

[LesMiner]

This thread seems to strike a chord with many here. As far as the changes over generations, my parents grew up during the Depression. Everyone was dirt poor, financially that is. I can remember their discussions with neighbors and friends about how tough it was during the Depression. Something like "we use to cut newspapers into strips for toilet paper!" Another would respond back "you had it easy, we had no newspaper so what do you think we used for toilet paper!" So it is true as a generation grows old they see the younger generation having it easy. I often wondered what my grandparent's generation would have said to my parents generation.

As for myself I had sort of a parenting epiphany. When my younger son was looking at universities I vowed he would not have to deal with the interruptions I had when I was in college. Interruptions like going to off to war, lack of funds for tuition, work and school at the same time etc. Besides college education had become so much more expensive. I became a "helicopter" parent. I took him around to different schools and discussed courses of study. The "what do you want to do?" discussions along with the merits of different choices. When he made his choice I went with him to the Freshman orientation sessions. They had a program for the parents. I learned a lot about the school and all. A little hint came to me when subject of grades came up. The grades are reported only to students not parents so parents do not even ask. I sort of blew that off. Many of my sons friends in high school were very academically advanced. One even had a perfect ACT score. All of them scored 1400 or higher on the college board exams. So he decided Theoretical Physics would be his major, you know like Stephen Hawking. The first year went OK. The following Summer was a bit rough. When Fall came around and tuition was needed, I asked my son how much money he saved during the Summer and the answer was none. I sort of lost it but I put the money out and paid the tuition and boarding. Then after the the Fall semster he announces he is changing his major to Psychology? I am furious, I tell my son that Psychology is a bad choice, difficult to get a job, hard to advance unless you get a advanced degree. I push him into Computer Science because I am going to do this management thing and fix the problem! I go online to the university website and start arranging classes and talk to instructors. My son says he will not take programming classes because he does not want to become a neurotic programmer. So ok how about system adminsration? He says OK. He then starts dropping courses because he is failing. Then a revelation hits me. Many things go through my mind like YOU STUPID IDIOT, you just did all the things you were advised not to do! Who's life is this? Are you trying to live your son's life to do all the things you missed out? With great pain I let him go, no more meddling, no more managing, no more advice, and no more money. My son changed schools and does get a Computer Sceince degree. I am very proud and at his graduation commencement when his advisor gets up to introduce my son to speak. The advisor says my son had an early interest in computers since his father brought home a personal computer and said to his son "go ahead try it it out you will not break it see what you can make it do". That made me feel like a successful parent. Despite everything he is graduating with honors. My son then addresses the audience with his speech. The dean follows my son and announces that my son will begin Law School in the Fall! My jaw hit the floor, where did that come from? My wife reminds me that my son had taken a couple of years of Speech in high school. He joined the Speech Club, and got on the Debate Team. He also got into Youth in Government, and was a student senator and judge at the state capital. So what about the two invites to Space Camp, the build your own telescope and learn astronomy, the Math Masters competition, the engineering school project workshop the summer before senior year in high school? I was so totally confused. I talked with my son days after the graduation about Law School. He managed to get a full scholarship and he was planning to get married in a couple of months. I asked why Law School now? He said he did not pursue it before because he thought I did not want him to become another "sleezy lawyer". Then the epiphany, I knew so little about my own son. I had so nearly screwed up his life. I changed to be passively supportive. He and his new wife worked as a team. He finished Law School in 3 years, passed the Bar Exam. He worked as Law Clerk for a judge for a year and then on to a law firm. The daughter in law finished her accounting degree and now works for a one of the big banks.
Raising children is one of life's most amazing things. I think the Baby Boom generation has made the college degree the new high school graduate. Not that it is really required but because they choose to make it so. Every generation is going to be mixed in their capabilites, desires, and accomplishments. So now I sit back and watch my older son with his son, my grandson, that is now 16. I remain in the passively supportive role, offer no advice, no judgement, just support whatever happens.

[firerescuefin]

Les....thanks for posting. Lots of wisdom to be garnered from that post. Kudos for being able to step back and save both your son and yourself....from yourself. With 2 little guys, I know I will have to do the same. :beer:

[SamIAm]

3) I think there's a correlation between affluence, lack of imagination and laziness. In other words, the poor kids at LBCC worked hard and were willing to refine their crazy creative ideas whereas the affluent kids I worked with at LMU were quite happy to stay on campus, take boring pictures and turn it in.


All this leads me to believe that the "better life" parents have tried to give their kids is actually just going to screw them in the end.

TFT

I think there is a strong correlation between good parenting and success, but I would imagine there is no correlation between affluence and lack of imagination/laziness as you claim. Way off base.

[rugbysecondrow]

I think there is a strong correlation between good parenting and success, but I would imagine there is no correlation between affluence and lack of imagination/laziness as you claim. Way off base.

I agree 100% with you.

[JMerring]

...but I would imagine there is no correlation between affluence and lack of imagination/laziness as you claim. Way off base.

correct u r - see steve jobs, bill gates, mark zuckerberg and tiger woods, to name just a few.

[Dave B]

I had this awesome long diatribe written out about rich vs. poor, broken educational systems, merit based pay, and clever real life situations.

None of it matters.

Education is a screwy system and there isn't one asnwer...to any of the problems.

I just wish I was paid like a baby sitter!


$3/hr per kid for 6.5 hours a day times 30 kids (not having to pay for my 25 minute lunch and any planning, cause I am off the clock there) for 180 days...cause we teachers should not be paid year round as we are lazy.

That is like $105,300 a year. I don't make half that with 10 years experience and a masters plus an additional 30 extra graduate school hours and have been published several times.

Now double the $3/hr rate for teachers with masters or who work in special ed.

Not only would I babysit them, I would actually teach them stuff. :beer:

[Clydesdale]

Jean Twenge's book "Generation Me" is a great read about the self esteem and entitlement movement and its impact on our culture. There are many sections about the effects and challenges within education. If I remember correctly the traits tend to cross over socio-economic boundaries and influence kids across the spectrum. A very good book.

[Climb01742]

one thing i wish i could change about my college experience is this: i wish i'd taken some time off between HS and college, or taken time off during college.

at 18 years old, i was spectacularly immature and clueless, yet i believed i was just the opposite. (my wife might argue i still am.) i think a dose of real world reality would have done my education a world of good. maybe we should go to college twice. at 18 and at 50.

[Dave B]

one thing i wish i could change about my college experience is this: i wish i'd taken some time off between HS and college, or taken time off during college.

at 18 years old, i was spectacularly immature and clueless, yet i believed i was just the opposite. (my wife might argue i still am.) i think a dose of real world reality would have done my education a world of good. maybe we should go to college twice. at 18 and at 50.


I don't disagree, but think about our grandparents and the generations before them. 18 was married with kids and working incredibly hard factories, mills, colleges, etc.

I do think people need longer to mature now a days, however I would be lost for a reason why. Lower expectations, more choices then those previous generations.

I think about adults waiting to get married, having kids in their late 30's relative to early late 20's. People are waiting to grow up rthese days. Is it because they can or do we see young people unable to handle stresses we face?

I think about the stipulation that you mist be 35 to run for president. I am 35 and trust me I would not be ready...I would argue few would be. So what has happened to our againg? Does a numerical value now have clout in professions?

No idea, but an interesting thought none the less.

[1happygirl]

I do think people need longer to mature now a days, however I would be lost for a reason why. Lower expectations, more choices then those previous generations.


Spot on. Talking with a group of mature people in the 55-65 y/o group. They stated when they left home and got married they never asked their parents for anything eg money, taking care of their family, favors. My friends kids OTOH ask for all of the above and some people I talk to the kids have come back home. Earlier generations this would not have been a consideration. Why I wonder?

[Dave B]

Spot on. Talking with a group of mature people in the 55-65 y/o group. They stated when they left home and got married they never asked their parents for anything eg money, taking care of their family, favors. My friends kids OTOH ask for all of the above and some people I talk to the kids have come back home. Earlier generations this would not have been a consideration. Why I wonder?


The only thing that really jumps out in that case is people are working longer...economy forces us to. As a result the trickle down issues set in. Let people promoted, less jobs available, higher educated incoming work force and that leads to no jobs...well less jobs.

Folks need money to live so they ask borrow steal their way to what they consider a livable situation...the problem there is they live pretty well. I have kids in 6th grade who say if they can't get a job they will live with their parents. Kind of telling for a 12 year old.

There is no fix it solution. We that question and see the problems will pass it down to our kids. I think it is the folks who feel secure andmight not be who fail to pass on the value of real money and what it takes to get it.

[mgm777]

one thing i wish i could change about my college experience is this: i wish i'd taken some time off between HS and college, or taken time off during college.

at 18 years old, i was spectacularly immature and clueless, yet i believed i was just the opposite. (my wife might argue i still am.) i think a dose of real world reality would have done my education a world of good. maybe we should go to college twice. at 18 and at 50.

I concur! One of my biggest regrets is not taking time off somewhere...went from HS=>college=>active duty=>grad school=>professional life(20 years). No time off between transitions. Now, I advise young people to take six or more months off after college/before/whenever to travel the world, pursue a passion, or just hang out. In my opinion, this will do great things for your motivation, mental health, maturity, personal development, and worldliness.

[Germany_chris]

Spot on. Talking with a group of mature people in the 55-65 y/o group. They stated when they left home and got married they never asked their parents for anything eg money, taking care of their family, favors. My friends kids OTOH ask for all of the above and some people I talk to the kids have come back home. Earlier generations this would not have been a consideration. Why I wonder?

This statement is not even remotely valid...multigenerational houses are cultural as much as economic. Come here to Germany and you will find few houses that are not multigenerational. If we were to travel to Hawaii you would find much the same thing. Yo simply cannot make a blanket statement like that period, especially when the people you were talking too were Boomers. Boomers were the ultimate me generation it's probably going to take 3 or 4 generations to undo boomer selfishness and right the ship.

I am truly glad many boomers are finally aging and mellowing you will finally take your moral, ethics, and values with you into retirement and we can start with fresh thinking and real problem solving.

I am not trying to offend anyone in particular it just get really old listening to people say that my generation, and the millennials following me are going to be the ruination of the world. Firstly because we were created you folks are our parents. Secondly we cannot ruin the world we will mold it into what we think is the best, and I guarantee that it will be different than yours but no less valid.

Chris

[mgm777]

Chris - I don't disagree with your sentiment, however, 1happygirl's post was an observation followed by a question, not an invalid statement as you assert.

[Germany_chris]

it's hearsay based on memories that have been blurred by the passing of years.

[Germany_chris]

I don't disagree, but think about our grandparents and the generations before them. 18 was married with kids and working incredibly hard factories, mills, colleges, etc.

I do think people need longer to mature now a days, however I would be lost for a reason why. Lower expectations, more choices then those previous generations.

I think about adults waiting to get married, having kids in their late 30's relative to early late 20's. People are waiting to grow up rthese days. Is it because they can or do we see young people unable to handle stresses we face?

I think about the stipulation that you mist be 35 to run for president. I am 35 and trust me I would not be ready...I would argue few would be. So what has happened to our againg? Does a numerical value now have clout in professions?

No idea, but an interesting thought none the less.

Possibly faster exposure to different cultures and ways of thinking. Much faster exposure to violence both real and on TV/video games. Don't you think this my drive kids back into a comfortable shell whether that be there mind or their home.

[jischr]

Both my kids are in college. The boy will come out $180K in debt but could make $90k-$100k first year out. The girl will be maybe $40k in debt and will be lucky to make $30K her first year. The boy got the fast firing synapses; the girl has to work hard for her grades. Both were ‘nagged’ did you get your homework done; let’s review it for the first 9 years of education. Every test was how did you do, what didn’t you understand?
Living with my wife and I is an unemployed 26 y/o relative from a broken home who can’t add two single digit numbers together and get the right answer. She was raised as ‘no child left behind’ with no expectations beyond going to school some of the time.
I think its nature and nurture. Good genes helps, supportive home environment helps, lack of parental fighting over money probably helps, school systems that actually require students to work helps. I feel sorry for the relative. She gets depressed remembering that she flunked remedial algebra the last time she tried. She is truly phucd until she figures out that she needs to work hard on many levels if she wants to live independently, which is her stated goal in life. Unfortunately skating by seems to be her mode at this time.
I’d say my kids are mature, maybe more mature than some of their classmates. Once on their feet I doubt they will ever come back home. I hope the 26 going on 14 relative gets on her feet in the next year and moves out, or gets married to a daddy war-bucks.

[rugbysecondrow]

Is she hot?

I hope the 26 going on 14 relative gets on her feet in the next year and moves out, or gets married to a daddy war-bucks.

[FixedNotBroken]

Funny story...My first marriage (many, many moons ago) was to a young lady who came from a very wealthy family. Her family spent time with other very wealthy families and their completely f$cked up kids....I mean, truly messed up...

Money, affluence, whatever has nothing to do with how well kids are raised. The "better" life that the parents were able to afford for their children did NOTHING to help them become independent, hard working young adults...absolutely NOTHING. It was quite sad to see.

It's not like it makes them not independent..it's what the kid wants to do with their life. My family is well off and lives comfortably where as 3 of my best friends since grade school are in the highest tax bracket. Their parents are doctors, one is high up in Apple, and the other high up in LG. They were very independent..parents made them work throughout high school, pay for everything and do it on their own. One went to Stanford, one went to Emory in Atlanta, and the other to Georgetown..talk about driven friends who I talk to on a weekly basis. You're right, money has nothing to do with how well kids are raised but no one can say that opulence ruins children.

[thegunner]

It's not like it makes them not independent..it's what the kid wants to do with their life. My family is well off and lives comfortably where as 3 of my best friends since grade school are in the highest tax bracket. Their parents are doctors, one is high up in Apple, and the other high up in LG. They were very independent..parents made them work throughout high school, pay for everything and do it on their own. One went to Stanford, one went to Emory in Atlanta, and the other to Georgetown..talk about driven friends who I talk to on a weekly basis. You're right, money has nothing to do with how well kids are raised but no one can say that opulence ruins children.

absolutely right, but i think it might be fair to say that opulence doesn't ruin children, it simply provides a catalyst/suitable environment for children to ruin themselves. no more than poverty of course.

[FixedNotBroken]

absolutely right, but i think it might be fair to say that opulence doesn't ruin children, it simply provides a catalyst/suitable environment for children to ruin themselves. no more than poverty of course.

Agreed. Both scenarios provide that kind of environment.

[rugbysecondrow]

I think we are resentful that some affluent people do so little with so much and it is easy to generalize and apply that to all affluent folks. We notice the poor who have boot strap pulling stories because we respect their plight and we like to generalize that story as well. We should not generalize either.


Both groups have failures and success stories.

[Bud_E]

...
Let me share my final thoughts.

1) A college degree is new HS degree. It means almost nothing
2) Parents and schools have babied children to the point that they have a hard time thinking for themselves and stepping up to a challenge.
3) I think there's a correlation between affluence, lack of imagination and laziness. In other words, the poor kids at LBCC worked hard and were willing to refine their crazy creative ideas whereas the affluent kids I worked with at LMU were quite happy to stay on campus, take boring pictures and turn it in.


All this leads me to believe that the "better life" parents have tried to give their kids is actually just going to screw them in the end.

TFT

1) Unfortunately I agree with this. But the good ones will be able to make the most of a college education. A brief look at a transcript should make it easy to separate serious students from cruisers.

2) I agree with this one also. I've seen some extreme cases.

3) I disagree. Some kids are raised with a sense of self-entitlement ( and some kids are plain born with it ) and this can be regardless of how affluent the parents are. I think this is what can be correlated to laziness/lack of imagination.

I lucked out with my kids. Their talents are very different but both of them are smart and accomplished ( in spite of having to endure me as a dad :rolleyes: )

[Bob Loblaw]

I just got a teaching certification to learn little kids about English.

According to one study, the number one determining factor of student performance (as defined by test scores) is parent involvement, not affluence or lack thereof. Socio-economic status matters too, but much less than parents who insist on seeing tests, oversee homework and study practices, reward good grades, get to know the teachers, etc.

I.e., if the parents act like school is important, the kids will too.

BL

[HenryA]

Kids don't have to perform like they used to and have very little other motivation to do much they don't want to do. There exists across large swaths of society little expectation to achieve highly or to work hard for something. We, as a country, are rich. Poor folks have cell phones and cable TV. Nothing is a big deal these days except not being made to feel "uncomfortable".

Years ago there was something wrong about a young man or woman who didn't pull his or her weight. Some kids had to work to help keep the family going. It took more than one earner or worker to get it all done and the babies fed and clothed. Everybody had to pitch in to get by. My grand parents saved string and aluminum foil because they feared they might not get anymore when they needed it. Didn't waste a thing.

But that was then.

How's that for an old man rant?

[akelman]

How's that for an old man rant?

Your lawn: it is vast.